Have you been accused of sexual assault under Article 120, UCMJ? Is the Military preferring charges against you in a Military Court-Martial? If the answer is yes and you are serious about hiring a Military Sexual Assault Lawyer, fill out the Confidential Form to the right for a Free Telephone Consultation. GAPASIN LAW GROUP will call you shortly.
**Read about some of Mr. Gapasin's past sexual assault trials below.
Media Coverage On Sexual Assault Cases:
- “U.S. Naval Academy football players face charges over alleged 2012 rape,” The Washington Post, June 17, 2013
- “Vella Gulf Rape Case,” The Virginian-Pilot, December 9, 2012
- “Major facing court martial for misconduct says he was forced to drink to excess,” Stars and Stripes, September 17, 2012
Mr. Gapasin Focuses On Sexual Assault Trials and OVER 70% of his case load involves Article 120 and Sex-Related Allegations.
Click on “NOTABLE CASES” to review our unmatched case results going back to 2008.
Have you been accused of sexual assault? Are you facing a Special or General Court-Martial? Talk to a sexual assault court martial attorney from GAPASIN LAW GROUP who will fight the federal conviction and sex offender registration.
The Military's "War On Sexual Assault"
Mr. Gapasin dedicates much of his court martial law practice on sexual assault trials in the military. The military has been aggressively prosecuting sex assault allegations going back to 2010. This is the year that the Military began its "War on Sexual Assault," prosecuting any allegation regardless of the credibility or lack of credibility of the accusations. The Government generally pursues these types of allegations without the same without hard, solid evidence that is required by State or Federal prosecutors in civilian courts. We have seen a considerable amount of success in court-martial cases with acquittal after acquittal on sexual assault charges. The Washington Post, St Louis Post-Dispatch and other media outlets have contacted GAPASIN LAW GROUP court martial attorneys as subject-matter experts on high-profile sexual assault cases in the military, and we continue to defend service members of all branches in military courtrooms around the world.
Common False Allegations In Military Sex Assault Cases
Make no mistake, an incredibly high number of sexual assault and rape cases in the military are later discovered to be false allegations. Additionally, even if charges are not based on false allegations, they are based on allegations that actually involve consensual encounters but the accuser misperceives that something else happens. Sexual assault and rape allegations have flourished in today's military because accusers who are service members know that becoming a victim of sexual assault, and becoming an accuser are sure ways to garner the attention they need from their units to accomplish whatever ends they are after, e.g., terminate their own separation proceedings, divert negative attention away from them due to insufficient performance such as poor PT, or get overbearing NCOs off their back. A common motive to fabricate sex assault allegations resulting in a court-martial also includes spouses who are out to clean up in their divorce, to include obtaining full custody of the children. Undoubtedly, even JAGs cannot deny that there is a high incidence of false allegations in the military. As a result, sexual assault and rape cases are very winnable if you have an experienced court-martial lawyer representing you in court.
Sex Offender Registration In The DOD And The Military
Now, you have been accused of this crime that can result in sex offender registration — which is basically a life sentence that will affect every aspect of your life from finding suitable employment, to spending time with your kids at a park. With registration, it is possible depending on which state you reside in that your picture will be placed on a website next to your residential address so that anyone who lives in your neighborhood will know that you are a registered sex offender. These adverse, life-changing consequences of being found guilty of sexual assault are not ones to leave up to an inexperienced court-martial lawyer who may have handled a few guilty pleas before you walked in their door.
You voluntarily joined to serve your country because you are the type of person who wants to fight for your nation and for what you believe in. You have spent months and sometimes even years downrange fighting for your country and you have done everything in your power to make those closest to you proud. Then, one day, your commander calls you into his office to tell you that you are under investigation for sexual assault. You are flagged, suspended from duty, placed on a work detail, or even confined in jail.
Guilty Until Proven Innocent Is Not The Law
Organizations like OSI or CID, who claim to be neutral, put words into your mouth and interrogate you for hours on end. No matter what you say, they never stop asking the same question: why did you rape her?
The respect that you have earned over years of dedicated service is all gone, and your now viewed as a pariah or worse…a sex offender. Reality sets in, and you realize for the first time that in the United States Military — when it comes to sexual assault — you are guilty until proven innocent.
Overly Aggressive Sexual Assault Policy in the Military.
Are you the next target of the Military's overly aggressive, indiscriminate sexual assault policy?
