OUTCOME: GOMOR destroyed. No separation board. Our client is preparing his retirement paperwork.
E-7 client who has served in the Army for 19 years is accused of committing domestic violence against his E-7 wife. The original allegations are that our client sexually assaulted and then attacked hi...s wife. Shewmaker & Shewmaker work hard to uncover the truth and the sexual assault allegations are withdrawn when command learns that the accuser suffers from an assortment of mental health problems. The Government then decides to notify our client of a General Officer Letter of Reprimand for domestic violence. During the course of our investigation, Shewmaker & Shewmaker learn that the accuser is having an affair on our client and wants to file for a divorce. In the GOMOR rebuttal, Shewmaker & Shewmaker argue that the accuser is simply protecting herself and her own career. Shewmaker & Shewmaker provide the command with proof that the accuser was having an affair on our client and had a motive to hurt our client.
Sex crime
Fort Lee, VA (Abusive Sexual Contact).
Aug 01, 2019
OUTCOME: No sex offender registration. No DD. Client will retire next month with all of his benefits intact.
E-7 client is a 19-year veteran of the United States Army. He’s accused of touching a female trainee inappropriately during a training event. The E-7 is facing jailtime, sex offender registration, an...d the loss of his retirement. Shewmaker & Shewmaker conduct a thorough investigation into the allegations, guide the E-7 through the process, and ultimately convince the Government to withdraw the abusive sexual assault allegation.
Sex crime
United States Military Academy, West Point, New York (Sex Assault)
Jul 26, 2019
OUTCOME: Sexual Assault, Abusive Sexual Contact, and Fraternization Unfounded. Client CDT is RETAINED.
Two different female Cadets (CDT) accuse Client CDT of sexual assault and abusive sexual contact. First accuser claims that Client CDT raped her two times in her barracks room. The second accuser cla...ims that Client CDT snuck into her room and began groping her while she was asleep. Government refers charges against CDT at a General Court Martial for an additional allegation of fraternization. Client CDT retains Shewmaker Law to defend him. Shewmaker Law immediately begins investigating the case and discovers that both accusers have significant motivations to fabricate. Shewmaker Law also learns that both accusers deleted text messages, provocative photographs, lied to multiple people about what happened, and destroyed evidence that would exonerate Client CDT. For example, the first Accuser, after the alleged sexual assault, immediately texted her boyfriend and stated that she and Client CDT where “flirting”—not that she was sexually assaulted. After boyfriend becomes angry, she changes her story and says that Client CDT raped her. Additionally, second Accuser denied ever inviting Client CDT to her room the night of the alleged incident, however, Shewmaker Law discovered texts between her and Client CDT that not only did she invite him to her room, but she also invited him to come and “cuddle” with her. She had deleted these texts. Shewmaker Law shows the Government that the accusers are lying in order to protect their relationships with their significant others. Government dismisses the case, and instead refers the case to a Misconduct Board hoping to get a win because the burden of proof is much lower at a Misconduct Board than at a Court-Martial. Shewmaker Law zealously advocates for Client CDT to the Board and clearly proves that the accusers are lying. Shewmaker Law also argues that the Government knows that the accusers are lying, but aren’t interested in the truth, but in winning despite it costing the career and reputation of an innocent man.
Sex crime
U.S. v. E-5, United States Air Force Base, Utah (Sexual Assault)
Jul 15, 2019
OUTCOME: NO Conviction. NO sex offender registration. NO reduction in rank.
SSgt Client hires Shewmaker Law after being accused of sexual assault by a woman he met on Tinder. Shewmaker Law conducts an extensive investigation and finds out that every eye witness believes the s...ex was consensual. The civilian sheriff’s office drops the case in 2 days. However, OSI picks the case up and the USAF refers the case to a GCM. Shewmaker Law files a 28-page MRE 412 motion and finds a witness who will testify that the Accuser admitted to him that the “sex was consensual.” As a result, the Government dismisses one specification before the motions hearing. Shewmaker Law litigates at the motions hearing that the sex was consensual and highlights for the judge dozens of inconsistencies in the Accuser’s story. Three days after the motions hearing, the Government dismisses the remaining charges.
Military law
U.S. v. T.M. (E-3), Wright Patterson, AFB (Article 112(a), Illegal Use of Drugs)
Jun 27, 2019
OUTCOME: Charges Dismissed. No confinement. NO punitive discharge. NO reduction in rank.
