Dyess Delinquents: Military Justice Summary October 2017

For the month of June 2017, three Airmen were discharged while several other Airmen received Article 15 nonjudicial punishments for their actions. (U.S. Air Force Photo by Airman 1st Class Rebecca Van Syoc)

For the month of June 2017, three Airmen were discharged while several other Airmen received Article 15 nonjudicial punishments for their actions. (U.S. Air Force Photo by Airman 1st Class Rebecca Van Syoc)

DYESS AIR FORCE BASE, Texas --

OFFICE OF THE STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE DYESS DELINQUENTS:

MILITARY JUSTICE SUMMARY OCTOBER 2017

COURTS- MARTIAL SUMMARY:

A1C: Member did not report to work for several days. AFOSI, SFSOI, and local law enforcement began searching for the member, who was eventually found in the local area. Member was subsequently interviewed and drug tested after he was found. Member told law enforcement that he had been kidnapped by members of the Sinaloa Cartel, which accounted for the time he was missing. After the drug test results returned positive results for methamphetamine and cocaine, member told law enforcement that he not only had been kidnapped, but was also forcibly drugged by the Cartel. In a subsequent interview, member further alleged that he was not only kidnapped and drugged, but was also sexually assaulted by members of the Cartel. Member was found guilty of Articles 86, 107, and 112a of the UCMJ, and sentenced to reduction to AB, forfeitures of $1,066.00 pay per month for four months, 4 months of confinement, and a bad conduct discharge.

ARTICLE 15 (NON-JUDICIAL PUNISHMENT) SUMMARY:

Commanders are responsible for good order and discipline in their commands. Generally, discipline can be maintained through effective leadership including, when necessary, administrative corrective measures. Nonjudicial punishment is ordinarily appropriate when administrative corrective measures are inadequate due to the nature of the minor offense or the record of the servicemember, unless it is clear that only trial by court-martial will meet the needs of justice and discipline. Nonjudicial punishment shall be considered on an individual basis. 

Commanders considering nonjudicial punishment should consider the nature of the offense, the record of the servicemember, the needs for good order and discipline, and the effect of nonjudicial punishment on the servicemember and the servicemember’s record.

A commander who is considering a case for disposition under Article 15 will exercise personal discretion in evaluating each case, both as to whether nonjudicial punishment is appropriate, and, if so, as to the nature and amount of punishment appropriate.

MSgt: Member was soliciting Airmen junior in rank to him for a pyramid scheme that he financially benefited from. Solicitations happened on duty time and in the workplace. He received an Article 15 for Violation of Article 134 and was punished with forfeiture of $1,898.00 pay per month for two months, a reduction to the grade of TSgt, suspended for six months, and a reprimand.

MSgt: Member sent disrespectful and vulgar text messages about others, using racially derogatory and sexually explicit language, to include comments about his chain of command. Member sent the texts to other members of his unit. He received an Article 15 for violation of Article 92 and was punished with reduction to the grade of TSgt, forfeiture of $1,875.00 pay per month for 2 months, suspended for six months, and a reprimand.

TSgt: Member sent disrespectful and vulgar text messages about others, using racially derogatory and sexually explicit language, to include comments about his chain of command.Member sent the texts to other members of his unit. He received an Article 15 for violation of Article 92 and was punished with reduction to the grade of SSgt, forfeiture of $1,616.00 pay per month for 2 months, suspended for six months, and a reprimand.

TSgt: Member showed up drunk to work. He received an Article 15 for violations of Article 112 and was punished with a reduction to the grade of SSgt, suspended for six months upon the additional condition that the member participate in an alcohol treatment program, forfeiture of $229.00 pay, and a reprimand.

SSgt: Member posted on social media that he was a local town’s, “newest volunteer firefighter.” The post was seen by members of his unit and his supervision, who also knew he had a lengthy profile of duty limiting conditions and was undergoing an MEB for them. Investigators observed him performing numerous strenuous physical activities at a local training, tasks he alleged he was too ill to do on duty. He received an Article 15 for violation of Article 115 and was punished with reduction to the grade of SrA and a reprimand.

A1C: Member repeatedly failed to show for work. He received Article 15 for violation of Article 86 and was punished with reduction to the grade of AB and a reprimand and was subsequently discharged.

A1C: Member failed to check in with his supervisor, showed up to work late, and wore an unserviceable cover to work which had the words, “legalize murder and drugs” written on it with permanent marker. Member also posted offensive and inappropriate messages on social media, posting memes about burning the American flag on September 11th and arguing with and making threats to internet strangers which prompted calls to Public Affairs to complain about the content. He received Article 15 for violation of Articles 86 and 92, and was punished with reduction to the grade of Amn and a reprimand.

ADMINISTRATIVE DISCHARGE SUMMARY:

SrA: Member was administratively discharged for Misconduct – Minor Disciplinary Infractions and for Defective Enlistments – Fraudulent Entry. His disciplinary history consisted of an Article 15, placement on a Control Roster, establishment of an Unfavorable Information File, three LORs, and one LOC. He was discharged with a General service characterization after waiving his rights to a formal board.

SrA: Member was administratively discharged for Misconduct – Drug Abuse. His disciplinary history consisted of an Article 15 for smoking pot. He was discharged with a General service characterization after waiving his rights to a formal board.

A1C: Member was administratively discharged for Misconduct – Drug Abuse. His disciplinary history consisted of an Article 15 for smoking pot. He was discharged with a General service characterization.

A1C: Member was administratively discharged for Misconduct – Minor Disciplinary Infractions. His disciplinary history consisted of an Article 15, placement on a Control Roster, establishment of a UIF, three LORs, and one LOC. He was discharged with a General service characterization.

AB: Member was administratively discharged for A Pattern of Misconduct – Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline. His disciplinary history consisted of an Article 15, placement on a Control Roster, establishment of a UIF, four LORs, and two LOCs. He was discharged with a General service characterization.

AB: Member was administratively discharged for Misconduct – Sexual Assault. His disciplinary history consisted of an Article 15 for groping another Airman on base. He was discharged with a General service characterization.

ADMINISTRATIVE DEMOTION SUMMARY:

SrA: Member was administratively demoted for Failure to Fulfill Responsibilities. His disciplinary history included placement on a Control Roster, the establishment of a UIF, and one LOR. He was demoted to Airman First Class.

A1C: Member was administratively demoted for Failure to Keep Fit. His disciplinary history included a previous administrative demotion from Senior Airman to Airman First Class, placement on a Control Roster, a UIF, and two LORs. He was demoted to Airman.