Make a False Rape Allegation & Win Soldier of the Year

Discussion of a case where someone can make a false rape allegation & win soldier of the year:

U.S. v. Army CW2 – Fort Gordon, GA

Allegations: RAPE, Fraternization, Adultery
Max Punishment: LIFE, Dismissal, Sex Offender Registration
Result: ALL CHARGES DISMISSED
Discharge: RETIRED WITH AN HONORABLE
Location/Branch/Rank: Fort Gordon – Augusta, GA/Army/CW2

Summary: This case is disgraceful. It shows that without proper legal representation, a false allegation can ruin your life. Even if you prove that the allegation is false, the military can still try to destroy you.

FoodOur African American client was a married Warrant Officer. A white female Army Reserve NCO accused him of rape. This case was vigorously defended for over two years.

STORY 1:

The alleged “victim” claimed that an “unknown black man” broke into her home and violently raped and beat her. She had injuries and DNA evidence to support the allegation. Georgia police arrested our client and Army CID investigated him. To make matters worse, the alleged victim’s wife was in our client’s unit.

Our client made no statement to the police and hired our firm. We quickly got the true story and our client provided us with videos of his consensual sexual activity with the “victim.” In reality, he was having an affair with her. After a few months, she began asking him for money to pay for gas and her phone bill. He obliged. Then, she demanded that he give her $7,000 to pay for in vitro fertilization. Our client refused. That is when she made the false police report. She even had a “Go Fund Me” page soliciting money for the pregnancy.

When we presented the sex videos to the GA police, they dropped the charges. We didn’t present all of the evidence, just the videos.

In the sex videos, it was clear that she knew our client and they had an ongoing consensual sexual relationship. She fabricated the entire story.

Did the Army do the right thing? Continue reading….

Hellicopter

Keep in mind, the Army teaches that alleged “victims” should never be questioned or doubted. They must be believed.

When they got the sex videos, CID informed the false victim. Instead of confronting her or charging her with perjury, they helped her to come up with a different story.

STORY 2:

Our client forced her into a sexual relationship and then forced her to become a prostitute. She said that he recorded the sex videos without her permission (which is a felony). She now claimed to be deeply traumatized by the sex videos. These videos show two people engaging in consensual sex and prove that she made a false rape allegation.

We also had social media/text evidence that showed that she initiated the relationship and that they were on friendly terms. This evidence proved that she was not a sex slave. When she learned of the additional evidence, she changed her story again.

STORY 3:

helmetThey had sex, but she desperately wanted a baby and he used her emotional weakness against her. The sex was not consensual because she only did it because she thought he may be able to help her get a baby.

Instead of stopping the madness, the Army gave our client Article 15 for adultery. They included the CID rape investigation as part of the packet, knowing the rape allegation was completely false.

Then, they initiated a separation. Again, they included the false rape allegations as evidence against our client.

The separation was based on various factors, including adultery, conduct unbecoming (for having sex with a soldier’s wife), filming the sex, and various other allegations.

Mr. Waddington traveled to Augusta to fight the allegations at the board. However, at the board, the prosecution did not call the alleged victim or her ex-wife (the victim divorced her wife and married a man during this process). The prosecution’s case was based on the CID file and the sex videos. We were not able to cross-examine the false victim or her wife at the board.

The board recommended a General Under Honorable Conditions Discharge. The fight continued. Before the discharge was approved, we made an effort to allow our client to medically retire.

RESULT: CLIENT WAS ABLE TO MEDICALLY RETIRE.

military in ladderThe false “victim” remains in the Army and won soldier of the year after her false allegation was exposed. People consider her a hero and survivor. Her peers see her as a role model, although she falsely accused a fellow soldier of rape and perjured herself. No one took action for perjury, false reports, or false official statement. She now claims to be a victim of Military Sexual Trauma (MST) and will be able to get a lifetime service-connected disability based on her false rape allegation.

