You’re facing the most aggressively prosecuted charge under the UCMJ. Article 120 cases now fall under OSTC’s exclusive jurisdiction, which means a dedicated prosecution office with handpicked trial attorneys is deciding whether to take your case to court-martial. Congress created OSTC because it didn’t think commanders were prosecuting enough sexual assault cases, and it felt the acquittal rate at trial was too high. OSTC exists to increase conviction rates, not to ensure fair trials. The Sexual Assault Response apparatus (SARC/SAPR) runs a parallel operation that goes beyond supporting the accuser: it briefs commanders, trains unit members, and saturates your installation with messaging that contaminates the potential jury pool before you ever see a courtroom. You’re facing a system built to convict you. What you do […]

Military investigators start manipulating you long before you ever meet them. They do it in the way they coordinate your interrogation through your chain of command. When you meet them, everything they say and do is designed to get you to waive your Article 31(b) rights. When they advise you of your rights, they’ll try to make it sound like a minor housekeeping task. They will use mind games and word tricks to get you to waive your rights. This charade will continue all the way through trial, when agents will testify against you in pastels to look soft and harmless. The only safe way to respond to an interrogation is to make a clear, unambiguous request for a lawyer. Anything else can leave you […]

Article 31(b) of the UCMJ prohibits military investigators from questioning suspects before informing them of the nature of the accusation and advising them of their right to remain silent. Your rights under Article 31(b) are clear but the forms agents use to inform you of those rights are not. This article covers what Article 31(b) requires, how rights advisement forms differ across the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard, and how investigators use mind games and the rights form itself to get you to sign your rights away. United States v. Scottgeorge (NMCCA 2026) and United States v. Campbell (AFCCA 2017) illustrate where courts draw the line between a valid waiver and one that violates your rights. Article 31(b) Rights Advisement Forms […]

Your script, simplified:  What exactly am I being accused of? That’s not true. I didn’t do it. I’m not going to talk to you, I want a lawyer. If the military suspects you of committing a crime, eventually the investigators will ask you to talk. The conversation won’t be on your turf. It’ll be at their office, behind locked and guarded doors, in a tiny, windowless, clockless interrogation room. You’ll be directed where to sit. The scene and the method are scripted, staged, and calibrated for maximum psychological effect. It’s not a conversation, it’s psychological warfare. And it can last all day and night if you let it. Update, April 2026: Three recent cases (two from 2026 and one from 2017 that keeps coming up) show […]