The Hidden Dangers of Military Command Investigations – What Your Chain of Command Won’t Tell You

TLDR – Command Investigations Are Not About “Finding the Truth.” They Are About Protecting the Command.

Most service members believe a command investigation is a neutral, administrative process. It is not. It is a tool used by commands to protect leadership, manage risk, and create a record that justifies punitive or administrative action. The investigating officer is usually untrained, influenced by politics, and guided by JAG advice that assumes guilt from the outset. If you mishandle the process, you can lose your career—sometimes without ever seeing a courtroom.

• Command investigations exist to protect the institution, not the individual.
• Most IOs have no training in evidence, interviewing, credibility analysis, or bias control.
• Even minor allegations can lead to severe punishments or administrative elimination.
• Your rebuttal is the single most powerful tool you have—but only if it’s professionally crafted.
• Gonzalez & Waddington leads the world in defending command investigations and AR 15-6 cases.

Why Service Members Constantly Underestimate Command Investigations

Unlike court-martials, command investigations require almost no evidence. Commands often use them to “document” misconduct, remove leaders, or justify discipline. Complaints that would never survive a courtroom are used to initiate career-ending administrative actions.

The biggest misconception is thinking the IO is a neutral party. They are not. They are hand-selected by a command that already suspects something went wrong.

How Command Investigations Work Behind the Scenes (What You Are Not Told)

Step 1: The Commander Receives a Complaint

This may be an anonymous tip, a SHARP/EO filing, a rumor, or a single disgruntled soldier. Many investigations begin from incomplete or false information.

Step 2: The Command Conducts a Quiet Pre-Investigation

This RCM 303 or informal inquiry often involves speaking to witnesses before you are even notified. The command may begin shaping the narrative early.

Step 3: The Commander Selects the Investigating Officer

IOs are chosen because of rank, not investigative skill. Most:

• Have never conducted an investigation before
• Do not understand evidence or forensic standards
• Rely heavily on JAG guidance that is not neutral
• Operate with confirmation bias

Step 4: Evidence Is Gathered Selectively

IOs rarely dig deep. They typically interview:

• The complainant
• Witnesses recommended by the command
• People who support the expected narrative

Exculpatory witnesses or documents are often ignored unless your defense demands inclusion.

Step 5: The IO Issues “Findings of Fact” That Become the Official Story

If unchallenged, these findings become the basis for:

• GOMORs / Letters of Reprimand
• Nonjudicial Punishment
• Relief for cause
• Bars to reenlistment
• BOI / Administrative Separation Boards
• Court-martial referrals

Once signed by the approval authority, the findings become extremely difficult to reverse—unless you intervene effectively.

Four Real Examples of Why Command Investigations Destroy Careers

1. A Junior Officer Accused of “Toxic Leadership”

One complaint from a disgruntled subordinate led to a 15-6. The IO interviewed only negative voices, ignored positive evaluations, and concluded the officer “failed to maintain a healthy climate.” The officer was removed from command and later separated—despite no misconduct.

2. A Senior NCO Investigated for Travel Voucher Errors

A mistake on a DTS voucher resulted in allegations of “fraudulent intent.” The IO misunderstood the finance rules and recommended NJP. A strong rebuttal prevented punishment, but without civilian counsel, this NCO would have been labeled a criminal.

3. A Service Member Accused of Inappropriate Messaging

Consensual messages were misconstrued as misconduct. The IO used screenshots selectively and omitted context. After an aggressive rebuttal, the findings were modified and the reprimand was withdrawn.

4. A Platoon Sergeant Blamed for a Training Injury

Despite following all safety protocols, the IO concluded the NCO “contributed to unsafe conditions.” This triggered relief for cause. Only after presenting overlooked evidence was the finding reversed.

5. A Naval Petty Officer Targeted in a SHARP Investigation

False allegations led to a JAGMAN inquiry. The IO accepted every allegation as fact. The rebuttal exposed inconsistencies, leading the approving authority to reject all findings.

The Most Dangerous Myth: “If I Just Cooperate, It Will Be Fine.”

No. Cooperation is often interpreted as guilt. IOs are not neutral interviewers. They are collecting statements to support predetermined conclusions. Anything you say—even innocent statements—can be misinterpreted or weaponized.

You are not required to answer questions in a command investigation. Remaining silent is often the smartest choice.

How to Protect Yourself When Targeted by a Command Investigation

1. Do Not Talk—To Anyone—Without Legal Counsel

Not the IO. Not your commander. Not your first sergeant. Not your peers. Not your soldiers. Every conversation becomes evidence.

2. Preserve Every Piece of Evidence

Do not delete anything. Screenshots, text messages, emails, photos, social media messages, receipts, and timelines matter.

3. Build a Defense File Immediately

You should begin documenting your version of events with your lawyer’s help on day one.

4. Understand That the IO Already Has a Narrative

Your job—and your rebuttal—is to dismantle it with precision.

5. Hire the Best Civilian Military Defense Lawyers You Can Find

Command investigations are won by strategy, not cooperation. Most military lawyers cannot engage deeply at this stage due to workload and restrictions.

For official guidance, see:
Army Regulation 15-6 – Procedures for Administrative Investigations

Why Gonzalez & Waddington Are the Top Command Investigation Lawyers in the World

Our firm has represented service members in hundreds of command investigations, AR 15-6 inquiries, CDIs, and JAGMAN cases across the United States, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and the Pacific. Our rebuttals are known for flipping findings, stopping NJP, preventing separations, and saving careers.

• Decades of experience defending officers, senior NCOs, aviators, cyber, intel, SOF, and command personnel
• Unmatched expertise in AR 15-6, CDI, JAGMAN, and command investigation procedures
• Known globally for precision rebuttals that dismantle weak investigations
• Frequent defenders in high-stakes cases involving leadership, climate, SHARP, hazing, and resource misuse
• International representation for clients assigned in Germany, Italy, Japan, Korea, Guam, the UK, and CENTCOM

Protect Your Rank, Reputation, and Future

Your command already has lawyers advising them. You need your own. A command investigation is not the time to gamble or trust the system.

➤ Speak with Gonzalez & Waddington for an immediate defense assessment.

Let Us Craft the Rebuttal That Saves Your Career

A command investigation rebuttal is the most important document you will submit in your entire military career. Do not write it alone, and do not submit it without expert review.

➤ Hire our team to build a powerful rebuttal that the command cannot ignore.

Hidden Dangers of Command Investigations – Frequently Asked Questions