Should Commanders have UCMJ authority in a garrison environment or should this authority be given to JAG alone?

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 16:58:25 -0500

*Edit. I've adjusted the question so that it is clearer.

I think that Commanders in a garrison environment should have not UCMJ authority especially since UCMJ and Criminal Law in America do not operate under the same standards.

Just to clarify, I am facing a courts martial for alleged sexually assault. I am asking whether Commanders should have UCMJ authority in a garrison environment as opposed to a deployed environment where courts are not readily available.

Additionally, if you view my group at http://www.facebook.com/withutheapp/ you'll cleally see that I am trying to solve the problem. I've been working on the project for a year. So I'm not trying to skirt the judicial process. I'm really just trying to ensure that justice is served.

Facebook

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Dec 28 at 2015 5:10 PM

SFC Pete Kain — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 17:10:22 -0500

What part of Non Judicial escapes you LT?

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Dec 28 at 2015 5:11 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 17:11:17 -0500

What is the alternative?

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2015 5:13 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 17:13:24 -0500

Sir, then whom do you feel should carry the burden of UCMJ authority when situations do not need appearance before a Courts Martial?

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2015 5:36 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 17:36:00 -0500

The accused always has the option to seek the court.

Response by Capt Mark Strobl made Dec 28 at 2015 5:45 PM

Capt Mark Strobl — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 17:45:09 -0500

1LT Private RallyPoint Member - It would be helpful to better respond to this question if you could bracket it with some example(s). To make a broad-brush statement, as you did, invites all the sea-lawyers out of the woodwork. Besides, the oath of enlistment and/or commissioning oath make one immediately subject to the UCMJ.

Edited - To correct SM's name.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Dec 28 at 2015 6:01 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:01:46 -0500

What is your alternative? There is a reason for the difference between the UCMJ and civilian criminal laws. That is because of the difference in what the military does vs. all other jobs. The chain of command needs to maintain discipline in the ranks. That is why there is Article 15. If a commander cannot exercise discipline, what do you think would happen? And a commander does not take any of these actions in isolation. They get legal counsel before any kind of legal action and before most administrative actions.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2015 6:16 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:16:50 -0500

I don't think this is a bad discussion to have but your elaboration is horrible. Commanders may lack legal training (as you stated) but they should have a legal team that doesn't.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2015 6:35 PM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:35:15 -0500

UCMJ has harsh punishments and a long road to get to them. An Article 15 is a tool to rehabilitate a soldier, not to end their career. Out of of the COUNTLESS times I could have been UCMJ'ed, I have only received a summarized Article 15 once. I wholeheartedly deserved that punishment as well.

Commanders aren't lawyers, but those cats at JAG are. If you are innocent, or even have a good background as a soldier then the UCMJ is going to favor you. If you are blatantly guilty and you still want to try and weasel out of it, you are going to find that the UCMJ process and what it does to your career is very unforgiving.

Response by CPT Mark Gonzalez made Dec 28 at 2015 6:37 PM

CPT Mark Gonzalez — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:37:23 -0500

If found not guilty you'll be very happy that the garrison leader had lawful authority. If found guilty you'll be afforded due process through appeals.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Dec 28 at 2015 6:45 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:45:23 -0500

I have personally chaptered 4 soldiers out for DUI or drugs. Those infractions were out of my authority level. However, I worked with all the soldiers to mentally prepare for life after the Army. I wanted them to know they made a mistake, but they can still win in life.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2015 6:56 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 18:56:34 -0500

Not sure what the issue is. The SM always has the right to turn down NJP and go for trial by court martial. Furthermore, every legal team I've worked with will advise commanders that their ART 15 packets do not meet sufficient evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt" if something is lacking.

Have you been a part NJP readings? If not, be advised that these hearings can be about anything from underage drinking to punching cab drivers and vehicular theft. If you took this away from commanders, you would bog down the lawyers beyond their ability to function.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Dec 28 at 2015 7:02 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 19:02:24 -0500

It's simple.

If you don't trust your Commander, or the system, use the Courts Martial. You IMMEDIATELY take it out of their hands. You have a RIGHT to Courts Martial.

