Article 108 UCMJ – Military Property of the United States: Loss, Damage, Destruction, or Wrongful Disposition
UCMJ Military Defense Guide by Gonzalez & Waddington
Article 108 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice criminalizes the loss, damage, destruction, sale, or wrongful disposition of military property of the United States. This includes everything from government-issued weapons, vehicles, night vision devices, and radios to uniforms, computers, equipment, and specialized gear. Because the military relies on strict accountability, any perceived mishandling of property often leads to aggressive investigations—even when the alleged misconduct was accidental, misunderstood, or caused by factors outside the service member’s control.
Article 108 cases frequently involve lost gear, training damage, vehicle accidents, negligent storage, barracks theft allegations, excess wear-and-tear, mis-signed hand receipts, and confusion during PCS or deployment transitions. Many service members are wrongfully accused after items are misplaced during field exercises, turned in incorrectly, or mishandled by supply personnel. In other cases, units attempt to blame a junior service member for equipment failure or damage caused by poor command oversight.
Florida’s military bases—including NAS Jacksonville, Mayport, Pensacola, Whiting Field, Eglin, Hurlburt Field, Tyndall, Patrick SFB, MacDill AFB, NSA Panama City, and NAS Key West—see frequent Article 108 allegations due to heavy aviation operations, high-value equipment, constant deployments, and large inventories of sensitive gear. An innocent mistake can quickly escalate into a criminal investigation.
Gonzalez & Waddington aggressively defends service members accused under Article 108 by challenging chain-of-custody failures, supply mismanagement, unclear instructions, mechanical failure, lack of training, and command negligence. We protect your rank, reputation, and future.
What Article 108 Criminalizes
Article 108 covers five main categories of misconduct involving military property:
- 1. Selling military property without authorization
- 2. Wrongfully disposing of military property (including giving it away or trading it)
- 3. Willfully damaging or destroying military property
- 4. Negligently damaging or destroying military property
- 5. Suffering military property to be lost, damaged, or destroyed
“Military property” includes any item owned, leased, or controlled by the U.S. military—regardless of value. Losing night vision goggles is treated the same as losing smaller but sensitive gear if the command wants to punish someone.
Examples of Article 108 Situations
Common allegations include:
- Losing NVGs, radios, or other high-value items
- Damaging a government vehicle during training
- Misplacing gear during PCS, deployment, or field exercises
- Turning in damaged equipment that was already compromised
- Signing equipment you never physically received
- Failing to secure gear which is later stolen
- Selling issued gear online (often unintentionally illegal)
- Accidental weapon discharge damaging government property
- FOD or maintenance actions damaging aircraft equipment
Most Article 108 cases involve mistakes—not criminal intent.
Elements the Government Must Prove
To convict under Article 108, prosecutors must prove:
1. The property belonged to the U.S. military.
Property must be owned, leased, or strictly controlled by DoD.
2. The accused damaged, lost, sold, or wrongfully disposed of it.
They must show a specific act of misconduct or negligence.
3. The accused acted willfully or wrongfully—or was negligent.
Intent is not required for negligent cases, but the government must still prove fault.
4. The value of the property.
Punishments are based partly on the property’s value.
What Article 108 Is NOT
These situations DO NOT automatically qualify as Article 108 violations:
- Items lost due to unclear instructions
- Equipment failure or normal wear-and-tear
- Poor supply-chain management by the unit
- Missing items later found in another container or warehouse
- Damage caused by flawed equipment design
- Items loaned informally in the unit without proper documentation
- Loss during chaotic field or deployment conditions
- Accidents caused by weather or environmental hazards
Commands often misuse Article 108 to punish service members for problems they did not cause—or could not prevent.
Why Article 108 Cases Are Often Weak
Most Article 108 cases fall apart because the government cannot prove:
- The accused received the property in the first place
- Proper accountability procedures were followed
- The supply system maintained accurate records
- The accused actually caused the damage or loss
- Negligence—rather than honest mistake—occurred
- The accused had wrongful intent (for sales/disposition cases)
- Value assessments were accurate or verifiable
- Proper training was provided before equipment use
We frequently dismantle these cases by exposing procedural sloppiness.
Why Article 108 Allegations Are Common in Florida
Florida’s military environment creates unique challenges:
- Aviation-heavy operations (NAS Jacksonville, Whiting, Tyndall)
- High-value gear (flight equipment, weapons, aircraft parts)
- Frequent deployments leading to hurried gear turn-ins
- Large training populations with inexperienced personnel
- High humidity and storms causing equipment malfunction
- Busy ports and logistics hubs increasing risk of lost items
- Civilian-military storage overlap at rental units and off-base housing
Florida cases often stem from environmental conditions or chaotic operations—not misconduct.
