Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson occupies the northern edge of Anchorage, where the city ends and the Chugach Mountains begin. The Army element, formerly Fort Richardson, is home to the 11th Airborne Division, the Army’s only Arctic-focused division. Reactivated in 2022, the 11th runs two brigade combat teams: one at JBER, one at Fort Wainwright in Fairbanks. The mission is Arctic warfare and Pacific deterrence. Russian bombers probe U.S. airspace. Chinese ships move through Arctic shipping lanes. JBER is there for deterrence. Joint drills are run with Canadian forces. Deployments go to Korea, Japan, and forward positions across the Pacific. Soldiers here and throughout Alaska train in extreme cold and darkness that lasts for months.
The Alaska Native population is everywhere: working at the military exchanges and hospitals, running businesses downtown, teaching in schools, serving in government offices, shopping at the same stores, eating at the same restaurants, and in the same bars, hospitals, and courts. And jail stays full. Drugs and violence are constantly in the news. But it’s not just the Natives getting into trouble: Soldiers drink in the same bars, shop in the same stores, and get into the same mischief as anyone else in Anchorage.
Recent prosecutions out of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson include soldiers charged with using AI to create child sexual abuse images, possessing child pornography, killing an infant son (shaken-baby syndrome), murdering a spouse (National Guard member), and sexual assault by force. One former soldier was arrested in Delaware years after allegedly committing sexual assault at JBER in 2020, showing that investigations and charges can follow soldiers long after they leave Alaska. These cases demonstrate the range of OSTC jurisdiction: child exploitation involving emerging technology, domestic homicide, sexual assault, and violent crimes against children.
Anchorage is Alaska’s largest city. It still feels like a frontier town. It’s five hours by air from Seattle. In winter, moose walk through downtown streets. Cargo ships supply the Port of Anchorage. Summer brings cruise ships and tourists. Hotel rooms triple in price. By October the crowds leave, daylight shortens, and the city returns to its year-round population: soldiers, university students, dockhands, oil workers, Alaska Natives, and people who came north and stayed.
49th State Brewing has a heated brass rail along the bar. The view from the top of the Hotel Captain Cook overlooks the city, Cook Inlet, and the mountains. At 10th and I Street, the city keeps a pen of reindeer. Star, the local legend, died in 2025. The pen remains. These are the places Soldiers go off-duty and take their parents when they visit.
The military has been here since World War II. The base operates on land with a complicated history: contamination from fuel storage and ordnance, disputes over subsistence rights and range access, overlapping claims that never got resolved. Off-duty violations can become federal cases. Poaching, illegal fishing, trespass on protected land: all of it draws attention from command, prosecutors, and media looking for examples to make.
Office of Special Trial Counsel at JBER
The OSTC office at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson prosecutes the most serious offenses for Soldiers stationed here and at other Alaska installations, including Fort Wainwright in Fairbanks.
- What OSTC prosecutes: Articles 117a, 118, 119, 119a, 120, 120a, 120b, 120c, 125, 128b, 130, 132, and 134. Murder, manslaughter, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, distribution of intimate images, and related crimes.
- How OSTC operates differently: The OSTC reports to the Secretary of the Army, not the local chain of command. That independence changes the calculus. OSTC attorneys are focused on winning cases they take to trial, not on prosecuting every case to satisfy command pressure or public relations concerns. They evaluate evidence, not optics.
This creates opportunities for the defense. OSTC counsel are decision-makers who understand federal prosecution tactics and respond to strong evidence presented early. During the investigation or at the Article 32 hearing, favorable evidence gets attention. Weak cases can be derailed before charges are referred. That doesn’t happen with traditional trial counsel operating under command influence.
A note on proximity and legal representation: Some soldiers believe hiring local counsel gives them an advantage because the attorney is “right there.” In reality, military legal personnel rotate constantly. The appointed Trial Defense Service (TDS) counsel assigned to a soldier at Fort Wainwright might be stationed at JBER, and vice versa. In effect, this is no closer than a civilian attorney in Chicago. Most issues in military cases are resolved through calls, texts, emails, and secure file transfers.
Proximity doesn’t determine success. What determines outcomes is experience with OSTC prosecutions, federal courtroom work, and the ability to identify weaknesses in the government’s case that others don’t see.
The OSTC’s stated mission is to “seek justice by independently and equitably evaluating criminal allegations” and to “pursue justice in accordance with Constitutional due process.” Our job is to hold them to that standard and to make sure due process applies to the accused, not just the institution.
Our Army Defense Practice
We entered the Air Force JAG Corps in 2001 and served on active duty through 2005. When we opened this firm in 2006, Army cases dominated our docket: AWOL, desertion, combat-related offenses, and the fallout that followed soldiers home from Iraq and Afghanistan. We defended soldiers under Articles 120, 128, 134, and others during a period when the system ran at wartime intensity.
We’ve handled courts-martial at JBER and Fort Wainwright for twenty years, including sexual assault, CSAM, child enticement, domestic violence, attempted premeditated murder, and other cases OSTC now prosecutes.
