Our client was accused of sexual assault of a fellow Marine in her barracks room. Our client about 19 years old when he first met the alleged victim. She was in her mid-20’s and already had a bachelor’s degree in biology. She had traveled the world, and her father was an 0-6 in the Navy.

During the morning of the night in question, the alleged victim was flying back to Okinawa from Kyoto. She spent most of the flight, as well as the remainder of the day sexting her boyfriend in the U.S. That evening, she allowed our client to stay in her room, and sleep in her bed with her. Another Marine was also in the room sleeping on the floor.

Though they fooled around that evening, she claimed it was an assault. She claimed that instead of saying no she froze. However, even she had to admit on the stand during cross examination that she shifted and moved her body around. Further, even though she stated she got out of bed, to sleep on the futon next to another Marine, she eventually returned to the same bed our client was in. She further claimed that rather than wake up the Marine that was on the floor, she said she texted him for help. We obtained her full phone extraction and there were no indications of texts. The Marine stated he never received a text message from her. In fact, during cross examination of the NCIS Digital Forensic Expert, I was able to point out that most likely artifacts noted in the report were actually gif’s or memes. This is an important point because it showed that whatever was going on in the bed wasn’t a problem.

The alleged victim had a history of being a drama queen in the unit. She loved attention and leaned into the idea of being a victim months in advance of any accusations against our client. We also learned that she had a “reputation” in the unit regarding her interactions with men. That was highlighted by the fact that after she made the accusation against our client, she came up positive for chlamydia. She immediately blamed that on our client when she spoke to her victim witness liaison.

You might be wondering how we were able to obtain those privileged communications. As it turned out, those communications were not privileged because she already had a friendship with her so-called victim witness liaison. Their relationship was so far across the line that the VWL was reprimanded for her behavior. But…more to the point, the alleged victim in this case had turned over her full phone to be analyzed by NCIS, thus waiving her privilege to any so-called privileged communications in the first place.

After doing our homework, we figured out the AV could not have acquired chlamydia from her boyfriend as he was state side, and he has never tested positive for it. Further, our client was tested…and he didn’t test positive either. Finally, our client was accused of sexual assault using his finger. We presented expert testimony to show that you can’t get chlamydia from a finger.

The alleged victim had not made an official report of sexual assault until after she received that positive result for chlamydia. Up until this point she had only reported that our client was a bit weird and strange and that he needed to understand boundaries. Now, she needed a means to explain her chlamydia to her boyfriend stateside and our client became the scapegoat.

The other unique wrinkle to this case was that our client gave a statement where it seemed like he confessed. In fact, based on that confession alone, he was receiving advice from his Marine Defense Counsel that taking a administrative discharge to avoid the chance of a federal conviction was in his best interest. The client wasn’t so sure, and I was called to review the case to determine its viability for trial. After carefully scrutinizing my clients’ words, and conducting a thorough interview, I was not convinced that our client believed he was guilty. Instead, I was convinced that NCIS manipulated our client. Our client said many things in his statement to lead me to believe that he believed this was a consensual act. Our client’s statement to NCIS was admitted at trial. In closing, I pulled out the golden nuggets of his statement to NCIS and argued them.

Ultimately the Marine panel saw this case for what it was. The alleged victim is a manipulative liar taking advantage of a young, impressionable and scared Marine.

U.S. Marine Corps E-3 Article 120 Sexual Assault Case – Case FAQ

1. What were the circumstances surrounding the Article 120 sexual assault allegation against a Marine stationed in Okinawa?
This case began when a 19-year-old Marine was accused of sexual assault by a fellow Marine in her barracks room. She was in her mid-20s, more experienced, and had invited him to stay in her room and sleep in her bed while another Marine slept on the floor. Though they fooled around, she later claimed it was assault, saying she froze instead of objecting.

2. Why did the alleged victim’s own testimony during cross examination weaken her claim of sexual assault?
On the stand, she admitted to shifting and moving her body during the interaction. She also acknowledged that although she got out of bed to sleep on the futon near another Marine, she eventually returned to the same bed as the accused. These admissions directly undercut her claim that she was passive and unwilling.

3. What evidence did the defense present to challenge the alleged victim’s claim of texting another Marine for help during the incident?
The alleged victim claimed she texted the Marine sleeping on the floor instead of waking him. A full phone extraction revealed no such messages. That Marine testified he never received a text. Cross examination of the NCIS Digital Forensic Expert confirmed that supposed artifacts in the report were actually gifs or memes, not calls for help.

4. How did the alleged victim’s medical test results for chlamydia factor into the defense?
The alleged victim tested positive for chlamydia and immediately blamed the accused. However, the defense proved her stateside boyfriend never tested positive, and the accused also tested negative. Expert testimony confirmed chlamydia cannot be transmitted by a finger, which was central to the allegation. This showed her claim had no medical basis.

5. Why were the alleged victim’s communications with the victim witness liaison admitted despite claims of privilege?
The alleged victim had given her phone to NCIS for analysis, waiving any privilege. Furthermore, she already had a personal friendship with the liaison, which crossed professional boundaries and led to reprimand. These communications revealed her manipulative behavior and motives, directly supporting the defense.

6. What role did the accused Marine’s statement to NCIS play in the trial, and how was it used by the defense?
Although the statement seemed like a confession at first, a deeper review showed it reflected the Marine’s belief that the encounter was consensual. The defense highlighted key parts of the statement in closing, arguing that NCIS manipulated him into language that appeared incriminating, when in fact his words supported consent.

7. How did the Marine panel evaluate the credibility of the alleged victim and the accused in reaching a verdict?
The panel considered the inconsistencies in the alleged victim’s story, her reputation within the unit, her attempt to use the accusation to explain her chlamydia diagnosis, and her manipulative behavior. Against this, the accused’s statement and the lack of corroborating evidence led the panel to see the case as a false allegation.

8. What was the final outcome of the Article 120 sexual assault case against the E-3 Marine in Okinawa?
The Marine panel found the accused not guilty. The case was recognized as an attempt by a manipulative alleged victim to take advantage of a young, impressionable Marine. The acquittal cleared him of the sexual assault allegation and preserved his military career.

Protect Your Military Career

This case shows how a sexual assault allegation under Article 120 can be defeated when the evidence and testimony are carefully scrutinized. The Marine was ultimately acquitted because the defense exposed contradictions, false claims, and manipulation.

Attorney Joseph L. Jordan is a former Army prosecutor who defends service members worldwide in Article 120 trials, administrative separation boards, and appeals. He brings extensive experience in military justice to every case.

📞 Call 888-256-0348 to discuss how your case may be evaluated.
🌍 Offices based in Fort Hood, Texas – representing Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen globally.