If you trust your Local Commander, and the system, use them. You still have the Right to CONSULT Legal Consul. You still have the Right to Appeal the decision.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Dec 28 at 2015 7:23 PM

SGM Erik Marquez — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 19:23:11 -0500

Yes for a mired of reason to include being able to see members in their unit prosecuted for sexual assault vice having charges dropped by a DA ,, because it's Thursday on a 4 day upcoming weekend and they want to get out of town.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 28 at 2015 7:26 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 28 Dec 2015 19:26:47 -0500

That is the way that military justice is set up. Also it takes high ranking officers to order a court marsh and they have legal staff under them. A company commander doing an art 15 has legal assets to use to review it. Can there be improvements sure but I don't think it is needed of a total overhaul. Another point is that there are military judges that hear court marshals.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Dec 29 at 2015 12:35 AM

SN Greg Wright — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 00:35:23 -0500

Oh boy. I'm staying out of this one.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Dec 29 at 2015 12:50 AM

SN Greg Wright — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 00:50:32 -0500

1LT Private RallyPoint Member LT...something has gone wrong in your path. You mention sexual assault. I don't have the facts to judge you on that. What I do know is, it's very unusual for a 1lt to remain a 1lt for 4 or more years. This doesn't mean that I think you're guilty. It just means that I recognize that this is not the norm. Let's set that aside for a moment.

Your query is one of the silliest I've seen on RP. From contract signing to retirement, every SM is subject to the UCMJ, whether s/he's at home, in his/her car, at church, in the dining hall, at the NYC Museum of Fine Arts....or the Garrison. This is what you signed up for.

In my time, I have seen plenty of people falsely accused of what you're talking about. Also, I've seen plenty rightly accused. I can't tell to which group you belong with the facts I have. But this question is rather inane.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2015 5:47 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 05:47:52 -0500

Here's another article that might be of interest. Shouldn't these generals and commanders be subject to UCMJ for disobeying orders... I'm trying to be as objective about this as possible; however, people clearly think that attacking my character is the solution.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0UB1B020151228

Special Report: Pentagon thwarts Obama's effort to close Guantanamo| Reuters

In September, U.S. State Department officials invited a foreign delegation to the Guantanamo Bay detention center to persuade the group to takedetaineeTariq Ba Odah to theircountry. If they succeeded, the transfer would mark a small step toward realizing President Barack Obama's goal of closing the prison before he leaves office.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2015 6:38 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 06:38:36 -0500

Again, I've been working on a project for a year to help combat rape and false allegations. It's located at http://www.Facebook.com/withutheapp. My court martial proceedings do not have anything to do with this discussion.

Facebook

Response by SCPO Charles Thomas "Tom" Canterbury made Dec 29 at 2015 6:42 AM

SCPO Charles Thomas "Tom" Canterbury — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 06:42:10 -0500

If we lose the ability to discipline our folks for one thing - other things will begin to erode as well. At least at a court marshal one can have representation and present evidence whereas an Article 15 (NJP) the CO does not have to have preponderance of evidence.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2015 8:46 AM

LCDR Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 08:46:20 -0500

Your article leaves much to the imagination, but it seems like you're down the proverbial creek without the proverbial paddle. I would echo CPT Forbes' advice, and suggest that you're best defense at this point, is to avoid stirring the pot.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Dec 29 at 2015 9:20 AM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 09:20:16 -0500

The UCMJ gives you additional rights beyond Criminal Law in many cases. And, the military is unique, even in garrison. There are many good reasons for the current UCMJ structure, and it has developed and improved over the decades. Your own personal criminal case is very big to you (at least it should be), but it is a drop in the ocean to the UCMJ structure. You are tilting at very solid windmills here and should be concentrating on your own case, with your lawyer, and not on-line.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2015 9:22 AM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 09:22:53 -0500

MCPO Private RallyPoint Member - To say that "[I am] are deserving of everything [that I] have coming to [me]." makes it sound like you hope that the CM finds me guilty, regardless of the evidence. This is really a terrible thing to say in spite. I am not trying to ignore CPT Forbes' advice and having higher rank does not make someone more knowledgeable. I simply asked the question and CPT Forbes indicated that my military career path is indicative of my innocence/guilt, which is a common and incorrect position held by Officers and NCOs in the military.

