Understanding Counterintuitive Victim Behavior in Military Court Martial Cases: What It Means for Your Defense
In the complex world of military justice, certain defense strategies and prosecutorial tactics can reveal much about the strength or weakness of a case. One such tactic is the use of counterintuitive victim behavior experts. Court martial lawyer Michael Waddington sheds light on why the invocation of these experts often signals significant flaws in the prosecution’s position—and what that means if you or a loved one is facing serious allegations.
What is Counterintuitive Victim Behavior?
The term counterintuitive essentially means behavior that goes against what one would logically expect. In the context of victim behavior, it refers to actions or reactions by an alleged victim that seem to contradict typical trauma responses or common sense expectations following an incident, especially one involving assault or abuse.
For instance, if a person were assaulted or attacked and then, shortly afterward, willingly invited their alleged assailant over repeatedly, such behavior might be described as counterintuitive. This is because, under normal circumstances, a victim of trauma is expected to avoid contact with their attacker, exhibit fear, or show signs of distress consistent with their experience.
Why Do Prosecutors Call Counterintuitive Victim Behavior Experts?
According to Michael Waddington, when the prosecution calls an expert witness—such as a psychologist, psychiatrist, or behavioral specialist—to testify that the victim’s behavior was counterintuitive, it often indicates that their case has serious weaknesses. Waddington bluntly states, “If they’re calling a counterintuitive expert and paying the person $30,000, their case generally sucks.”
These experts are brought in to explain away seemingly contradictory victim behavior that might otherwise undermine the prosecution’s narrative. For example, if an alleged victim continued to engage socially or intimately with the accused after the alleged assault, the prosecution might struggle to explain this inconsistency without expert testimony. The expert’s role is to provide context, such as trauma bonding, delayed reporting, or psychological coping mechanisms, to justify or rationalize the victim’s unusual behavior.
Examples of Counterintuitive Victim Behavior in Court Martial Cases
Consider a scenario where an alleged victim accuses someone of sexual assault but continues to date or have consensual contact with the accused afterward. Eventually, the relationship deteriorates, and the victim reports the assault. Without expert testimony, such behavior might appear to contradict the allegation, potentially casting doubt on the victim’s credibility.
Experts in counterintuitive victim behavior testify to help the court understand that trauma and human responses are complex and don’t always follow a straightforward path. Victims may behave in unexpected ways due to fear, manipulation, confusion, or emotional attachment, especially in environments with significant power dynamics, such as the military.
The Importance of Expert Cross-Examination
While the presence of a counterintuitive victim behavior expert can be a red flag for the prosecution’s case, it doesn’t guarantee an acquittal. Effective cross-examination by defense counsel is critical to challenge the expert’s credibility, methodology, and assumptions. A skilled defense attorney can highlight inconsistencies, question the expert’s qualifications or biases, and present alternative explanations for the victim’s behavior.
Military court martial cases are complex, with unique rules and high stakes. Understanding how experts are used to explain victim behavior can provide defendants with a strategic advantage and help demystify the legal proceedings.
Contextualizing Courts-Martial and Their Stakes
Military justice operates differently than civilian courts, with specific types of courts-martial—summary, special, and general—that vary in severity and consequences.
- Summary Courts-Martial: The lowest level, with limited punishments and no civilian equivalent.
- Special Courts-Martial: Intermediate level, considered akin to federal misdemeanor courts, with restricted sentencing power.
- General Courts-Martial: The highest level, equivalent to federal district courts, capable of imposing severe penalties including death.
Given the gravity of these courts, particularly the general courts-martial, every element of the prosecution’s case is scrutinized closely, including the credibility of alleged victims and the testimony explaining their behavior.
Why This Matters to You
If you are facing allegations in a military court martial, or if you know someone who is, understanding the use of counterintuitive victim behavior experts can be a crucial part of your defense strategy. It signals potential vulnerabilities in the prosecution’s case and highlights the importance of expert legal representation.
Michael Waddington and his team provide experienced civilian defense counsel for military members facing court martials, including those involving sexual assault allegations. For a confidential consultation, you can contact their office directly.
Conclusion
The use of counterintuitive victim behavior experts in military court martial cases often reveals prosecutorial weaknesses and attempts to rationalize victim behavior that seems inconsistent with the alleged facts. Recognizing this dynamic equips defendants and their counsel with critical insight into the prosecution’s case and the challenges ahead. Whether you’re a service member or a concerned family member, knowing how these experts fit into the broader military justice landscape can make a significant difference in navigating the court martial process.
For more information or to speak with an experienced military defense attorney, visit ucmjdefense.com or call 1-800-921-8607.