What NJP's are used for.

LCpl Mark Lefler — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 17:48:21 -0500

My question is basicly asking the SNCOs and officers about NJPs. Since NJPs do not carry the need to present burden of proof, were they always about the issue with the person in question or could they be used as a personal grudge issue?

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Dec 28 at 2013 5:50 PM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 17:50:34 -0500

COULD they be? Sure. Are they? Every command will differ...

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Dec 28 at 2013 6:08 PM

CW2 Joseph Evans — Sat, 28 Dec 2013 18:08:12 -0500

While there isn't a "requirement" for proof of misdeeds to administer NJP, if the NJP is challenged by the Soldier/Marine and it fails to stand up to a Commander's Inquiry, CID investigation or Court Martial, this could represent significant trouble for someone, especially if there turns out to be a history of unfounded "NJP".<br>Yes, I have seen NJP applied unevenly and used to pressure someone out. It is a leadership and integrity issue, people are human and some do not handle power well.<br>

Response by CDR Clint Grimes made Feb 25 at 2014 3:55 PM

CDR Clint Grimes — Tue, 25 Feb 2014 15:55:55 -0500

From what I have seen, CAPT's Mast/Office Hours is for maintaining good order and discipline without going to the level of a court martial.  It's definitely for a sailor or marine worth keeping, not for one you are looking to get rid of.  The chances of the CO having  a personal grudge against someone he takes to NJP should be pretty small.  There should be layers of th chain of command between that person and the CO.  I don't know about the Marine Corps but in the Navy a sailor would have to go through the Chief's mess and XOI (XO's Instruction) before he even got to NJP, so I doubt the skipper would know the sailor well enough to hold a grudge.

Response by MGySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 31 at 2014 1:29 PM

MGySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:29:39 -0400

Just remember that under the provisions of the accused's rights under Article 15 of the UCMJ, the accused has the right to refuse Non-Judicial Punishment. If the accused feels that the charge(s) against him/her are vindictive or have no merit, he/she can request a Courts Martial. At that point the Convening Authority can appoint an Officer to convene the Courts Martial then present his/her recommendations for punishment. The punishment levels for Courts Martial climb steeply from Non-Judicial Punishment; however, a Jury can be requested (Special/General) which allows the accused to be judged by his/her peers. The thing to remember, though, is that if you always do the right thing, you can never go wrong. If you choose to live the military life, it always pays to play by the rules.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 19 at 2015 10:48 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 10:48:26 -0400

Someone could try. Always remember: you never have to accept an article 15. You always, ALWAYS have the option to demand a court martial. Someone attempting to use NJP for a personal grudge would have a tough time making it stand up in court.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 19 at 2015 11:55 AM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 11:55:10 -0400

NJP is intended to be a convenient disciplinary tool for commanding officers, it is up to your CO to determine if the burden of proof is met. As the accused you are afforded the opportunity to seek counsel several times, you may refuse NJP at any time prior to sentencing and request a courts martial, lastly you may appeal NJP. It's not that there is no burden of proof, keep in mind what NJP is intended for, convenience of the commanding officer. In my opinion, if you are absolutely not guilty, never accept NJP, if you are take the NJP as the sentences are less severe.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Mar 19 at 2015 12:00 PM

COL Charles Williams — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 12:00:24 -0400

LCpl Mark Lefler This is a response to a similar question - Army perspective, but all the same MCM-UCMJ.
T
his actually depends on the circumstances. I would not say demanding trial by Courts Martial should be used to avoid NJP - Article 15, but it is also your right as the accused service member. I probably have a unique perspective on this, as I have literally been on both sides of the proverbial desk...

1. I was offered an Article 15 (as an E-3) by my Company Commander at the the 472nd MP Company, Fort Wainwright, Alaska, circa 1982/83; I requested trial by Courts Martial, after consulting with my supervisors, and SJA (Trial Defense Service), because the charges were simply B.S. Within 24 hours, the Article 15 was dropped.

2. I have been a Company Commander (32 months), Battalion Commander (25 months), and Brigade Commander (37 Months), so have done both NJP - Art 15 at each level, as well as preferred charges for trial by courts martial for things that were above and beyond NJP.

My perspective is an Army perspective, and in the Army Letters of Reprimand only end up in your official file, if they are signed by a General Officer; General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR). A letter from me (CPT/LTC/COL), would only be locally filed, but of course they could impact NCOERs or OERs (evaluations).

* My approach to Article 15s, based on my experience as a young PFC on the other side of the desk, was simple. I would never offer an Article 15, if my SJA (Staff Judge Advocate) did not agree in advance that he/she could and would prosecute the charges if the SM refused the Article 15. With that knowledge in hand, I never had a SM refuse and ART 15, because the CM would be more painful. An ART 15 should never be offered, if SJA is not willing to take the case to courts martial, if the SM refuses. That is not the purpose of NJP. Art 15 is to handle solid cases quickly, and avoid a Courts Martial. Courts Martial (all three types) carry much bigger penalties.

That said, I have seen many Commanders offer ART 15 for cases/charges a Trial Counsel (Prosecutor) would not touch. That is not the way the system is supposed to work.