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made Dec 29 at 2015 9:52 AM

MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 09:52:29 -0500

I don't know the particulars of your situation, nor do I need to. I can offer you this bit of advice though: Having served as a Bailiff during several Courts Martial actions, the LAST thing you need to be doing is trolling for comments on a social media site. If you don't have one already, hire a good attorney and listen to their advice. It will save you a lot of grief in the end.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2015 12:49 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 12:49:53 -0500

I sympathize with your perspective, as it seems that enforcement of UCMJ can be somewhat subjective and arbitrary (at least, in principle). However, wouldn't removing UCMJ authority outside of the chain-of-command make prosecution of alleged sexual assaults more likely? At least, this is what some congressmen like Senator Gillibrand (D-NY) argue. In theory, your chain-of-command would be more hesitant to ruin the life of a good officer.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2015 3:01 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 15:01:28 -0500

1LT Private RallyPoint Member Released yesterday:
The MJRG’s proposals for amendments to the UCMJ generally fall into seven categories. The Report’s major proposals would:
 Strengthen the Structure of the Military Justice System by—
o Establishing selection criteria for military judges, mandating tour lengths, and requiring appointment of a Chief Trial Judge in each armed force.
o Creating authority for military judges to handle specified legal issues that arise before formal referral of a case to court-martial that would otherwise await a ruling until after referral to court-martial.
o Establishing a military magistrates program as an option for the services, with magistrates authorized to preside over specified pre-referral matters upon designation by a military judge, and to preside with the consent of the parties in the proposed judge-alone special court-martial.
o Establishing a military judge-alone special court-martial as an additional option for disposition, similar to the judge-alone forum in civilian proceedings, with confinement limited to a maximum of six months and no punitive discharge.
o Requiring issuance of guidance on the disposition of criminal cases similar to the U.S. Attorneys Manual, tailored to military needs.
o Mandating additional training for commanders and convening authorities focused on the proper exercise of UCMJ authority.
 Enhance Fairness and Efficiency in Pretrial and Trial Procedures by—
o Enhancing victims’ rights by:
 Facilitating the opportunity for victim input on disposition decisions at the preliminary hearing stage.
 Providing for public access to court documents and pleadings.
 Treating victims consistently with regard to defense counsel interviews and access to records of trial.
o Expanding authority to obtain documents during investigations through subpoenas and other process.
o Enhancing the utility of the preliminary hearing for the staff judge advocate and convening authority and providing an opportunity for parties and victims to submit relevant information on the appropriate disposition of offenses.
o Replacing the current variable composition and voting percentages for court-martial panels (military juries) with a requirement for a standardized number of panel members and a consistent voting percentage.
o Requiring, to the greatest extent practicable, at least one defense counsel be learned in the law applicable to capital cases, as in federal civilian courts and military commissions.
 Reform Sentencing, Guilty Pleas, and Plea Agreements by—
o Replacing the current sentencing standard (which relies on maximum punishments
with minimal criteria in adjudging a sentence below the maximum) with a system of
judicial discretion guided by parameters and criteria.
o Ensuring that each offense receives separate consideration for purposes of sentencing
to confinement.
o Improving military plea agreements by allowing negotiated ranges of punishments
and adjudged sentences within the range.
o Continuing to permit appeals of sentences by servicemembers, and establishing
government appeals of sentences in circumstances similar to federal civilian practice.
o Providing for the effective implementation of these reforms by establishing
sentencing by military judges in all non-capital trials.
 Streamline the Post-Trial Process by—
o Eliminating redundant post-trial paperwork and requiring an entry of judgment by the
military judge similar to federal civilian practice to mark the completion of a special
or general court-martial.
o Establishing restricted authority to suspend sentences in cases in which the military
judge recommends a specific form of suspension and the convening authority
approves a suspension within the military judge’s recommendation.
 Modernize Military Appellate Practice by—
o Providing servicemembers, like their civilian counterparts, with the opportunity to
obtain judicial review in all cases.
o Transforming the automatic appeal of cases to the service Courts of Criminal Appeals
into an appeal of right in which the accused, upon advice of appellate defense
counsel, would determine whether to file an appeal.
o Focusing the appeal on issues raised by the parties, with the opportunity for the
Courts of Criminal Appeals to review for plain error.
o Establishing harmless error standards of review for guilty pleas similar to those
applied by the federal civilian courts of appeal.
o Providing for review of issues identified by the accused regarding factual sufficiency
when the appellant makes a sufficient showing to justify relief.
o Permitting the government to appeal a sentence under conditions similar to those
applied by the federal civilian courts of appeal.
o Permitting the government to file interlocutory appeals in general and special courtsmartial
regardless of whether a punitive discharge could be adjudged.
o Continuing to require automatic review of capital cases and requiring, to the greatest
extent practicable, at least one appellate defense counsel be learned in the law
applicable to capital cases.
o Expanding direct review jurisdiction of the Courts of Criminal Appeals primarily with respect to cases in which an accused is sentenced to confinement for more than six months.
 Increase Transparency and Independent Review of the Military Justice System by—
o Creating a statute requiring uniform public access to courts-martial documents and pleadings similar to that available in federal civilian courts.
o Establishing an independent blue ribbon panel of experts to conduct periodic reviews of the UCMJ.
 Improve the Functionality of Punitive Articles and Proscribe Additional Acts by—
o Creating new enumerated offenses, including:
 Article 93a: Prohibited activities with military recruit or trainee by person in position of special trust
 Article 121a: Fraudulent use of credit and debit cards
 Article 123: Offenses concerning Government computers
 Article 132: Retaliation
o Authorizing the President to designate lesser included offenses under legislative criteria.
o Aligning the definition of “sexual acts” in Article 120 with federal civilian law.
o Revising the stalking offense (Article 130) to include cyberstalking and threats to intimate partners.
o Amending the statute of limitations for child-abuse offenses, fraudulent enlistment, and to extend the period when DNA testing implicates an identified person.
o Restructuring the punitive articles of the UCMJ.
o Establishing specific statutory punitive articles to