Remember, her original story. An “unknown black man” broke into her house and violently raped and beat her. She relied on racism and prejudice and the Army fell for it. If you are a minority service member accused of a sex crime, especially if the “victim” is white, then you face an uphill battle. Even if you are 100% innocent and prove your innocence, many will still believe that you are guilty.  We see this every day. It is a fact of life.

Military truckThe idea that a white woman would never lie about rape has been around for years. The book/movie, To Kill a Mockingbird, deals with this issue. We encourage you to watch the movie or read the book. In this story, a black man was convicted of rape, despite his innocence and then lynched by an angry mob the next day. We see this fact pattern play out in military courts across the USA. While no-one is literally lynched, this process destroys many innocent lives.

The DoD sexual assault program feeds into this problem because they teach service members, in mandatory training, that a woman never lies about being sexually assaulted. They teach that anyone who questions a rape allegation is “victim-blaming” and “slut-shaming.” Lawyers that defend service members (like our lawyers) are commonly accused of being “sexists” and “misogynists,” simply because they do their job and seek the truth behind sexual assault allegations. Some allegations are true, some are false, and often the truth is in the middle. Prosecutors and investigators have a duty to seek the truth. In reality, they seek convictions and bend the truth. A skilled defense lawyer is your last line of defense in a world where people deem you guilty no matter what.

Fisherman Steals Coastie’s Wife with the Help of Corrupt CGIS

U.S. v. Coast Guard E-5 – USCG Base Kodiak, Alaska – tried in the Federal building in Juneau

Spousal Abuse

Allegations: Article 120 Rape, Sexual Assault, Physical Assault, Spousal Abuse
Max Punishment: 70+ years in prison, Dishonorable Discharge, Sex offender registration
Result: NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES
Sentence: NONE
Discharge: NONE
Location/Branch/Rank: USCG Base Kodiak, Alaska tried in Juneau, Alaska/USCG/E-5

Summary: 

Our client was accused of beating and raping his estranged wife. While our client was at sea, she was hooking up with a local fisherman, “Steve.” Steve claimed to be a former Army Ranger with a Purple Heart. In fact, he never served in the military. He is a local Alaskan fisherman that picks up local Coast Guard wives, lies to them, and has sex with them while their husbands serving our country, at sea. He is a low-life POS. But, the Coast Coast JAGs and the Command was led around, by their noses, by this scumbag.

Our client was given a no-contact order and kicked out of his home by the Coast Guard. He was also not allowed to see his two young boys so he hired a lawyer and filed for a divorce. Meanwhile, Steve moved into our client’s home and was driving his truck around Kodiak, with our client’s kids and wife.

physical assaultCorrupt CGIS agents took the alleged victim’s statement and tried to frame our client. They failed to collect exculpatory evidence and permitted the victim and Steve to destroy evidence. Then, CGIS interviewed our client and claimed that he “confessed.” The CGIS reports were poorly written and were full of false and misleading information. They paraphrased and cherrypicked parts of witness statements and pasted them into their ROI in order to make the accused look guilty.

Michael Waddington and Navy defense lawyer, LT Michael Ellis, fought the allegations in front of a mixed officer and enlisted jury. The defense impeached the alleged victim with numerous text messages and social media posts. The victim had tried to delete these messages but they were recovered by the defense.

sexual assault
One of many text messages that Steve deleted.

The defense proved that our client’s wife had an affair with a local fisherman and then used the rape allegation in order to win child custody. The supposed victim and her fisherman boyfriend went to great lengths to try and destroy the life and career of our client.

Steve threatened Mr. Waddington via text messages in an attempt to intimidate him on the eve of trial. Their plan backfired.

The defense presented numerous threatening texts to the jury at trial, including messages where Steve and the victim insulted the Coast Guard and threatened to destroy our client. We called the lying victim’s mother who testified that her daughter is not truthful. (See sample screenshots below).

