I was a Navy officer charged with aggravated sexual assault and conduct unbecoming due to an event that would better be described as follows: A drunk enlisted woman of a similar age went to my quarters with drunk me after a night of dancing/partying with the rest of our command and I made what I tho...ught was a welcome pass that was rejected and our time together ended. I didn't retain Michael until after charges had been filed and I had been detailed military counsel. BAD mistake. After seeing Michael derail the prosecution at my Article 32, I think he may have been able to keep charges from being filed, or at least kept the charges to something reasonable like fraternization and conduct unbecoming. Maybe not, I found myself in a VERY WRONG place at a VERY WRONG time, when sexual misconduct in the Navy was at the very forefront of the leadership's agenda. A friend who attended the CNO's 2010 four-star conference said it was one of the first things he discussed. But I kick myself everytime I think about the time I wasted when Michael could have been on my team. Once retained, Michael spent hours on the phone with me, hashing and rehashing accounts of the events from me, the alleged victim, and various others the government had come up with to "witness" against me in a situation in which they weren't involved. He dug into the details, we compared our notes, and we picked apart each of the statements provided by the prosecution. During my Article 32, Michael used his in-depth knowledge of the detailed statements, his gut feel for why the victim had come forward 3 months later and why the others had written statements against me, and his extremely professional nice-guy bearing to literally tear the prosecution's case apart. Before the Article 32, the prosecution had 3 witnesses with 3 stories they thought lined up. By the end of the Article 32, the prosecution had 3 witnesses with 6 different stories. One of them was verbal testimony against me that Michael physically acted out in the courtroom (turning himself into a human pretzel) to demonstrate to the court that the testimony was ludicrous. His courtroom style led witnesses right into traps that they set for themselves and then he sprung them with a soave smile before they even knew it - if they ever did. The Investigating Officer wrote that while there was enough evidence to charge me just because the alleged victim said it happened and she seemed believable, based on the credibility of the various prosecution witnesses (which Michael destroyed) and lack of corroboration (which Michael again ripped asunder with his attention to detail and instincts), it would by no stretch of the imagination be surprising if I was acquitted. The prosecution changed their tune from "NO WAY would we consider a resignation" to "sure, go ahead and submit that and we will support it." I ended up requesting to resign in lieu of court martial. Though I was innocent, I could not risk even a 1 in a million chance of conviction since the Navy was charging me with something that would have required sex-offender registry and effectively separating me from my kids lives until they became adults. The Navy accepted my request. I was supposed to be discharged adminsitratively with an Other Than Honorable, but ended up with a General under Honorable Conditions. Bottom line, get Mike Waddington on your team ASAP if you are innocent and there's anything to work with in your case. He will help you find it, make sure the government gets the point, and get you as little punishment as reasonably possible.

Mr. Waddington, I have had a moment to reflect on your defense of my son April 18th, 2008. I will never be able to find the words to express the gratitude my son and I have for you. From the very beginning when you went to South Korea to meet with him and to question the witnesses to your clos...ing argument at the court marshal, your defense was relentless and so focused that even though we, of course, were aware of your defense strategy, we sat spellbound in that court room as you laid it all out for the jury. You exposed the alleged sexual assault charge of rape for what it was, a false claim. My son is truly the victim and through your meticulous and sometime theatrical defense that day, you secured his not guilty verdict. For the rest of my life, I will keep you in my prayers. If ever there is something I can do, in service to any future soldier you defend, please, please call upon me. We can never repay you in a lifetime for your belief in my son and your understanding our family is of modest means. My son was facing 30 years for a crime he didn’t commit. If you weren’t there to pinpoint for the jury the lack of credibility the shielded victim possessed, and this within the guidelines that her prior behavior was excluded due to rape shield laws, and then methodically countering every aspect of the prosecution’s case, my son would not be free to continue to serve his country. You had left before you were able to sit and listen to so many Soldiers, NCOs and Officers that were in unison in their belief that with this, a sex crime charge, and all the stigmas that go along with it, though it was a false claim, that the only way my son would have justice would have been through your defense of him. All over South Korea, at the other camps, to Texas and Honolulu, my son received support. The Korean soldiers were telling their families and congratulating my son. I remember one Korean soldier, whose service was up months ago traveled untold miles just to stand by my son. His not guilty verdict was announced on the loud speaker that day at evening formation and the roar of support was unbelievable. I can’t tell you the number of people, known to and unknown to my son that came up to express their support and also give their impression it wouldn’t have turned out this way without you defending him. Thank you Mr. Waddington, for giving my son’s life back to him. Mr. Waddington, I am forever grateful.