Most uniformed defense counsel practicing today entered service after the wars ended. They’ve never seen the system under combat pressure. Few civilian attorneys have that experience either. We’re not from the Army, but we’ve defended more Soldiers in serious cases than most Army lawyers will in their entire careers.
Defending CSAM Cases at JBER
Most CSAM cases begin with a CyberTipline report to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC). Electronic service providers like Facebook, Google, Instagram, Snapchat, Yahoo, and Microsoft are required by federal law to report suspected CSAM on their platforms. NCMEC assigns a priority and forwards the report to law enforcement. The report includes file descriptions, cryptographic hash values, and the IP address linked to the account.
Other cases start when repair technicians find suspected material on a device, when witnesses see images on a phone, or when law enforcement discovers files during an unrelated investigation.
Devices Seized in CSAM Investigations
Investigators seize every device capable of storing or transmitting digital files: computers, external hard drives, flash drives, SD cards, phones, tablets. Game consoles like PlayStation, Xbox, and Nintendo Switch are taken because they support messaging, image transfer, and internet browsing. Digital cameras, GoPros, camcorders, and any removable media get collected. Routers, network-attached storage, and even smart TVs or voice-assistant hubs can be imaged when they contain cached or shared data. Any device with storage capacity or network connectivity becomes subject to seizure, duplication, and forensic analysis.
How the government proves possession:
Finding CSAM on a device isn’t enough. The government must prove the accused knowingly possessed it. That requires proof of control and awareness. Investigators conduct interviews to determine who used the device, review search histories, analyze peer-to-peer software, and examine cloud storage and messaging apps. They look for documents, emails, or personal photos that link the accused to the device and show familiarity with its contents.
How the defense challenges possession:
The fact that CSAM is on a device doesn’t prove the accused knowingly possessed it. The defense must determine who had access, whether files were saved intentionally or by automatic download, and whether the accused deleted or reported the material immediately upon discovery.
Hash values are powerful tools, but they’re not infallible. The defense verifies that hash values were properly generated, that files weren’t corrupted, and that the matching process was accurate. Errors in forensic imaging, chain of custody, or analytical software create reasonable doubt. Defense counsel also reviews whether the search warrant exceeded its scope or whether investigators relied on NCMEC summaries without independent verification.
The central issue is knowledge. Did the accused know what the files depicted? Were they stored in obvious folders or hidden in system directories? Were filenames suggestive or randomly generated? These answers determine whether the government can prove wrongful possession beyond a reasonable doubt.
Expert testimony and evidence exclusion:
Digital forensic experts determine whether files were intentionally accessed, whether timestamps were manipulated, and whether malware or remote-access software could have created the material without the accused’s knowledge.
NCMEC reports often include victim-impact evidence from the jurisdiction where the child was originally identified: police reports, forensic interviews, victim statements. These documents are hearsay. The accused in a possession case has no connection to the original offense against that child. The government cannot use third-party investigations to prove knowledge, intent, or motive. Effective defense counsel moves early to exclude these attachments, limiting the government’s aggravation case at sentencing to the forensic facts of the charged possession itself.
Consequences and strategy:
Conviction carries severe penalties: dishonorable or bad-conduct discharge, total loss of veterans benefits, mandatory sex offender registration, confinement up to thirty years. Employment becomes limited. Lifelong restrictions on residence, travel, and community involvement apply.
The defense must challenge every element: the reliability of the CyberTip, the integrity of the forensic analysis, whether the IP address identifies the accused, whether files were intentionally saved, and whether mitigating factors call for leniency. Early engagement is critical. Retain digital forensic experts immediately, preserve exculpatory evidence, and confront investigative errors before charges are referred.
Why would a defense lawyer take these cases?
Most don’t. Very few criminal defense firms take them. But we don’t pick and choose. Every person accused of a crime has the right to a fair trial and competent representation. The defense attorney’s role is to ensure that constitutional rights are protected, that the government meets its burden of proof, and that sentencing reflects both justice and proportionality. Defending CSAM cases requires stoicism, technical precision, and a commitment to fairness that does not depend on the popularity of the cause.
If You Have an Article 128b Case at JBER
What should I do in the first 48 hours of a domestic violence investigation?
- Say nothing. When CID or someone in your chain asks to “get your side of the story,” say only: “I am not going to make a statement. I want to talk to a lawyer.” Then stop talking.
- Do not consent to searches. Say no to phone searches and home searches unless they show you a signed warrant. Never give your passcode.
- Stay away from Family Advocacy. FAP interviews are not harmless conversations. They exist to collect statements that can be used against you.
- Follow the military protective order exactly. One text message, one “accidental” encounter at the commissary, and your case doubles in size.
- Call a lawyer immediately. Silence protects you only until your attorney starts speaking for you.
Why is domestic violence treated differently under the UCMJ?
Congress built Article 128b to be a career-killer. That’s why it falls under OSTC jurisdiction. The military prosecutes these cases aggressively, and convictions carry severe consequences: confinement, discharge, loss of benefits, and mandatory registration as a domestic violence offender in some states.
What if the accusation came from a divorce or custody dispute?