The jury deliberated for 50 minutes and acquitted him of all charges. Waddington and Ellis went out to celebrate and drank some local beer.

Former Army special victim prosecutor faces court-martial for sexual assault

By: Meghann Myers    

An Army judge advocate who previously served as a prosecutor on sexual assault cases will face a court-martial, according to a Tuesday release from Military District Washington.

Capt. Scott Hockenberry faces three counts of sexual assault and three counts of assault consummated by battery, the release said. He will be arraigned on Thursday at Fort Belvoir, Virginia.

The charges stem from a romantic relationship in 2016 with another Army attorney. The alleged victim reported that what began as a consensual relationship of rough sex and domination-submission turned criminal.

Hockenberry is accused of holding a knife to the victim’s throat, choking her and forcing her to have sex without a condom, violating an explicit rule she had set forth.

“The accused may think that this was a game or it was role-playing, but it’s not a game — it’s an assault,” prosecutor Lt. Col. Carol Brewer said at the end of a multi-day preliminary hearing in January.

The case hinges on whether Hockenberry knowingly and deliberately violated the terms of their relationship in an attempt to brutalize his partner.

“At the outset, she knew exactly what the relationship involved,” civilian defense attorney William Helixon said in January.

Don’t Dump the Prosecutor’s Paralegal… Or, You’ll be Charged With Rape!

U.S. v. Army E-6 – Fort Polk, LA/JRTC

Don’t dump the prosecutor’s paralegal… or, you’ll be charged with rape!

Allegations: DOUBLE RAPE, 2 VICTIMS
Max Punishment: 2 LIFE SENTENCES
Result: NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES
Discharge: NONE
Location: Fort Polk, LA & Kandahar, Afghanistan
Branch/Rank: Army/E-6

Summary: Our client, a Combat Engineer, was accused of raping two women (a US Army soldier/JAG Paralegal and one British citizen). Later, the prosecution claimed that he sexually assaulted two additional people, for a total of four alleged victims. He faced 14 different allegations, over 100 years in prison, and sex offender registration. Mr. Waddington and CPT Brian Greco defended this case.

prosecutor's paralegalOur theory:

The two primary victims have scorned ex-lovers out for revenge.

This trial was like an episode of Dr. Phil mixed with Jerry Springer. In and out of court, there was crying, lying, and a lot of drama. We had a local stripper in the audience, a bunch of British witnesses that hated each other, and the British victim kept accusing the defense of intimidation because we were laughing with our client outside of court at the smoke pit, which was completely authorized. She peeped out the window and was offended by us laughing. The prosecutor then scolded us for laughing in public and asked us to stay hidden.  Our response was to laugh even louder.

When the trial began, the prosecutor was literally crying during her opening statement while pointing at my client and calling him a rapist.

The two alleged rape victims took 3-4 hours EACH to tell their stories. It was painfully boring. The prosecutor kept asking, “How did you feel?” about every minor detail of the case.  While how they “felt” was not relevant, the defense intentionally did not object. Instead, we let them blab on and on to the point where the jury stopped listening. 90 minutes into their testimony, the jury stopped paying attention and some jurors were falling asleep. Few people can pay attention to 4 hours of fake sobbing. After the first box of tissues, the jury tuned her out.

Dump the Prosecutor's ParalegalOn cross-examination, these witnesses were quickly cut to shreds when confronted with lie after lie. After impeaching her with numerous blatant lies, one victim’s neck (the JAG paralegal) started to twitch. It would have been amusing, but for the fact that our client sat falsely accused of heinous crimes.

During Mr. Waddington’s closing argument, the paralegal “victim” brought her husband into the court to watch. When Mr. Waddington talked about all of her lying and cheating, she ran out of the courtroom in tears, in the middle of the closing. Apparently, she never told her husband about her love affair with my client or the fact that she was bragging about my client’s sexual prowess to fellow soldiers, while she was with her husband.