The aggressive sexual assault policy in the military has persisted over the last several years. Although there have been changes in the prosecution of sex assault in the military over the last few years, the policies behind the prosecution of sex assault is still "politically-motivated". The fact is that commanders get suspended and eventually lose their commands over a failure to prosecute even one sex assault allegations, regardless of poor evidence or accusers who are not credible. Even many prosecutors will likely agree that the military aggressively pursues and follows-up on any sexual assault allegation that occurs. Because of the politics behind the military's sexual assault policies, many of the prosecutions for sexual assault fail to appropriately discriminate between well-founded allegations versus allegations lacking any merit or evidence whatsoever, or false allegations. This aggressive policy is largely due to lawsuits and Congressional Actions filed against Commanders and other military leaders because of alleged inaction/negligence in dealing with a perceived sexual assault problem in the military. Understandably, your Garrison Commander does not want a Congressional filed against him or her. However, it's your life and family that is affected because your leaders want to approach the Pentagon with their statistics in hand and show how hard they are prosecuting sexual assault.
Also because of the politics, resources in the JAG Corps throughout all branches of the military are being diverted towards the prosecution of sexual assault. Prosecutors are getting more skilled and experienced because the JAG Corps is doing everything possible to spend more of its resources on convicting service members of sexual assault. Because of recent trends to do everything possible to get more sexual assault convictions, prosecutors are receiving more resources than ever in order to get more convictions and to compensate for the lack of experience of young prosecutors. As a result, you need to retain a sexual assault court martial attorney with the skill and experience to win your case.
As indicated by the links listed below, the military is facing extreme pressure from both Congress and multiple advocacy groups to prosecute even the weakest sexual assault allegations. It does not matter to the Government or your command that you had consent or that the complaining witness is only lying to save a marriage. All that matters is that an allegation has been made, and now the military is coming after you can't wait to hire the best military sexual assault lawyer to provide the best defense.
The sexual assault court martial attorneys at GAPASIN LAW GROUP are dedicated to ensuring that your rights are protected and that your voice is not ignored. If you are the victim of a baseless sexual assault allegation and you are ready to fight back, then give us a call. Your career, honor, and reputation are worth fighting for.
Advocacy Groups Sue US Military For Sexual Assault Records
OPINION: Sexual Assault In The Military A Rampant Problem
Base Rates: U.S. Military Bases By Rates Of Sexual Assault Reports Filed
Some Of Mr. Gapasin's Past Sexual Assault Trials:
U.S. vs. E-7. Faulty DNA Sampling and Lying Rape Victim. Attacking the DNA, Thorough Pre-Trial Investigation, and Cross Examination of Victim Results in Full Acquittal of All Charges and Specifications.
Mr. Gapasin's client was charged with four specifications for forcible rape and adultery. He was accused of aggravated sexual assault against a female E-3 who was allegedly substantially incapacitated due to alcohol. Under cross-examination at the Article 32Hearing, the alleged victim admitted that she could only identify her attacker because she recognized his voice. Based on the evidence, my client was a possible contributor to a small sample of foreign DNA found from a rectal swab of the purported victim. It was later discovered that the DNA was based on skin cells. Semen from the anal swabs also showed no sperm to identify the semen. The incident in question allegedly occurred at his home in the early morning hours of an after party. Semen from another male who she admitted to having had sex with at the party was found on vaginal swabs. A number of facts on cross-examination at trial illustrated the alleged victim's lack of credibility. The alleged victim's testimony went uncorroborated. For example, her mother testified that her daughter was crying on the phone at 0700 and her daughter had to hang up because she could not talk and drive at the same time. But the alleged victim testified she was raped in the early morning hours before the sun came up at 0630 because it was too dark to physically identify her attacker. Moreover, several witnesses testified that at no time was the accused in the room with the alleged victim. In an incredible turn of events and thanks to aggressive pre-trial investigation, Mr. Gapasin discovered that the alleged victim actually robbed the client a couple days after he allegedly raped her. Mr. Gapasin also discovered that the alleged victim had a motive to make false allegations against the client because she believed it was his fault for turning in her former ex-marine boyfriend to law enforcement for a DUI that left a pedestrian dead. Mr. Gapasin's client was fully acquitted of all rape charges, and the alleged victim was prosecuted by the State for burglary.
U.S. v. O-1. Black-Outs After Drinking. Cross-Examination of Rape Victim Reveals Lies and Inconsistencies Resulting in Acquittal of All Rape Charges.
Mr. Gapasin's client was charged with three specifications under Article 120 for aggravated sexual assault, abusive sexual contact, and wrongful sexual contact. He was also charged with one specification under Article 125 for forcible sodomy, and one specification under Article 134 for fraternization. Mr. Gapasin's client was an Active Guard Reserve officer. The alleged victim was a 24-year-old female who had been an E-5 in the select reserves. After a dinner date, they returned to the client's house where she was at from 2000 – 0130. She alleged that she had blacked out approximately four times after their date. During intermittent periods of consciousness, she believed the client sexually assaulted her. DNA testing did result in positive findings of my client's saliva or epithelial cells from vaginal swab of the alleged victim. After extensive preparation with Mr. Gapasin, the client took the stand and testified to having consensual sexual activity. He testified that he did not act against the alleged victim's will. Mr. Gapasin's cross-examination of the alleged victim revealed lies and inconsistencies. After a full hearing on the merits, the officer panel found him Not Guilty of all of the Article 120 offenses, and of the Article 125 offense.
