Camp Casey Article 120 Sexual Assault Court-Martial Lawyers
Table Contents
Article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice defines a range of sexual offenses, distinguishing between acts classified as sexual assault and those categorized as abusive sexual contact. Sexual assault involves conduct such as penetration or attempts achieved through force, threat, or when the victim cannot consent, while abusive sexual contact refers to intentional, non-penetrative touching done without consent or under similar coercive circumstances.
Violations of Article 120 are treated as felony-level offenses within the military justice system, meaning a service member at Camp Casey faces the possibility of a general court-martial if formally charged. These proceedings carry the full weight and authority of federal criminal adjudication as applied through military law.
Prosecution of Article 120 allegations is controlled within the military chain of command, which determines whether an investigation moves forward, whether charges are preferred, and whether a case proceeds to court-martial. Commanders rely on military investigators and legal advisors, but the decision-making authority remains embedded in the command structure.
This command-centered approach contrasts with civilian criminal systems, where independent prosecutors decide charging actions and local or state courts oversee proceedings. As a result, Article 120 cases at Camp Casey follow processes, timelines, and authorities distinct from those used in civilian jurisdictions.
Article 120 covers felony-level sexual assault offenses in the military, where cases can escalate rapidly from investigation to expert evidence review and potential administrative separation. At Camp Casey, servicemembers facing such allegations can seek guidance from Gonzalez & Waddington at 1-800-921-8607.
Watch the criminal defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington break down how they defend criminal cases and service members worldwide against Federal Charges, Florida State Charges, UCMJ allegations, CID/NCIS/OSI investigations, court-martials, Article 120 cases, administrative separations, and GOMORs. If you’re under investigation or facing charges, this video explains what your rights are and how experienced criminal defense lawyers can make the difference.
Camp Casey operates under a strict zero‑tolerance culture for sexual misconduct, and mandated reporting requirements ensure that any concern is rapidly elevated through legal, medical, and command channels. These obligations create a structured process in which notifications occur immediately, often involving multiple offices from the outset.
Because commanders must manage operational risk and maintain unit readiness, they tend to respond quickly to any allegation to preserve good order and discipline. The high visibility of incidents in an overseas environment also encourages prompt documentation and oversight, which can make the timeline appear accelerated.
In addition to the criminal process, service members may be exposed to parallel administrative actions, including potential administrative separation procedures. These pathways can occur independently of investigative outcomes, adding to the perception that matters progress rapidly once an allegation is reported.
If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges or a criminal investigation by federal authorities, the military, or the State of Florida, early defense matters. Gonzalez & Waddington provide disciplined, trial-focused criminal defense for high-stakes cases involving serious allegations and complex evidence. To speak with experienced criminal defense lawyers and get confidential guidance, call 1-800-921-8607 or text 954-909-7407 to request a no-cost, confidential consultation.
Many cases involve scenarios where service members participated in social events with alcohol, resulting in blurred recollections or differing accounts of conversations, intentions, and levels of awareness. These situations often lead to uncertainty surrounding timelines or interactions due to memory gaps or conflicting interpretations of events.
Another recurring pattern includes the use of dating apps, text messages, and social media. Digital communication sometimes becomes central to understanding expectations, boundaries, and how each party interpreted their interactions, especially when messages are incomplete, deleted, or open to multiple interpretations.
Incidents may also arise within the unique environment of the barracks or tight-knit units, where informal socializing overlaps with professional relationships. Relationship disagreements, breakups, or evolving personal dynamics can prompt reports, occasionally initiated by third parties who express concern based on what they believe may have occurred rather than direct observation.
Article 120 investigations at Camp Casey involve coordinated efforts between military law enforcement and command authorities to gather and document all relevant information. These inquiries focus on reconstructing events, establishing timelines, and identifying the individuals involved through standardized investigative procedures.
Evidence collection in these cases often spans both physical and digital domains. Investigators compile materials from multiple sources to create a comprehensive factual record that supports further legal processing within the military justice system.
MRE 412 restricts the introduction of evidence concerning an alleged victim’s prior sexual behavior or sexual predisposition, making it a focal point in Article 120 litigation because it narrows what the defense and prosecution may present to the fact-finder.
MRE 413 and 414, by contrast, allow the admission of certain prior acts of sexual assault or child molestation to show propensity, expanding the range of evidence the government may seek to introduce in cases arising at Camp Casey.
The motions practice surrounding these rules—particularly hearings on relevance, prejudice, and procedural compliance—shapes the structure of the trial by determining which facts, witnesses, and narratives are permitted into the courtroom.
Because these evidentiary rulings influence what the panel or judge will ultimately hear, they effectively define the contours of the case, often becoming the most consequential determinations in Article 120 proceedings.
Article 120 cases at Camp Casey frequently turn on the reliability of scientific and testimonial evidence, making expert input central to both prosecution and defense strategies. These experts help clarify disputed facts, address gaps in memory, and evaluate whether investigative procedures were properly conducted.
Because credibility assessments play a decisive role, defense teams often call upon specialized professionals to challenge assumptions, expose investigative shortcomings, and contextualize the physical, digital, and psychological evidence presented at trial.
Service members at Camp Casey facing Article 120 allegations can encounter administrative separation even without a criminal conviction. Commanders may initiate separation actions based solely on the underlying conduct, using a lower evidentiary threshold than that required in a court-martial.
These actions often proceed through a Board of Inquiry or show-cause process, where officers and senior enlisted members review the evidence and determine whether the member should be retained. The administrative forum focuses on servicemember suitability for continued duty rather than criminal guilt.