The jury deliberated for about 60 minutes. The defense witnesses went out to party and Mr. Waddington went to his hotel to rest for his next case the following Monday in Norfolk, VA.

Air Force master sergeant to face court-martial on child porn charges

A master sergeant with the 315th Security Forces Squadron at Joint Base Charleston in South Carolina will face a court-martial next month on charges of possession of child pornography.

Master Sgt. Brian Arnold, of the Air Force Reserve, is accused of possessing sexually explicit videos of a minor, or someone who appears to be a minor, between August 2012 and June 2015, according to charge sheet information provided by Joint Base Charleston. If convicted, this would be a violation of Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Arnold’s court-martial is scheduled to begin March 19 at the base, and end March 23. Maj. Gen. Christopher Bence, the commander of the United States Air Force Expeditionary Center, will be the convening authority.

“It is important to remember in the military justice system every individual is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” Marvin Krause, a spokesman for Joint Base Charleston, said in an email. “While it is premature to comment on the outcome of the case, charges have been referred to trial by the General Court Martial Convening Authority, and a court will determine if the accused is guilty of the alleged offense and if so, adjudicate an appropriate sentence.”

Cheating Wife Brings Lover to Husband’s Rape Trial

U.S. v. Army E-4 – Fort Stewart, GA

Allegations: RAPE, Violating a no-contact order
Max Punishment: LIFE IN PRISON
Result: NOT GUILTY OF RAPE, Guilty of the MPO violation
SENTENCE: NO JAIL TIME, Reprimand, Reduction to E-3
Discharge: NONE
Location/Branch/Rank: Fort Stewart, GA/Army/E-4

RAPE, Violating a no-contact order

Summary: Our client allegedly “confessed” a rape to CID. They had a written and video confession.  Our client was locked up in pretrial confinement and agreed to plead guilty. He was pleading guilty to rape, aggravated assault, and violating a no-contact order. His mother came to watch his guilty plea and stopped him in the middle. She demanded that he seek a second opinion.

His mother called our firm and spoke with Alexandra. While we don’t guarantee results, we let his mother know that we guarantee that we will fight for our clients. We were hired and went to work because the trial was 30 days away.

This case was a unique challenge because our client had signed a written confession admitting to rape and spousal abuse. He also made a videotaped confession to CID. After looking at the alleged “confessions,” our only defense was to attack the confessions head-on. Winning a case with one confession

is nearly impossible. Here, we had two confessions, one written and one video recorded.

Before she accused him, our client’s wife asked for a divorce, AND she wanted our client to keep financially supporting her and her new lover. Our client refused. The supposed “victim” had the nerve to bring her lover to her husband’s rape trial. The lover sat in the front row, smirking, but not for long. During her cross-examination, Mr. Waddington called her out, “Is that your new boyfriend in the front row?” he asked, pointing at her lover. The jury turned and glared at her dirtbag boyfriend.

The challenge:

Hellicopter

How do we challenge multiple rape confessions in front of a jury without losing credibility?

As Sun Tzu said, in The Art of War: “In war, the way is to avoid what is strong and to strike at what is weak.”

We carefully studied the “confessions,” learned about our client’s personality, analyzed the victim’s story, and reviewed CID regulations and training manuals. We learned that CID shut off the video recorder and threatened to charge our client with attempted murder and a life sentence if he did not confess to rape. They also promised him that nothing would happen to him, so long as he admitted to rape. When he agreed to confess,  CID started recording again.

At Trial:

camouflage

Mr. Waddington, working with Army defense lawyer, CPT Rachel Large, plotted a defense that attacked the alleged victim’s story and the CID interrogation. We showed that the CID interrogators violated their own policies and rules, they used lies, trickery, and deceit, and they preyed on our client’s gullibility.

At the beginning of the trial, we had a 5% chance of success. When the alleged victim and CID agents testified, we hammered them on cross-examination. Then, our odds went to 50/50. In the closing, we swung for the fences.