U.S. v. E-6. Estranged Wife Accuses Military Policeman of Domestic Violence, Possessing and Viewing Child Pornography, and Molesting her Twelve-Year Old Daughter. Aggressive, Solid Defense Results in Full Acquittal of All Charges and Specifications.
Mr. Gapasin's client was an MP stationed at Camp Zama, Japan who was charged with two specifications of indecent acts against his twelve-year old daughter, and two specifications for the use and possession of child pornography on his home computer. His estranged wife, also an NCO, made all accusations. Just days before trial, Mr. Gapasin's client was offered a Chapter 10 with a General, Under Honorable Conditions Discharge. A Chapter 10 is a type of discharge that occurs in lieu of going to court-martial. After speaking with Mr. Gapasin, the client turned down the Chapter 10 and opted instead to go to trial, thereby risking a possible guilty finding that could result in over 15 years of confinement and sex offender registration. A 5-day trial ensued. Mr. Gapasin exposed considerable flaws in the prosecutor's investigation on how the alleged child pornography was downloaded. Mr. Gapasin cross-examined the daughter, eliciting evidence that the alleged 12-year old victim daughter clearly lied in accusing Mr. Gapasin's client of molesting her. The evidence pointed to her clear motives to lie and ruin the client's career because her mother brainwashed her. Mr. Gapasin argued that the mother did this so she could win custody of their daughter after a pending divorce. After five days of heated litigation, the Court found the client Not Guilty of All Charges and Specifications.
U.S. vs. O-3. Special Forces Unit Wrongfully Accuse Their Own Soldier and Instead Takes Sides With Untruthful Wife. Defense Never Quits. Full Acquittal of Seventeen (17) Specifications.
Mr. Gapasin's client was a soldier with First Special Forces (Airborne) based out of Okinawa, Japan. He was a team leader who was charged with 17 specifications under the UCMJ: three specifications for willfully disobeying orders; failing to pay BAH to his spouse who he is separated from; failing to obey orders to sign in with the staff duty officer; disobeying a lawful order by possessing a fixed-blade knife with a blade longer than three inches (although he was charged with this, most of the Soldiers in Special Forces had fixed-blade knives with blades longer than three inches — including the former XO, who had a knife with a blade longer than three inches placed on his bookshelf behind his office desk); Mr. Gapasin's client was also charged with two specifications for submitting a false official statement. He was also charged with two specifications under Article 120 for the sexual assault of his estranged spouse; two specifications of aggravated assault; one specification of obstruction of justice; and charged with specifications under Article 133 for allegedly tape-recording a conversation involving his spouse and family members without either party's consent; also for the wrongful wear of military ribbons and awards, as well as other accusations of physical, verbal, and mental abuse against his spouse. All allegations began when the client's spouse spoke to a physician at Lester Naval Hospital regarding pain to her vagina and intestines. This physician reported allegations of sexual assault. Testimony after testimony revealed that the unit went overboard with charging Mr. Gapasin's client. The alleged victim's testimony was simply not credible, and she clearly embellished and exaggerated. Mr. Gapasin litigated this trial for five days. At the end of this five-day trial, the Officer Panel at Camp Zama, Japan found Mr. Gapasin's client Not Guilty of all Charges and Specifications.
U.S. vs. E-7. Child Pornography Case. Mr. Gapasin Exposes Unethical Conduct by Military Law Enforcement. Mr. Gapasin Fights Relentlessly Allowing Client to Successfully Retire as an E-6 after 22 Years Of Dedicated Military Service.
Charges were preferred against Mr. Gapasin's client for soliciting, distributing, receiving, and possessing images and videos of child pornography. The client possessed at least 625 images and videos of child pornography within a period of 6 months. Also, Mr. Gapasin's client distributed at least 227 images and videos of child pornography to other individuals and received images and videos of child pornography from other individuals. The client also made and published notices and advertisements through Giga Tribe chats and emails seeking and offering to receive, exchange, distribute, and reproduce visual depictions of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct. The client also possessed 3,979 images and videos of “child erotica.” Through cross-examination at the Article 32 Hearing, Mr. Gapasin exposed how the lead CID agent modified the Agent's Investigation Report (AIRs) in order to hide from the defense a problem with the chain of custody to crucial evidence. Mr. Gapasin elicited testimony by this agent that he had modified the AIR to reflect an “unbroken” chain of custody of the evidence. Under cross-examination, the CID agent admitted he knew that the Defense would review the AIRs. Defense used this clear violation as a means to reach an acceptable deal. The client had previously provided CID with two incriminating sworn statements as well as a consent to search all of his personal hard drives. The court rendered an adjudged sentence of 6 months confinement and reduction to E-4. Mr. Gapasin did not quit there and fought hard for clemency. Mr. Gapasin prepared a solid clemency case to the Convening Authority. The Convening Authority reinstated Mr. Gapasin's client to E-6, allowing him to retire after a 22 year career.