If separation is recommended, the characterization of discharge—such as Honorable, General (Under Honorable Conditions), or Other Than Honorable—can significantly influence post-service opportunities. Each characterization carries different implications for access to benefits, employment prospects, and how the service record is perceived by future reviewers.
An adverse administrative outcome may affect long-term career progression, eligibility for reenlistment, and potential retirement benefits. Even a service member nearing retirement consideration can face substantial setbacks if separated before meeting the required service thresholds.
Article 120 cases at Camp Casey often begin alongside broader sex crimes investigations, which may involve military law enforcement, investigative agencies, and command oversight. These investigations examine not only the alleged conduct but also surrounding circumstances, including unit climate, reporting procedures, and witness involvement.
During or after the initial inquiry, commanders may initiate command-directed investigations to gather additional administrative facts separate from the criminal process. Although these inquiries do not determine guilt, their findings can influence decisions about interim measures, duty status, and whether further administrative actions should be considered.
Even when an Article 120 case does not result in court-martial charges, service members may still face administrative consequences such as Letters of Reprimand or formal reviews before Boards of Inquiry. These actions operate on different evidentiary standards and can significantly impact a soldier’s career, making them closely interconnected with how Article 120 allegations are handled overall.
With decades of military justice experience, the attorneys at Gonzalez & Waddington are often retained for Article 120 cases arising at Camp Casey because they understand how to craft disciplined trial strategies and develop motions practice tailored to the unique demands of courts‑martial. Their approach emphasizes careful analysis of the evidence, procedural precision, and the ability to anticipate government litigation tactics within the military justice system.
They are known for methodical cross-examination techniques that focus on testing reliability, exposing inconsistencies, and scrutinizing investigative steps. This includes experience working with and challenging expert witnesses, allowing the defense to scrutinize forensic assumptions and expose weaknesses in expert opinions when appropriate.
The firm’s attorneys have also contributed published work on trial advocacy, reflecting a long-standing commitment to educating practitioners on effective courtroom techniques. Combined with their extensive background representing service members across multiple installations, this foundation equips them to address the complex issues that often arise in Article 120 cases at Camp Casey.
Article 120 addresses sexual assault and related offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It defines prohibited conduct, applicable elements, and the standards used by military authorities when evaluating allegations.
Consent is assessed based on voluntary agreement, communicated through words or conduct. Military investigators consider the circumstances, communication between parties, and any factors that might affect a person’s ability to agree.
Alcohol may influence a person’s capacity to consent, and investigators review its role when examining the surrounding circumstances. Evidence such as witness statements, level of impairment, and situational context may be considered.
Digital evidence can include messages, social media activity, photos, or location data that help reconstruct timelines and interactions. Investigators may examine these materials to understand communication and events relevant to the allegation.
Experts may present specialized knowledge on topics such as forensic evidence, behavioral patterns, or alcohol effects. Their testimony can help explain technical issues that are not easily understood by non‑specialists.
Service members may face administrative review processes separate from any court‑martial proceedings. Command authorities determine whether administrative action is appropriate based on the circumstances and available information.
Investigations typically involve interviews, evidence collection, and review by military law enforcement and command authorities. The process aims to gather information objectively before any decisions are made about further action.
Service members generally have the option to obtain civilian legal representation in addition to military defense counsel. Civilian attorneys can participate in the case according to military rules and procedures governing representation.
Camp Casey is located in Dongducheon, a city in the northern region of Gyeonggi Province, South Korea, just south of the Demilitarized Zone. This area is defined by steep hills, narrow valleys, and a climate that shifts sharply between humid summers and cold, dry winters. Its proximity to the DMZ makes it one of the most strategically positioned U.S. military installations on the Korean Peninsula. The base sits alongside long-established Korean neighborhoods and commercial districts, where daily interaction between U.S. personnel and the local community is a routine part of life. The surrounding region supports the installation with transportation access, training areas, and a shared economic relationship that has developed over decades of U.S.–ROK cooperation.
Military Presence & Mission
Camp Casey hosts elements of the U.S. Army, particularly units aligned with deterrence and rapid defensive operations along the peninsula’s northern corridor. The installation supports maneuver brigades, sustainment elements, and mission command organizations that maintain a high level of readiness due to the base’s frontline role. Training at Camp Casey is designed to integrate closely with Republic of Korea forces, emphasizing combined operations, mobility, and immediate response capabilities that reflect the unique security environment of the DMZ region.
Service Member Population & Activity
The population at Camp Casey includes a large contingent of active duty soldiers, many of whom serve in deployable and combat‑focused units. The base supports continuous field training, gunnery rotations, and coordination with nearby installations within the 2nd Infantry Division footprint. Operational tempo is high, with frequent movements to surrounding training ranges and regular integration with allied forces. Support services, logistics hubs, medical facilities, and command functions ensure that the installation can sustain a forward‑positioned military presence year‑round.
Military Law & UCMJ Relevance
The demanding training environment and strategic posture of Camp Casey mean that UCMJ matters arise regularly, including command investigations, administrative actions, non‑judicial punishment, and courts‑martial. Service members stationed here or rotating through the peninsula may require legal guidance as they navigate issues linked to readiness demands, overseas operations, or heightened disciplinary expectations. The military defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington represent servicemembers at Camp Casey, providing support in these complex military justice matters.
You should consult a civilian military defense lawyer as soon as you learn you are under investigation or suspected of an Article 120 offense.
A not guilty verdict does not automatically protect against administrative actions such as separation or loss of clearance.
Prior consensual conduct may be admissible in limited circumstances but is heavily restricted by military evidentiary rules.
Restricted reporting allows confidential support without triggering an investigation, while unrestricted reporting initiates command and law enforcement action.
Expert witnesses can be used to explain memory, intoxication, perception, trauma, and investigative flaws.
