Defending individuals accused of crimes against children, from physical or sexual abuse to Shaken Baby Syndrome, CSAM possession, enticement, or indecent communication, is the most morally and emotionally demanding field in criminal law. To meet the constitutional duty of effective representation, a defense has to approach these cases with expertise and psychological composure.
For more than 20 years, our firm has defended service members accused of the most stigmatizing UCMJ violations. We have handled every variety of case under Articles 119b, 120b, and 134, including CSAM possession, production, and enticement.
Psychological Compartmentalization
The first requirement is the ability to evaluate disturbing evidence with professional detachment.
Evidence Review
This work demands exposure to deeply disturbing material: explicit recordings, medical examiner reports describing traumatic injuries, and images documenting the worst moments of a child’s suffering. Detachment is essential not because the defense excuses harm, but because innocence, error, or overreach remain real possibilities.
Navigating Victim Impact
That detachment must extend into the courtroom, especially when testimony becomes emotional or graphic. The defense counsel must stay composed and respectful, even when witnesses express anger, grief, or outrage. The focus remains on evidence, law, and the presumption of innocence.
The Necessity of Tactful Cross-Examination
Interviewing and cross-examining children and their parents requires courage, compassion, and patience. The primary goal is (or needs to appear to be) not to discredit a child, but to test the reliability of what the child remembers and says, or has been led to remember or say.
A child’s account carries unique importance in a military courtroom. Like all military members, judges and panel members have all sworn an oath to defend and protect others, which makes them instinctively protective of a child in ways that can exceed what you see in civilian courts. That instinct has to be acknowledged and navigated, not ignored.
A child’s account is also the most fragile. Like adults but even more so, children don’t always know the difference between what they remember and what someone helped them remember. They are highly suggestible, even as they testify. The courtroom for a child is a strange and imposing place, with grown-up strangers in uniform staring at them intently.
Sometimes children lie. Sometimes they lie on their own; sometimes an adult with an agenda shapes what they say. When that happens, it’s not an invitation to attack. The attorney has to stay calm, almost parental, firm but polite, and draw the falsehood out conversationally and clearly so the judge or panel can see it for what it is.
The attorney must know which points advance their case and which destroy their own credibility with the trier of fact. We often see cross-examiners derail their case getting into arguments with child witnesses. It is better to walk away from an unnecessary confrontation with anyone, especially a child, than to alienate the judge or jury by arguing with a child or losing control of the inquiry.
Identifying the Winnable Issue
In CSAM cases, it might be a question of whether the government can prove the accused actually knew the images were on his phone. In physical abuse cases, it might be a forensic challenge to medical conclusions.
Situational Awareness: Holding the Room Together
The defense lawyer must process multiple streams of information at once:
- Witness: Listening for coached language, contamination, or suggestion while staying calm and respectful.
- Expert Testimony: Watching for gaps between what was said and what the panel understood.
- Trier of Fact: Reading body language and adjusting tone accordingly.
- The File: Keeping every report, line of testimony, and exhibit mentally indexed for instant recall.
All this unfolds while the climate in court is extremely tense. Military courtrooms are not dramatic. The tension is ambient. The defense attorney, not the prosecutor, has to be the voice of reason, patience, and fairness.
Mitigation in the Shadow of Outrage
When a guilty verdict comes in or in a case where the client concedes guilt, and the sentencing proceeding begins, the defense attorney’s role shifts to preserving what remains of the client’s life. Sentencing in a military court begins almost immediately after the verdict. There is no pause for reflection or recovery.
Mitigation takes two very different forms depending on how the case ends.
In a litigated case, where guilt is contested, mitigation runs parallel to the defense. It provides the court with a human context without ever conceding the underlying allegations. It shows the service member’s life, service, and circumstances in full relief, reminding the panel that even in judgment, proportion is necessary.
In a guilty-plea case, mitigation becomes the centerpiece. The attorney’s job is to shift the court’s focus from what happened to what comes next: rehabilitation, accountability, and the possibility of recovery. Here, the advocate’s credibility and professionalism are crucial. The attorney must accept the reality of the conviction without accepting the idea that a life is irredeemable. And while doing this, counsel must keep the client focused, keep his spirits up, and attend to his loved ones and friends.
Public Scorn and Brand Identity
Defending someone accused of harming a child draws strong reactions from the public, from colleagues, and sometimes from the attorney’s own family. A criminal defense attorney can’t be concerned about any of that. Personal social cost is irrelevant.
Most firms avoid these cases because the evidence is emotionally challenging, the social stigma is real, and the risk of conviction is high. We take them because every accused person is entitled to a defense and because the presumption of innocence applies to everyone. A justice system only works if it treats the hardest cases with care and fairness. Our role is to give the client a real defense and to make sure the process stays grounded in law, not emotion.
If you or someone you care about is facing allegations involving a child under Article 120b, 119b, or 134, contact us immediately for a confidential consultation. Call 800-319-3134 to speak directly with a senior attorney who understands what’s at stake and how to fight for your future.