U.S. vs. E-5. Enlisted Panel Believes the Client, Not Law Enforcement. Never Say Die Attitude by Defense Lawyers Results in Acquittal of Sex Assault Charges.
Mr. Gapasin's client was charged with three specifications of sexual assault against three separate purported victims. The client was also charged with one specification of aggravated assault, and one specification of false official statement. The case was preferred in September 2008, but did not go to trial until October 2010. Approximately two months before the trial, a fourth charge of rape was preferred regarding a fourth Private. This fourth charge for rape was not included in the referral of the charges for the prior three allegations. Despite the client's three sworn statements to military law enforcement wherein the statements included considerable detail about the alleged sexual assaults, e.g., pressing his hand against one of the Private's mouths, the Defense advised the client to take the stand and testify in order to clarify what he actually said versus what law enforcement typed down. The client contested the wording of the sworn statements as well as the testimony of his three accusers. Mr. Gapasin's client was found Not Guilty of all three sex assault charges, thus saving him from registering as a sex offender. The court-martial took over two years from referral to trial, and included video depositions at Fort Carson, and two Article 32 hearings in Korea. Because Mr. Gapasin fought hard on the client's behalf, he was able to move on to civilian life without registering as a sex offender.
U.S. vs. E-5. Cross-Examination of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) Reveals Non-Credible Evidence of Bruising Due to Assault. Results in Sergeant Cleared of Sexual Assault, Gets No Punishment.
Mr. Gapasin's client was charged with one specification of rape, one specification of aggravated sexual assault and one specification of false official statement. The sexual assault charge stemmed from a sexual encounter the client had with a female Soldier at Camp Zama, Japan in 2008. The second sexual assault charge stemmed from a sexual encounter he had with a different female Soldier at Camp Zama, Japan in mid 2009. In both instances, Mr. Gapasin's client is alleged to have gone to the Camp Zama Club (an on post entertainment facility) with the females and later engaged in sexual acts with them against their will. The client already received an Article 15 for the first charge back in early 2008; however, prosecutors re-charged the same offense to paint the client as a serial rapist. In the second charge, Mr. Gapasin's client was alleged to have physically restrained the alleged victim while violently raping her inside of another Soldier's barracks room until someone walked in on them while they were having sex. Prosecutors pointed to the multiple bruises on the second alleged victim thus showing the amount of force and violence used by the client. This was rebutted, however, by Mr. Gapasin's cross-examination. Under questioning by Mr. Gapasin, the prosecutor's own Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner testified that the dark coloration of the bruises in relation to the timeline provided by the alleged victim revealed that the bruises could not have occurred when she claims to have been assaulted. Mr. Gapasin also exposed the reasonable possibility that the bruises occurred from PT rather than from an assault. Mr. Gapasin also attacked law enforcement for not properly testing the DNA evidence and conducting a sloppy investigation. The enlisted panel acquitted the accused of rape.
U.S. v. E-7. Rape Case Against Reservist Dismissed Thanks To Strategic Cross-Examination.
The reservist E-7 who was accused of forcible rape in an apartment complex. Thanks to aggressive investigating by Mr. Gapasin, and a detailed cross-examination of the alleged victim by Mr. Gapasin, the Investigating Officer at the Article 32 hearing did not find her claims on nonconsensual sex to be credible. Mr. Gapasin strategically cross-examined the alleged victim to reveal to the Investigating Officer the number of inconsistencies between her testimony and prior text messages, Facebook posts, and emails.
U.S. v. E-5. Full Acquittal In Rape Case Against NCO In Okinawa.
The E-5 client was fully acquitted of rape after facts revealed that the alleged victim had been exaggerating her supposed fear. Based on the testimony, she was never scared of fearful of the client.
U.S. v. E-3. Rape Charges Are Dismissed In High-Profile International Case.
A number of international media outlets covered this high-profile case in Okinawa, Japan. Protests on Okinawa streets persisted throughout the court-martial. However, cross-examination of alleged Filipina victim at Article 32 and depositions taken in Manila, Philippines resulted in the full dismissal of rape charges.
U.S. v. E-5. Rape Charges Are Dismissed After Mental Health Disorders Revealed.
Represented service member alleged to have committed forcible rape in the barracks. Pre-trial investigation at the Article 32 hearing revealed that alleged victim incurred serious mental health disorders after she was supposedly sexually assaulted as a teenager. Mr. Gapasin obtained a Chapter 10 discharge allowing his client to avoid sex offender registration.