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Dec 29 at 2015 3:22 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 15:22:26 -0500

Civilian criminal law and the civilian justice system are designed for civilians. The UCMJ is designed for service members. Are you saying that a person in garrison should be judged by civilian standards and by military standards while deployed simply as a matter of convenience? Sorry, I can't agree. One of the foundational issues is that judgement is best rendered by a jury of peers and I would be loathe to accept civilians as qualified. If there is a problem with the administration of military justice, that needs to be corrected wherever it is applied.

To be fair, I can't speak to the current state of affairs. However, I can speak in theory. While in Vietnam there were complaints about military justice. Obviously, many (maybe most) of these arose because almost half of those in uniform had been pressed into service against their will (drafted) and complained about everything from haircuts to food to you name it. Melvin Belli, a prominent criminal lawyer of that time, toured Vietnam visiting courts martial and reported that the system appeared fair and reasonably well administered at that time. Indeed, as a law graduate who represented a few defendants in courts martial I had to agree. Could these cases have been handled better in civilian courts whether in Vietnam or CONUS? Hell no...

BTW, it's impossible to adequately answer an either/or question with a yes of no

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 29 at 2015 4:07 PM

1LT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 29 Dec 2015 16:07:40 -0500

According to the Military Times, only 27% of Soldiers feel like their senior military leadership has their best interests at heart. There's also been a slow decline of the satisfaction with the officer corps.

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/2014/12/07/americas-military-a-force-adrift/18596571/

Response by SSG Samuel Sohm made Jan 1 at 2016 11:26 AM

SSG Samuel Sohm — Fri, 01 Jan 2016 11:26:47 -0500

So when you began your "working relationship" with TDS they told you to not talk to anyone, and to not go on the internet and talk about your case. So good job not taking their advice. Stop typing now, leave this conversation immediately and stop making this worse for yourself, please...

That being said, Commander=Decision Maker in the military, it can be no other way. Do they convict innocent people at times? Sure, but they also convict a TOOOONNNN of guilty people of bad things as well. I would rather not serve with the LT who was raping underage minors on Fort Carson when I first got there, and so I am glad that there was UCMJ authority to take care of him.