Florida-Specific Real-World Article 108 Scenarios
1. Aviation Equipment Lost in Transit
Gear misplaced between NAS Jacksonville and a deployed location, with supply blaming the wrong person.
2. Boatswain’s Mate Accused After Vessel Damage
High seas, mechanical failure, or poor maintenance misinterpreted as negligence.
3. Field Exercise Gear Lost at Eglin
Thousands of soldiers and trainees exchanging gear leading to confusion.
4. NVGs Damaged by Salt Air at Key West
Environmental degradation—not mishandling—damages equipment.
5. Aircraft FOD Incident at Whiting Field
Chain-of-command blames junior personnel instead of systemic failure.
6. PCS Move Loss in Florida’s Ports
Gear lost by movers, not the service member.
7. Hurricanes Causing Damage
Storm conditions damage stored equipment improperly protected by the unit.
How Article 108 Investigations Work
Expect reviews by:
- Supply officers and inventory personnel
- CID / NCIS / OSI / CGIS if high-value items are involved
- Maintenance chiefs and QA sections
- Financial liability boards
- Command investigations (15-6, CDI, JAGMAN)
- Digital forensics for alleged sales online
Common Failures We Expose
- Sloppy hand-receipt practices
- No proof the accused ever signed for the property
- Inaccurate or outdated supply databases
- Failure to follow turn-in procedures
- Blame-shifting within units
- Missing chain-of-custody documentation
Defense Strategies for Article 108 Cases
1. Challenge Receipt of the Property
If you never signed for it—or signed under duress—liability is doubtful.
2. Show Lack of Negligence
An honest mistake does not equal misconduct.
3. Demonstrate Supply or Command Errors
We expose systemic failures in inventory management.
4. Florida-Specific Defenses
- Environmental damage (humidity, storms, sea corrosion)
- Equipment failure in aviation/boat operations
- Chaotic training conditions leading to misplacement
- PCS losses beyond service member control
5. Attack Property Value Calculations
Overstated or inflated valuations drastically impact sentencing.
6. No Intent for Wrongful Disposition
Online listings may be misunderstandings—not criminal sales.
Potential Punishments Under Article 108
Punishment depends on value and intent:
- Willful destruction – up to 10 years confinement
- Negligent damage – up to 1 year
- Wrongful sale/disposition – up to 10 years
- Loss of property – administrative or NJP consequences
- Bad conduct or dishonorable discharge
- Total forfeitures
- Reduction to E-1
Even minor cases can end careers if not handled correctly.
Pro Tips for Anyone Accused Under Article 108
- Do NOT admit responsibility without legal counsel.
- Do NOT pay out-of-pocket for alleged losses.
- Preserve all emails, texts, and documents related to gear.
- Gather witness statements confirming proper handling.
- Photograph storage areas, conditions, and turn-in points.
- Document supply chain weaknesses.
- Contact a civilian military defense lawyer immediately.
➤ Protect Your Career & Finances – Get Article 108 Defense Now
Related UCMJ Articles
- UCMJ Article Hub
- Article 109 – Destruction of Private Property
- Article 110 – Hazarding a Vessel
- Article 107 – False Official Statement
- Article 131b – Obstruction of Justice
Article 108 – Frequently Asked Questions
Can I be convicted if I never signed for the missing property?
Not usually. Article 108 requires some form of responsibility or control over the property. If supply cannot prove you ever received or accepted it, the case is weak and often collapses under scrutiny.
What if the property was lost during deployment or field exercises?
Chaotic conditions, weather, and complex operations often make perfect accountability impossible. These circumstances create strong defenses to Article 108 allegations.
Can I go to jail for losing gear?
Only if prosecutors prove negligence or willful misconduct. Most Article 108 cases resolve with administrative action or dismissal when properly defended.
What if I am blamed for equipment failure?
Mechanical failure, environmental damage, and poor maintenance practices often explain equipment breakdowns. We frequently prove the accused was not at fault.
Why hire Gonzalez & Waddington?
Because Article 108 cases often involve sloppy investigations, missing documentation, flawed supply practices, and command pressure. Our firm is nationally recognized for dismantling these weak cases and protecting service members from wrongful punishment.