RESULT: Not guilty of all sex crimes, false official statement. Guilty of violating a no-contact order.

SENTENCE: NO JAIL TIME, NO DISCHARGE, Reprimand, reduction to E-3.


REAL COSTS OF A COURT-MARTIAL CONVICTION & DISCHARGE

No Jail After Stealing $91,000

U.S. v. Army O-3 – Fort Buchanan, PR – Fort Rucker, AL

Allegations: BAH & OHA fraud, Larceny of Government property over $91,000, False official statement, Conspiracy
Max Punishment: 65 years in prison, Dismissal
Result: During the trial, we got three charges dismissed, Not Guilty of conspiracy, Guilty of stealing OHA, BAH, and false official statement.
Sentence: NO JAIL TIME. $20,000 fine, and a dismissal.
Discharge: Dismissal
Location/Branch/Rank: Fort Buchanan, PRFort Rucker, AL/Army/O-3

Summary: 

beachOur client was accused of stealing over $91,000 in housing allowance from the US government (both OHA and BAH while stationed in Puerto Rico). He was also accused of false official statement and teaching an E-7 coworker how to defraud the Government. In addition, he was accused of collecting BAH for his ex-wife, while divorced. He faced over 65 years in prison, a dismissal, and total forfeiture of pay and allowances. At trial, our goal was to mitigate the damage and save our client from a lengthy prison sentence.

Mr. Waddington and CPT Brennan Breeland fought the case in front of an officer jury packed with senior Army Aviators. The jury consisted of Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels, a tough audience. The prosecution called an E-7 who testified that our client confessed to stealing OHA and taught him how to do it. Also, experts from finance and housing explained that the money was stolen through a bogus lease. Several witnesses from Puerto Rico, including the landlord, testified against our client. Three witnesses stated that our client admitted to receiving OHA that he was not entitled to. Additionally, the prosecution presented incriminating emails from our client.

We attacked each witness head on and impeached them with their lies and biases.

During the trial, we got three charges dismissed and the jury found him not guilty of teaching the E-7 how to defraud the Government, despite the E-7’s direct testimony. In the end, our client was convicted of stealing OHA, BAH, and false official statement.

Going into sentencing, he faced 35 years in prison. We argued for no jail time.

SENTENCE: NO JAIL TIME. $20,000 fine and a dismissal.

General’s Aide-de-Camp Caught in a Web of Lies

U.S. v. Army O-3 – Bagram Afghanistan/Fort McNair, Washington D.C.

Allegations: Rape x 2 Specifications, Adultery, Violation of a Lawful General Order
Max Punishment: LIFE IN PRISON, Dismissal, Sex offender registration
Result: NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES
Discharge: NONE
Location/Branch/Rank: Bagram Afghanistan/Fort McNair, Washington D.C./Army/O-3

Summary: 

We fought this case and won a full acquittal. Our client was falsely accused of violently raping a female O-3(P), the aide to a 2 Star General on the fast track to General, while in Afghanistan. The alleged rape was reported the next morning at the medical clinic. IMG_4303The “victim” was a lying sociopath and we exposed her on the witness stand. She was also a veteran SARC (Sex Assault Response Coordinator) and a victim advocate.

Although she reported the next morning, this is where her problems began. She deleted emails, social media posts, and text messages, thinking that they could not be recovered. She was wrong. Our client hired us immediately after being accused (and he did not talk to investigators). We then recovered emails, texts, and social media posts that showed that this BS victim was lying.

We exposed some of this evidence to the prosecution, hoping that they would do the right thing and drop the charges. They did the opposite. They used the information that we provided to educate the lying victim and her lawyer.

The victim again changed her story to explain away the damning evidence. This “victim” was very intelligent (the Army is currently paying for her Master’s degree at Columbia University in New York), charming, and conniving, like most sociopaths.