Response by SrA Paul Pfeil made Jan 1 at 2016 11:52 AM

SrA Paul Pfeil — Fri, 01 Jan 2016 11:52:51 -0500

You sir should not be on social media whining about being charged with sexual assault as an active duty soldier claiming to be an officer. Just running your mouth here puts you in violation of the ucmj, your code of ethics, and your oath of office. As a former military law enforcement specialist, I can tell you if I knew your information, I would contact your unit Comander and base Comander and tell them what you are doing just so they could charge you with more. Your actions here are definitely unbecoming of an officer, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Response by SGT Alicia Brenneis made Jan 1 at 2016 1:19 PM

SGT Alicia Brenneis — Fri, 01 Jan 2016 13:19:57 -0500

I don't know your situation and nothing I say is a comment directory related to it or personal opinions. I do believe this is a topic already under review in relation to sexual assaults only. The consideration for taking prosecution rights away from commanders when it comes to sexual assault cases is under review to determine if it will reduce the number or "under the rug" cases. I don't know the current status. As far as UCMJ in general. .. no, they should not loose the ability to punish soldiers. If Jag handled every case individually backlog would prevent timely justice. Not to mention they would not "know" the difference between a soldier who needs serious punishment and is a problem or the one who needs correction but not career ending punishment. Two soldiers can do the same thing but need different approaches to corrections depending on the situations. Commanders who know their soldiers will know the difference, JAG wont.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 1 at 2016 1:55 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Jan 2016 13:55:14 -0500

Sir,
Commanders have UCMJ authority, period. This is to enable them to COMMAND. Nonjudicial punishment is utilized as a corrective tool, so that repercussions for behavioral problems can be kept local and serve to correct the issue without long-term criminal records. Judicial punishment is the military's equivalent of being charged criminally and tried. The punishment is then adjudicated as criminal record.

Sexual assault is criminal both inside and outside of the military. The Command will adjudicate punishment based off of both civilian and military law, after being advised by JAG counsel. Your OBC/BOLC courses on military justice should have taught you this.

Being that you cited facing a court martial. You will be receiving the same type of legal counsel (specialized from the UCMJ standpoint) that anyone on the civilian side would. Yes, we have separate, additional, rules to follow. It's because our career field requires it, we call it the UCMJ.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 1 at 2016 3:12 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Jan 2016 15:12:14 -0500

Sir,

A lot of soldiers have gone through various forms of Judicial and Non-Judicual punishment.

If you are having a problem with the process there is nothing you can do but fasten your seatbelt and hold on while investigation occurs.

Once the investigation completes they will present their results to your command/SJA who ultimately has the decision on how to proceed.

Your command, knows you and knows who you are, and they evaluate those factors before the push forward with a plan.

So you wouldn't want this out of their hands entirely because lawyers and judges don't know you from Adam and know the LAW. It's a tougher road to go without the first steps you are trying to bypass.

Just two pennies to think on.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 1 at 2016 4:00 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 01 Jan 2016 16:00:25 -0500

The thing is, when you are in trouble you go to your command, if you dont like what they are putting out you can tell them you want to go to a courts martial and settle it there

Response by PO1 Pete Sikes made Jan 1 at 2016 7:49 PM

PO1 Pete Sikes — Fri, 01 Jan 2016 19:49:11 -0500

The Military always gets first crack on your GI body, as it should be.

Response by SFC Randall Anderson made Jan 1 at 2016 8:58 PM

SFC Randall Anderson — Fri, 01 Jan 2016 20:58:16 -0500

Don't screw up and you won't have to worry about UCMJ!

Response by CPL Jay Strickland made Jan 2 at 2016 4:34 PM

CPL Jay Strickland — Sat, 02 Jan 2016 16:34:05 -0500

If you have charges pending I advise you to be extremely careful about what you say on social media. If trial defense services is representing you please set up an appointment with them and discuss social media with them. If you have a private attorney do the same. Anything you post here may be brought up in your courts martial

Now as to your question I agree with you. I do not think Commanders should have UCMJ authority in a garrison environment. I believe it is better for JAG officers to make the calls on when and where to prosecute for felony level offenses. Misdemeanors I would have shared commander and JAG discretion. Lastly with non judicial punishment I would rest authority with Commander.

Response by PO1 Michael G. made Jan 2 at 2016 10:47 PM

PO1 Michael G. — Sat, 02 Jan 2016 22:47:11 -0500

Well, sir, this is really besides the point but to use the phrase 'a [noun]' implies a singular subject, but the term 'courts martial' is actually a plural noun.

You're absolutely right, though: civilian criminal penal codes in the US do not operate under the same auspice as the UCMJ, but the disparity is largely semantic: service members have a right to due process, legal counsel, a right to face accusers, etc.

Additionally, the purpose of non-judicial punishment is precisely to not overload the JAG corps with petty cases that can--and usually should--be handled at the commander's level in the military. Not to mention, service members facing NJP or Captain's Mast have the ability to request a court martial if they so choose.

