Gonzalez & Waddington – Attorneys at Law

CALL NOW 1-800-921-8607

U.S. v. Army E-8 – SOUTHCOM, Miami, El Salvador, Fort Sam Houston, TX

U.S. v. Army E-8 – SOUTHCOM, Miami, El Salvador, Fort Sam Houston, TX – Client was a Special Forces soldier accused of violently raping and sodomizing a Salvadoran housekeeper. There was allegedly physical evidence, DNA evidence and numerous eyewitnesses that supported the claim.

Ucmjarticle1201248 Gonzalez &Amp; Waddington - Attorneys At Law

The El Salvadoran Government wanted our client in jail. To appease the Salvadorans, the American Government spared no expense to win this case. It became an international incident between the US & Salvadorans and Not Guilty was not an option for the US Government.

U.S. v. Army E-8 – SOUTHCOM, Miami, El Salvador, Fort Sam Houston, TXMiami El Salvador Fort Sam Houston

However, our client took and passed a polygraph and provided evidence to prove his innocence to the US Government. SOUTHCOM disregarded all of his evidence and suppressed it at trial. They wanted to make an example out of this soldier and gain favor with El Salvador by sacrificing one of their own (regardless of his innocence).

To gain an upper hand, the prosecution denied almost all defense witnesses. However, they flew up numerous Salvadoran witnesses and several American witnesses to testify against our client. They also brought a Salvadoran doctor who tested that there was overwhelming physical evidence to prove rape.

To further stack the deck, the Army appointed one of the top Special Victim Prosecutors (SVP) in the Army. Then, they brought in a nationally known civilian prosecutor and expert in sexual assault prosecutions (similar to Nancy Grace) to work with the prosecution and get a conviction.

Mr. Waddington and Capt Dustin Murphy, along with legendary DNA expert, Dean Wideman, mounted a defense for our client with limited resources. We proved that the alleged victim was a hustler and liar, her husband most likely raped her, and that the DNA evidence proved our client’s innocence.

Result: NOT GUILTY OF ALL CHARGES

Skip to content