Anatomy of a Winning GOMOR Rebuttal: A Deconstructed Case Study
A GOMOR is not a letter; it is an indictment. It is a carefully constructed legal weapon designed to end your service. If you respond with a “letter,” you bring a knife to a gunfight. You must respond with a legal defense.
At Gonzalez & Waddington, we have reviewed thousands of rebuttals written by soldiers, JAGs, and generic lawyers. Below, we deconstruct a hypothetical case to show you exactly why the standard approach fails—and how our forensic legal approach wins.
The Case Study: The “Fraternization” Accusation
The Scenario: A Sergeant First Class (SFC) is accused of an inappropriate relationship with a junior enlisted soldier. The evidence is thin—mostly rumors and a few ambiguous text messages about “meeting up.” The Commander issues a GOMOR intent on permanent filing.
Part 1: The Opening Statement
I am writing to respectfully request that this GOMOR be filed locally. I understand why my actions looked suspicious, and I take full responsibility for the perception I created. I have learned from this mistake.”
“I respectfully contest the findings of the preliminary inquiry. The allegation of fraternization is legally insufficient as it relies on uncorroborated hearsay and fails to meet the elements of Article 134. The text messages in question, when viewed in their full context (Enclosure 1), demonstrate a strictly professional mentorship relationship consistent with NCO duties.”
Part 2: Attacking the Evidence
In most GOMOR packets, the evidence is messy. Witness statements contradict each other. Dates don’t match. However, most soldiers are afraid to call the investigator a liar. We are not.
“I know the text messages looked bad, but I didn’t mean anything by them. I was just trying to help the soldier with her car issues.”
“The AR 15-6 investigation characterizes the text messages on 12 May as ‘romantic.’ This is factually incorrect. A forensic review of the full text thread (omitted by the investigator but attached here as Enclosure 4) reveals that the conversation was exclusively regarding a unit recall roster issue. The investigator’s selective editing of this evidence suggests a confirmation bias that violates the impartiality standards of AR 15-6.”
Part 3: The “Domino Effect” Defense
Many soldiers think the GOMOR is the end. We know it is the beginning of an administrative separation (QMP or Board of Inquiry). We write the rebuttal to pre-emptively win that future board.
Furthermore, the imposition of a permanently filed GOMOR for this unproven allegation would disproportionately impact the Army’s mission. As the only Master Gunner in the battalion (see evaluation reports at Enclosure 6), my separation would create a critical readiness gap. Retaining this NCO is not a matter of leniency, but of command necessity.”
Why You Cannot Write This Yourself
Writing a rebuttal like the one above requires more than just good grammar. It requires:
- Knowledge of the UCMJ: Knowing the specific elements of the offense (Article 134, Article 92, etc.) so you can argue they weren’t met.
- Knowledge of Regulations: Knowing AR 15-6 or the Commander’s Inquiry rules to spot procedural errors.
- Fearlessness: A willingness to respectfully but firmly tell a General Officer that their subordinates messed up the investigation.
When you use a template or AI, you get a polite letter. When you hire Gonzalez & Waddington, you get a forensic audit of the investigation and a battle-tested legal defense.
The Cost of “Free” Advice
Free advice from the JAG office often comes with a heavy price. JAGs are hardworking, but they are often young, inexperienced, and part of the same chain of command structure. They may hesitate to attack a senior investigator’s credibility. As civilian defense counsel, Michael Waddington and Alexandra Gonzalez-Waddington answer only to you. We have no rank to protect, only your career.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I attach new evidence to my rebuttal?
Yes, and you must. A rebuttal without attachments is just an opinion. We help you gather affidavits, timelines, phone records, and character statements to physically attach to your response, forcing them into the official record.
What if the General files it permanently anyway?
This is where our strategy pays off. Because we treated the rebuttal as a legal defense, we have now preserved all these arguments for the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) appeal or the Administrative Separation Board. We have “locked in” the government’s weak evidence early.
Does Gonzalez & Waddington handle cases for all branches?
Yes. While terms differ (Army GOMOR, Air Force LOR, Navy/USMC NPLOC), the strategy remains the same: aggressive defense of your rights and reputation.
Do Not Let a GOMOR End Your Service
You have a short window to respond. Make it count. Contact the firm that wrote the book on military justice.
Contact Gonzalez & Waddington today at 1-800-921-8607 or visit ucmjdefense.com for a confidential case evaluation.