T.M. hires Shewmaker & Shewmaker to represent him after the Air Force charges him with several specifications of Article 112(a), use of illegal drugs. After Shewmaker & Shewmaker conduct a thorough in...vestigation, they discover that the Air Force employed a “snitch” or under-cover informant to incriminate T.M. Shewmaker & Shewmaker find out that the snitch engaged in illegal behavior, took a plea deal for his own misconduct, and was granted immunity to testify against T.M. T.M.’s defense team files numerous motions to suppress text messages found on T.M.’s phone and to exclude incriminating statements allegedly made by T.M. The military judge rules in favor of the defense and excludes all evidence that T.M. engaged in prior drug use.
Sex crime
U.S. v. M.D, (E-6) Jacksonville Naval Base, Florida (Sexual Assault, Sexual Harassment, and Assault)
Jun 14, 2019
OUTCOME: Sailor fully retained in service and returned to full duty status. No Separation. No NJP.
M.D. hires Shewmaker Law to represent him before an administrative separation hearing for charges of failure to follow DoD orders regarding sexual harassment (Art. 92), sexual harassment of subordinate..., assault (Art. 128), and sexual assault (Art. 120). The Navy takes actions to prevent M.D. from hiring the civilian counsel of his choice by refusing to grant a reasonable delay to afford him the benefit of private legal counsel. Shewmaker Law files an Article 138 injunction against the command. The continuance is granted. After a full hearing, lasting one full day, administrative separation board unanimously finds all charges unfounded and determine that M.D. did not sexually assault anyone.
Sex crime
U.S. v. T.C. (E-5), United States Army – Overseas Tour (Sexual Assault)
Jun 08, 2019
OUTCOME: No federal conviction. NO sex offender registration. No punitive discharge.
T.C. hires Shewmaker Law after he is notified that he is under investigation for sexual assault and possibly child pornography. Shewmaker Law conducts a preliminary investigation, speaks to law enforc...ement officials, and communicates with T.C.’s overseas defense attorney. After approximately 8 months of investigation, the Army drops the sexual assault investigation and the child pornography charges.
Sex crime
U.S. v. M.B. (E-1), Fort Benning, GA (Article 120 – Sexual Assault)
Jun 05, 2019
OUTCOME: Investigation dropped. M.B. allowed to graduate from basic training. No conviction. No separation. No NJP.
M.B. hires Shewmaker & Shewmaker after he finds out that a woman from his home town is claiming that M.B. sexually assaulted her. M.B. is a trainee at Fort Benning, GA when local law enforcement reque...sts to interview him for the alleged misconduct. Shewmaker Law immediately assigns one of their experienced investigators to the case. After a thorough investigation, Shewmaker Law uncovers several eye witnesses that observed the sexual encounter between M.B. and the complaining witness. Each of these witnesses will testify that the encounter was consensual.
Domestic violence
U.S. v. E-7, United States Army, Fort Benning, GA (Sex Assault and Domestic Violence)
May 18, 2019
OUTCOME: No court-martial. No jail time. No sex offender registration. No separation board. No Article 15. The SFC is set to retire next year with all of his benefits intact
SFC’s spouse accuses him of sexual assault, domestic violence, and child abuse after he finds out that she was having an affair. The SFC is FLAGGED, bared from promotion, removed from his primary duti...es, and told that the Government may court-martial him and take his retirement after 18 years of dedicated service and several combat deployments. The SFC hires Mr. Capovilla who immediately assigs one of the firms investigators to the case to find out the truth. After conducting several interviews, Mr. Capovilla discovers that the spouse was indeed involved in an adulterous relationship and that her own children believe she hurt herself to make it look like the SFC had hit her. Several of the witnesses affirm that the SFC was not even with his spouse at the time that she was injured. Mr. Capovilla discusses the case with the SFC dozens of times and even files an Article 138 Claim against the SFC’s command for not releasing relevant information. After nearly 7 months of investigation, the military dismisses the charges and does not prosecute the SFC.
Sex crime
U.S. v. E-5, United States Air Force, Nellis AFB, Las Vegas, NV (Sex Assault and Abusive Sexual Contact):
May 17, 2019
OUTCOME: No court-martial. No jail time. No sex offender registration. No federal conviction.
SSgt Airmen is notified that he is under investigation for abusive sexual contact and possible sexual assault. The SSgt decides to retain Mr. Robert Capovilla to represent him during the investigation... and possible court-martial. Mr. Capovilla speaks with the SSgt over 20 times on the phone, conducts several conference calls with him, interviews witnesses, and assigns one of the firms investigators to the case all before the Government finishes their investigation. Mr. Capovilla informs the SSgt there are serious problems with the Government’s case and he finds out that two of the Government’s most important witnesses will testify that the complaining witnesses story is not accurate and that their memory of events is very different than the complaining witnesses version of events. After extensive preparation and several discussions with the military prosecutor, the Government decides to dismiss the charges and not prosecute the SSgt.
