Recent Results

[blogposts count=”6″]

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

CID’s Recruiting Fraud Witch Hunt

U.S. v. Army 1LT – Fort Riley, KS

Allegations: Larceny of Government Property over $500, Fraud, Conspiracy
Max Punishment: 45 YEARS IN PRISON, Dismissal
Result: No charges preferred. No Reprimand, No NJP/Mast. He is still serving on Active Duty and was promoted to Captain.
Discharge: NONE
Location/Branch/Rank: Fort Riley, KS/Army/1LT

Summary: 

Our client was accused of being involved in an Army recruitment scam. CID went on a witch hunt and targeted hundreds of soldiers, many of whom were convicted.

According to a CBS News story, Backlash from Army’s largest criminal investigation:

“It is the largest criminal investigation in the history of the United States Army — an after shock caused by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Running short of soldiers, the Army National Guard came up with a scheme called the Recruiting Assistance Program which paid a $2,000 bonus to members of the Guard who brought in a new recruit. A total of 105,000 soldiers got those bonuses, but some of them scammed the system by claiming to bring in recruits they had never met. Eighty soldiers have pleaded guilty or been convicted, and another 60 remain under indictment. Some soldiers claim they did nothing illegal and are being made scapegoats for a recruiting program the Army admits was badly mismanaged from the start.”

As we do in every case, we went on the offensive and prepared a defense for our client. Before the Army preferred charges, we reached out to the command and pleaded our case. The Battalion Commander and Command Sergeant Major, based on the evidence, supported our client and helped fight to clear his name.

Plenty of Fish Triple Rape

U.S. v. Navy E-5 – Miramar, CA – tried at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, CA

NOTE: This case was overturned on appeal.

sandiegocourtmartiallawyersAllegations: Rape of 3 different women
Max Punishment: 3 Life Sentences, Dishonorable Discharge, Sex offender registration
Result: NOT GUILTY of 2 out the 3 allegations. Convicted of 1 allegation.
Sentence: The Marine prosecutors demanded 20 years in prison. The jury gave him 1 year of confinement and a DD. Our client was happy.
Discharge: Case overturned on appeal.
Location/Branch/Rank: Miramar, CA – tried at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, San Diego, CA/Navy/E-5

Summary: 

Our client was accused of violently raping three women in four months. He faced life in prison. There was lots of DNA evidence, a confession, and forensics. Our client was accused of finding women on the website, Plenty of Fish, luring them to his home, and raping them. Client’s original high powered attorney, a retired Marine Judge, and Colonel told the client he had “no chance” and would be convicted of all rape charges and get 30 years in prison.

He then negotiated a 5 year “deal of a lifetime.” The client then fired this lawyer and hired our firm. Mr. Waddington fought the case with LCDR Chad Temple and Marine Captain Yin in front of a Marine jury, although our client was Navy.

Guy’s Night Out Crashed by E-4 Party Girl – Bad Idea!

U.S. v. Army E-7 – Shaw Air Force Base, SC/Pensacola, FL

Allegations: MULTIPLE SEXUAL ASSAULT CHARGES, Fraternization
Max Punishment: 50 YEARS IN PRISON, DD, Sex offender registration
Result: NOT GUILTY OF ALL SEX CHARGES, Guilty of one specification of fraternization
SENTENCE: NO DISCHARGE, 30 days in the base brig, No Reduction in Rank
Discharge: NONE
Location/Branch/Rank: Shaw AFB, SC/Army/E-7

Summary: JetOur client was TDY near Eglin, AFB, Florida for a training mission with the Air Force. His all-male team of NCOs went to McGuire’s Pub and the International Lounge for dinner and drinks. One of his team members, a male E-7 (Warrant Officer Candidate), invited a female E-4 to join the guys for drinks. As you can imagine, this story does not end well. The Warrant Officer was trying to hook up with the E-4, but the alleged victim was more interested in our client.

The next day, the male E-7 accused our client of sexually assaulting, harassing, and maltreating the female E-4 at the bar and in her room. Witnesses found our client in the E-4’s room and intervened. The E-4 claimed sexual assault and the other NCOs ganged up on our client. The Warrant Officer claimed that our client forcibly removed her breast from her shirt, groped her, and forced himself into her room.

Mr. Waddington and CPT Joseph Piasta fought the case in front of an enlisted jury.

At trial, we exposed the Warrant Officer as a lying dirtbag. The other NCOs crumbled under cross-examination and the alleged victim was shown to be a drama queen and exaggerator.

RESULT: NOT GUILTY OF ALL SEX CHARGES, Guilty of one specification of fraternization

SENTENCE: NO DISCHARGE, 30 days in the local brig, No Reduction in Rank

San Diego Rape Court Martial Avoided – Charges Dropped

U.S. v. Navy E-4 – San Diego Navy Base

militaryattorneys-san-diego-navy-baseAllegations: Article 120 Sexual Assault
Max Punishment: 60+ years in prison, Dishonorable Discharge, Sex offender registration
Result: ALL COURT MARTIAL CHARGES DISMISSED, CLIENT RETAINED
Sentence: NONE
Discharge: NONE
Location/Branch/Rank: Naval Base San Diego, San Diego, CA/Navy/E-4

Summary: 

Our client was accused of sexually assaulting a female sailor in her quarters. Our client maintained his innocence and refused to plead guilty. As the trial date approached, the defense lawyers, Mrs. Gonzalez-Waddington, and CDR William Weiland prepared for trial.

Our goals were to: avoid a Federal conviction, avoid sex offender registration, avoid jail time, and allow our client to leave the Navy with an Honorable Discharge and his GI Bill benefits intact.

On the eve of trial, the prosecution agreed to drop all court-martial charges if our client agreed to fight the case at NJP/Captain’s Mast.

RESULT: ALL COURT-MARTIAL CHARGES DISMISSED, CLIENT RETAINED

No Federal Conviction, No Sex Offender Registration, No Jail Time, and our client’s GI Bill is intact.

Scroll to Top