Cross-examining an expert liar, like her, can be a challenge, but Mr. Waddington used her arrogance to destroy her on the stand. The defense also showed that she went to the clinic to get STD and Plan-B anti-pregnancy medicine because, in Afghanistan, it is a crime for soldiers to have sex. Admitting to having sex could ruin her career. As a SARC, she knew that she could get medicine by claiming rape.

Mr. Waddington and his bulldog co-counsel, CPT Patrick Sandys, suspected that the prosecutor and the SVC (special victim counsel) would likely double cross us, so we set a trap. We selectively exposed some, but not all of the text messages and social media that we had recovered. In the end, this “victim” perjured herself on the stand. But we had already set her and the unscrupulous prosecutors up. Once we locked her in her lies, we then revealed the additional evidence and demolished this liar in an ambush attack.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES.

military truckFor the first time ever, we included our client’s review on our results page. Here it is:

Micheal Waddington is hands down the best of the best! Selecting Micheal to represent me at my recent court martial was one of the best decision I could have made. Earlier on in my year long journey Micheal and his exceptional staff reached out to CID informing them that I represented and to leave me alone.

Micheal work diligently on my case developing case strategy, gathering evidence and filing critical motions which would eventually lead to my full acquittal of several specifications of Article 120, 134 and 92 charges.

Being tried at general court martial is one of the scariest things I have ever done in my life. Regardless of the evidence in the case the government is coming after you and you are in a fight for your life. Forget the innocent until proving guilty, I’m telling you from experience that you are Guilty until you can prove your innocent. Anyone that tells you any different has probably never faced 60 years, separation from their family and a complete erase of over a decade of exceptional service to their country. You are Guilty until you can prove that your innocent and that’s the bottom line! The government has unlimited resources and if you’re facing a sexual assault trail, then the alleged victim has at least three lawyers free of charge at his/her disposal. The Special Victim Counsel, Trial Counsel and the very vicious Special Victim Prosecutor. You my friend have a Trail Counsel whom you will only get assigned after charges have been preferred against you.

military menSo much can go wrong for you during the investigation, charges being preferred and being assigned a trial counsel. As I stated earlier Micheal contacted CID special agents and advised them to leave me alone, with a good lawyer you wont be hounded by CID Agents who claim they want to help. CID is not your friend and they have absolutely no other desire than to aid the government’s team of lawyers in gathering information to convict you.

You need a Lawyer, I will warn you however that not all lawyers are equal and sometimes you get exactly what you pay for. If you are facing serious criminal charges than you need a lawyer that has the experience in dealing with such manners. If you are facing a sexual assault allegation there is a 95% or better chance that you are going to trail. I’m sorry to break the news to you but get it in your head I’m in a fight for my life and I’m going to trial. You need a lawyer that has tried cases to verdicts with successful results.

I’m telling you from months of research, that Micheal Waddington is the best lawyer that money can buy. If I had to do it all over again I wouldn’t trust my life in the hands of no one other than Micheal Waddington. At trail Micheal meticulously exploited all of the weaknesses in the government case. Micheal took the fight to the government and after cross examination of the first witness, he had to government in a defensive posture. At the end of the first day of my trail Micheal was so effective that the government was attempting to offer plea deals, I watched him laugh in their face!!!!

two menThe second day, I testified and was well prepared as a result of Micheal preparing me. Then came the scariest 3 hours of my life after the SVP made me look like the worst person that ever walked the planet, Micheal was up and he in a very calm manner changed the perspective of virtually everyone in the room in regards to facts in the case and the type of Soldier I had been and currently was.

Sitting in that waiting room for the decision to come down I remember walking past a table were in plain sight were two boxes containing leg irons and hand cuffs. I say yet again you are in a battle for your life. If it had not been for the exceptional work of Micheal, I wouldn’t be typing this messageI. I would be wearing those leg irons and convicted of a crime I didn’t even commit. You may think you can’t afford a civilian lawyer, I personally feel that you can’t not afford one! MICHAEL WADDINGTON!!!!

