Article 134 UCMJ – Misprision of a Serious Offense – Military Defense Lawyers

UCMJ Military Defense Guide by Gonzalez & Waddington

Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice criminalizes misprision of a serious offense, meaning a service member knew a serious crime occurred, failed to report it, and took steps to conceal it. Misprision is essentially “covering up” or failing to notify authorities about a serious UCMJ violation. This offense is extremely broad and frequently misused when commands want to punish someone who had little or no involvement in an alleged crime.

Most misprision cases arise from barracks altercations, sexual assault investigations, drug incidents, hazing allegations, domestic disputes, theft rumors, and group misconduct. Commands often charge misprision when they cannot prove someone participated in the underlying offense but still want to impose punishment.

Florida’s military installations—including NAS Jacksonville, Mayport, Pensacola, Whiting Field, Hurlburt Field, Eglin, Tyndall, Patrick Space Force Base, MacDill AFB, NSA Panama City, NAS Key West, and Coast Guard Sectors—have a high number of misprision cases due to crowded barracks, nightlife environments, rapid information spread, and pressure from commanders to “set an example.”

Gonzalez & Waddington is globally recognized for defending service members accused of misprision, accessory, conspiracy, and other “association-based” offenses. We dismantle these cases by showing lack of duty to report, absence of concealment, government overreach, and the emotional or chaotic context in which the alleged misconduct occurred.

➤ Request an Article 134 Misprision Defense Strategy Session

What Is Misprision Under Article 134?

Misprision occurs when a service member:

• Knew a serious offense was committed, AND
• Failed to report it, AND
• Took affirmative steps to conceal it, AND
• Such conduct was wrongful, AND
• Such conduct was prejudicial or service-discrediting.

It is not a crime to simply remain silent — misprision requires active concealment.

What Misprision Is NOT

Many military members are falsely accused because commands misunderstand the law. The following situations do NOT constitute misprision:

• Being present during an incident but not participating
• Failing to report misconduct due to fear, confusion, or loyalty
• Not wanting to “snitch” on friends
• Being intoxicated and not understanding what happened
• Hearing rumors second-hand
• Leaving a scene without getting involved
• Deleting unrelated personal messages

Misprision requires deliberate concealment, not simple failure to report.

Examples of Misprision Under Article 134

1. Witnessing a Crime and Helping Hide It

E.g., helping move equipment, hiding evidence, or warning someone to flee.

2. Helping Clean Up After a Fight

Often misinterpreted as concealment when the service member was simply trying to help.

3. Lying About Knowledge of Misconduct

False statements may lead to misprision or Article 107 charges.

4. Deleting Messages That Discuss the Incident

Only criminal if done with the intent to conceal a crime.

5. Helping an Accused Avoid Investigation

E.g., giving transportation, hiding property, or advising them to “lay low.”

6. Interfering With Witnesses

If done to hide misconduct, may be misprision or obstruction.

Elements the Government Must Prove

To convict a service member of misprision, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. A Serious Offense Was Committed

The government must show someone else committed a crime.

2. The Accused Knew About the Offense

Suspicion or rumor is not enough — actual knowledge is required.

3. The Accused Failed to Report It

There must be a duty to report — not all situations create this duty.

4. The Accused Actively Concealed the Offense

This is the heart of misprision — concealment must be intentional.

5. The Conduct Was Wrongful and Prejudicial

Prosecutors must prove harm to good order or discredit to the service.

Why Misprision Cases Are Often Weak

Most misprision allegations fail because prosecutors cannot prove:

• The accused had clear legal duty to report the offense
• The accused knew the underlying act was a crime
• The accused took affirmative steps to conceal it
• The alleged concealment was intentional—not accidental
• There was actual prejudice to discipline
• Witnesses were sober, unbiased, or reliable
• Digital evidence shows concealment (it often doesn’t)

In most cases, the accused simply did not understand what happened — or assumed someone else reported it.

Why Misprision Allegations Are Common in Florida

Florida’s military culture produces many of these cases due to:

• High alcohol consumption leading to group misunderstandings
• Crowded barracks creating chaotic incidents
• Tourist-heavy nightlife near bases (Jacksonville, Tampa, Miami)
• Group fights or bar altercations
• Shared living arrangements
• Domestic disputes where partners blame others
• Breakups and roommate conflicts
• Civilian police involvement misinterpreting military culture

Most Florida misprision cases arise from emotional, drunken, confusing, or fast-moving situations.

Florida-Specific Real-World Misprision Scenarios

1. Barracks Fights

Multiple witnesses too drunk to understand what happened.

2. Helping a Friend After a Bar Altercation

Carrying them home is mischaracterized as concealment.

3. Being in the Wrong Group Chat

Flippant or joking messages misinterpreted by investigators.

4. Domestic Violence Misunderstandings

Partners claim someone “helped hide” misconduct.

5. Group Drug Cases

Accused didn’t use drugs but didn’t report others.

6. Sexual Assault Collateral Charges

Anyone near the incident is accused of misprision.

7. Helping a Roommate Clean Up a Mess

Misinterpreted as hiding evidence.

8. Misunderstanding Florida’s Alcohol Laws

Police overreact in nightlife areas.

9. Leaving a Party When Things Get Chaotic

Leaving is not concealment, but often treated as such.

10. Preventing Drama in the Unit

Service members avoid reporting to avoid escalation.

How Misprision Investigations Work

Investigators typically include:

• NCIS
• OSI
• CID
• CGIS
• Civilian police
• Command investigations (CDI, JAGMAN, 15-6)

Common Investigative Problems We Expose

• No evidence the accused knew a crime occurred
• Investigators assume silence = concealment
• Drunk or unreliable witnesses
• Failure to identify the accused’s legal duty to report
• Accusers motivated by revenge or jealousy
• Misinterpretation of texts or deletion of unrelated messages
• Failure to obtain complete digital records

Commands frequently overcharge misprision to pressure cooperation or create “accountability.”

Defense Strategies for Misprision Cases

1. Attack the Duty to Report

The military cannot punish someone for failing to report unless a specific duty existed.

2. Prove Lack of Knowledge

Many witnesses were confused, drunk, asleep, or unaware of the event.

3. Demonstrate No Active Concealment

Silence or avoidance is not misprision — concealment must be deliberate.

4. Undermine the Credibility of Witnesses

• Intoxication
• Memory gaps
• Retaliation motives
• Unit drama
• Dating/relationship conflict

5. Florida-Specific Defenses

• Bar scenes are chaotic and unclear
• Nightlife misunderstandings
• Tourist involvement causing confusion
• Barracks environments with shared access

6. Digital Forensic Reconstruction

We use full message threads, metadata, and timeline analysis to refute allegations of concealment.

7. Show No Harm to Good Order

Most misprision allegations do not actually impact the mission or discipline.

Pro Tips for Anyone Accused of Misprision

• Do NOT talk to investigators.
• Do NOT try to “explain your role.”
• Do NOT cooperate without legal counsel.
• Preserve all texts, photos, and digital evidence.
• Document your timeline privately.
• Identify neutral witnesses who know the truth.
• Avoid discussing the incident with peers.
• Hire a civilian defense lawyer immediately.

➤ Protect Yourself – Get Article 134 Misprision Defense Now

Article 134 Misprision – Frequently Asked Questions