The most interesting point, I think from a legal theory perspective, is that if you were to eliminate the commander's prerogative to take a service member to NJP outside of a deployment zone, you would actually be depriving those within deployment zones of the equal protection of the law, in this case that law is the UCMJ, thus eliminating the purpose of leveling, so to speak, military and civilian law.

Response by SGT Mitch McKinley made Jan 8 at 2016 3:05 PM

SGT Mitch McKinley — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 15:05:26 -0500

In garrison or deployed, you are subject to UCMJ. Therefore, commanders have the authority to recommend disciplinary actions, both punitive and non-punitive.
Even if this charge against you was off post by civilian authorities, often times, you will be referred to the MPs and then in turn to your chain of command and JAG.
To eliminate command authority under UCMJ simply because you are in Garrison would open Pandora's Box. Service members by the droves would be taking advantage of that loophole to justify all sorts of actions that are not befitting of the uniform they wear.
Good luck with your proceedings.

Response by MGySgt James Forward made Apr 28 at 2016 1:12 PM

MGySgt James Forward — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 13:12:39 -0400

Legal Authority for Art 15 is in the code, no jurisdiction for civilian prosecution/relief unless the alleged crime occurred off post. This discussion is way off scope for RP.

Response by SSgt Boyd Herrst made Nov 18 at 2018 10:39 PM

SSgt Boyd Herrst — Sun, 18 Nov 2018 22:39:34 -0500

I would surmise the NOs come from like-minded people as the accused

Response by Maj John Bell made Nov 18 at 2018 11:04 PM

Maj John Bell — Sun, 18 Nov 2018 23:04:35 -0500

Your question cannot be answered by the choices you give.
_Yes... Commanders should have UCMJ authority in a garrison environment or this authority should be given to JAG alone.
_No... Commanders should not have UCMJ authority in a garrison environment or this authority should not be given to JAG alone.

You are an officer and may not be tried at summary court martial. Therefore a military Judge, by definition a JAG officer, will preside over your proceedings.

"The commander may dispose of the offenses by court-martial. If the commander decides that the offense is serious enough to warrant trial by court-martial, the commander may exercise the fourth option, preferring and forwarding charges. The commander may chose from three potential levels of court-martial: summary, special, or general court-martial. These courts-martial differ in the procedures, rights, and possible punishment that can be adjudged. A summary court-martial is designed to dispose of minor offenses. Only enlisted soldiers may be tried by summary court-martial. A single officer presides over the hearing. The accused has no right to counsel but may hire an attorney to represent him. A special court-martial is an intermediate level composed of either a military judge alone, or at least three members and a judge. An enlisted service member may ask that at least one-third of the court members be enlisted. There is both a prosecutor, commonly referred to as the trial counsel, and a defense counsel. In addition, the accused may be represented by civilian counsel, at no expense to the government, or by an individually requested military counsel.

Response by LTC Ray Buenteo made Apr 6 at 2022 8:44 PM

LTC Ray Buenteo — Wed, 06 Apr 2022 20:44:28 -0400

Yes Commanders should have UCMJ authority

Response by LTC Ray Buenteo made Apr 6 at 2022 9:15 PM

LTC Ray Buenteo — Wed, 06 Apr 2022 21:15:34 -0400

I screwed up. I voted no by accident. Yes CDRs should have UCMJ authority. You are an officer in the military and you put yourself in a position to be accused of sexual assault? Lol. Back your bags.

Response by Cpl Benjamin Long made May 15 at 2022 1:03 AM

Cpl Benjamin Long — Sun, 15 May 2022 01:03:40 -0400

Any US court always has the power override a commander... Judicial orders and civilian judges ultimately answer to the US supreme court... The court has the power to strike down any art 15 via appeal process.. Just like a federal judge making a ruling an NJP can be overturned by an appeals cpurt.. Since they have the power to strike down laws and lower court rulings.

Response by Cpl Benjamin Long made May 15 at 2022 1:07 AM

Cpl Benjamin Long — Sun, 15 May 2022 01:07:51 -0400

Also I don't think a commander can take on the role of a federal judge... Considering the fact most commanders don't have bar licenses... As well as to the role of a federal judge is a presidential appointment and Senate confirmation... so I assume it would be illegal for commanders to act as judges.