Command Taints Court Martial – Case Dismissed

U.S. v. Navy E-6 – Norfolk Navy Base, VA

Allegations: 4 Specifications of sexual assault/Abusive sexual contact, assault consummated by battery
Max Punishment: 1 YEAR IN PRISON, BCD, Sex offender registration
Result: ALL CHARGES DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE
Discharge: NONE
Location/Branch/Rank: Norfolk Navy Base, VA/Navy/E-6

Summary: 

Norfolk Navy BaseOur client was accused of sexually assaulting a fellow sailor. Mr. Waddington and Coast Guard attorney LT Nicholas Smith were prepared to fight the case in front of an enlisted jury.

Before opening statements, the defense learned that the prosecution had withheld part of the NCIS file that contained a witness statement that was very helpful to the defense. Supposedly, NCIS “forgot” to give us this witness statement. It just so happened that this statement helped to prove our client’s innocence.

The defense immediately called the mystery witness only to discover that he changed his story since talking to NCIS. Also, the O-6 commander recently hand-selected him to be the victim’s Victim Advocate (VA). In other words, his duty was to protect and support the victim, no matter what. He was now tainted and refused to tell the truth.

The defense argued that the command blocked our client’s right to a fair trial by 1) hiding crucial evidence, and 2) by intentionally tainting the witness’s testimony by making him the Victim Advocate for the victim (which is considered Unlawful Command Influence or UCI).

Stephen King’s The Shining – a Coast Guard Version

U.S. v. Coast Guard E-7 – Juneau, AK

Allegations: Maltreating – sexually harassing a female E-4 x 2, Drunk and disorderly conduct
Max Punishment: 1 YEAR IN PRISON, BCD
Result: NOT Guilty of maltreatment charges, Guilty of drunk and disorderly
Sentence: NO JAIL TIME, NO DISCHARGE, One-grade reduction
Discharge: NONE
Location/Branch/Rank: Coast Guard Station Juneau, AK/Coast Guard/E-7

Summary: 

Stephen King’s The Shining - a Coast Guard VersionOur client was accused of two specifications of maltreating/sexually harassing a female E-4 and drunk and disorderly conduct. The allegations stemmed from a TDY trip to a remote area of Alaska to teach Native American villagers about water safety (The Kids Don’t Float Program). While in the village, a volcano erupted and grounded all air traffic. They were stuck, sharing a hotel room, where excessive drinking and craziness occurred.

Mr. Waddington and LT Warner Butkus fought the charges in front of an enlisted jury. On direct examination, the alleged victim told a harrowing story of how she was trapped for four days in a freezing remote village, with no means of communication, and was forced to share a hotel room with our out of control client. Her version sounded like Stephen King’s The Shining.

The alleged victim claimed that she ran from our client’s drunken assault and locked herself in her room. But, the lock didn’t work so she quickly barricaded herself inside of her room using a large dresser as he screamed through the door and tried to get in. As a result, she alleges that she suffered serious mental suffering. The story was compelling because she was a brilliant actress. However, phone records don’t lie and it is difficult to lie when being cross-examined.

At trial

Stephen King’s The Shining When Mr. Waddington cross-examined her, her story fell apart and she was exposed as a melodramatic exaggerator. She was forced to admit that:

-She had a cell phone and wi-fi and communicated with her Army E-6 boyfriend during the supposed assault. She told him everything was going well.

-She was chain-smoking cigarettes throughout the evening and the next day with our client.

-She was buying drinks for our client.

-The next day, she went to a museum, lunch, dinner, and tried to watch a movie at the theater alone with our client

-She bought our client alcohol on the flight home…. and much more.

Our client testified and admitted that they were drinking whiskey and they were both hammered.

Scroll to Top