Common. Commands and FAP offices see hundreds of accusations that start as leverage in family court. A defense investigation looks at who benefits if you look violent and who benefits if you get convicted. The answers are usually obvious.
The goal is to show the command (who issues the military protective order) and OSTC (who handles the prosecution) that the allegation is tactical, not factual. Weak cases built on divorce strategy can be shut down before charges are referred, but only if the defense moves early and brings evidence.
Why hire a civilian military lawyer for these cases?
Domestic violence cases are prosecuted by the OSTC. OSTC attorneys are experienced, well-funded, and focused on winning the cases they take to trial. You need an attorney who has worked with or against them, understands their institutional mindset, and has the credibility to talk them out of a weak prosecution before charges are referred.
Articles 117a and 120c: Explicit Images and Privacy Violations
What do Articles 117a and 120c prohibit?
- Article 120c criminalizes non-consensual recordings, voyeurism, and indecent exposure. That includes recording someone during sex without their knowledge, taking photos in a bathroom or changing room, or sending unsolicited explicit images of yourself to another person.
- Article 117a criminalizes wrongful distribution of intimate images. If you share, post, or show someone else’s explicit photos or videos without permission, even if you made the recording with consent, you’ve violated 117a.
Both offenses carry confinement, discharge, and mandatory sex offender registration in most states.
Can I be charged for sending an explicit photo of myself?
Yes. Sending an unsolicited sexual image to another adult is prosecuted as indecent exposure under Article 120c. The law treats digital transmission the same as physical exposure when done to offend, humiliate, or gratify yourself sexually.
What if we both agreed to make the video?
Consent to create the recording doesn’t equal consent to distribute it. Once you send or show that video to anyone else without the other person’s permission, it becomes a violation of Article 117a. The original consent is irrelevant. The wrongful act is the distribution.
How does the government prove these cases?
Witness testimony, metadata, phone extractions, chat logs, and forensic analysis of devices and cloud backups. The prosecution traces file paths, sync records, and timestamps to show the accused knowingly viewed, recorded, or distributed the material. The defense challenges every link in that chain: was the file intentionally saved? Was it automatically synced? Did someone else have access to the device? Chat histories are particularly important because they can reveal consent (or lack of it).
Are these registerable offenses?
Usually. Most states treat convictions under Articles 117a and 120c as sex offense equivalents. Registration lasts for decades or forever and carries civilian consequences long after discharge: employment restrictions, housing limitations, travel bans, and public notification requirements.
What should I do if CID wants my phone?
Do not consent to a search. Do not hand over your device until you’ve spoken to a defense attorney. Your phone may contain exculpatory data: messages, timestamps, or other evidence that supports your version of events. Once the government has it, you lose control. They’ll image the entire device, and anything they find can be used against you. You have to hand it over if they get seizure and search authority, but they can’t compel you to unlock it.
Does intent matter in these cases?
Not the way it does in other sex offenses. In Article 120 cases, the phrase “intent to humiliate” can turn horseplay (like a hazing prank or nut tap) into a sex offense when it targets someone’s private area to degrade them. But in Articles 117a and 120c cases, the conduct is already sexual in nature. Sharing a sex video, sending an explicit photo, or secretly recording someone doesn’t require proof of sexual intent. The act itself violates privacy and dignity.
The prosecution only needs to show you knew, or should have known, that sharing or recording the image would harm someone or invade their privacy. Whether you meant it sexually is irrelevant.
What’s the consequence for service members?
Under Article 120, a “joke” can become a sex offense if it targets someone’s private area to humiliate them. Under Articles 117a and 120c, the sexual nature of the act is obvious from the conduct itself. Either way, the result is the same: a registerable sex crime and the end of your military career.
Watch Out For the Fine Print When Hiring a Lawyer for a Court-Martial
Every firm sets its own structure and priorities. Some charge significantly more for the same type of case. The initial/investigative fees charged by most firms in this niche don’t vary all that much, from around $4,500 to $8,000 (ours is $6,500), but one sneaky move you have to look for relates to the fee that would apply if there’s a trial. Trial fees can be hugely different from firm to firm. Some firms charge an additional $100,000 for a court-martial appearance.
Whatever the fee might be, here’s what to look for: a “flat” trial fee that limits the number of days it covers. The fine print will then add daily or hourly charges if the trial runs long. Some firms bill a court day as a certain number of hours and then tack on a high hourly rate for any time that goes beyond what’s covered for that “day.” Some firms don’t include travel time in their trial fee, so every hour spent in the car or on a plane is added to the tab.
We take a different approach. When we quote a fee, it covers the full stage of representation. Travel days are included. 24 hours of every day are covered. The only separate costs are direct travel expenses such as flights, lodging, and rental car.
We also handle every client communication personally. There are no chatbots, answering services, or middlemen. Calls, texts, and emails go directly to one of the attorneys handling the case.
Send a form or call to discuss your case with a real UCMJ specialist
If you are stationed at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson or elsewhere in Alaska and facing investigation, court-martial, or administrative action under the UCMJ, call us at 800-319-3134 for a free confidential case review.