OUTCOME: Result: Client Not Criminally Charged. No Federal Conviction.
August 2013
Guam
Navy E-3
Charges: Drug possession and use
A Sailor stationed in Guam learned he was under investigation for use and possession of Spice and immediately retained the services of T...he Bilecki Law Group to intervene with the goal of keeping the government from preferring charges against him. Mr. Bilecki worked the case, and after several months of investigation by both the government and the defense, the government elected not to bring charges.
Military law
US v. Army E-8
N/A
OUTCOME: FULL ACQUITTAL
August 2013
Camp Humphreys, Korea
Army E-8
Charges: Assault on a Female Officer, Drunk and Disorderly Conduct
FULL ACQUITTAL
A male company First Sergeant was accused of punching his female 1LT... Platoon leader and slapping another female PFC while drinking at an on-post bar at Camp Stanley, Korea.
After Mr. Bilecki was retained and began his investigation, it became apparent that the story of what actually occurred at the bar that evening was substantially at odds from what the two females alleged. The investigation revealed that the female Lieutenant and the female PFC who were allegedly punched and slapped were, in fact, fraternizing with each other prior to the alleged assault. The defense further revealed that the other seemingly unbiased witness to the assault, another female E-6, also had an improper relationship with the two females in the bar.
It turned out that the government’s three seemingly unrelated witnesses were actually all close friends and all having an improper relationship with each other. Also, even though the company First Sergeant was accused of punching a female Lieutenant and slapping a PFC in the middle of a bar full of Soldiers, no one at the bar saw incident.
At trial, the defense highlighted the fact that, of the 30 plus known soldiers at the bar, the only witnesses were the three females, all of whom were in improper relationships with each other. In addition, the defense also showed that the bar was extremely crowded that evening, and the accused got bumped into by one of the two Soldiers alleging assault, and responded by pushing off to clear the space and may have made inadvertent contact with one of the alleged victims. The allegations by the accused grew from that point. Mr. Bilecki had the defendant take the stand in his own defense, who was fully acquitted by the jury.
Military law
US v. Marine Corps E-3
N/A
OUTCOME: Result: Government Sought 20 Years and a DD, sentenced to 24 months and a BCD
August 2013
Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii
Marine Corps E-3
Charges: 7 Alleged Victims - Child Sexual Assault, Sexual Assault (multiple alleged victims), Video Recording Sexual Acts without Consent, Use of... Narcotics, Making Threats.
A Marine was accused of sexually assaulting his stepdaughter, making over 37 hours of sex videos without the other participants consent, sexually assaulting two females, using drugs, and making threats to the alleged sexual assault victims.
In an incredibly complicated case where all of the evidence seemed insurmountable, Mr. Bilecki, and his team of investigators and military defense counsel took the case head on and battled the government relentlessly.
After a difficult trial against a mountain of evidence, Mr. Bilecki’s client was found, Not Guilty on the majority of the most serious charges, including the child sexual assault, one of the sexual assaults, and the threats. The accused received a conviction for production of the videos, one specification of forcible sodomy, which was documented on video, and he pled guilty to the drug charges. The government originally sought 20 years confinement and a dishonorable discharge, but the Marine was sentenced to only 24 months confinement and a bad conduct discharge.
Military law
US v. Army E-5 - Yongsan, Korea
N/A
OUTCOME: Chapter 10 in Sexual Assault Charges Approved the Day Before Trial. No Federal Conviction. No Sexual Offender Registration.
A Soldier was accused of sexual assault after having consensual sex with another Soldier after a night of drinking at “the ville.” On a Friday night, the E-5 went drinking with his buddies and met up ...with another female Soldier from his unit. They drank alcoholic beverages throughout the night at various bars and went to a barracks room post-curfew after-party. At the party, the alleged victim continued drinking and was making out with another female Soldier in front of the accused. As the party wound down, the accused Soldier, the alleged victim and the girl she was making out with all left together and went back to the alleged victim’s barracks room.
In the barracks room, the E-5 and the alleged victim were sitting in bed together, and she was flirting with him. The other female [that the alleged victim had been kissing earlier] noticed this and decided to leave the two of them together. She turned out the light and left the room.
After the E-5 and the alleged victim were alone in the room, they began kissing, and she helped take off her jeans and panties. The two had fully consensual sexual intercourse. After the sex, the accused left the room.
Nearly six months later, when the alleged victim was being counseled for her poor duty performance and learned that she could be chaptered out of the Army, she reported the alleged rape. During the counseling session, she began crying and stated that her poor performance was due to the alleged sexual assault six months earlier.
After allegations were made, Mr. Bilecki was retained and investigated the case. At the Article 32 hearing, the alleged victim admitted that she kissed our client while in bed, that she helped him take off her clothes and that she understood how he could have gotten the impression that she wanted to have sex with him. Even with that testimony, the government marched onward and referred the charges to trial.
One month prior to trial, the defense submitted a Chapter 10 [request for discharge in lieu of trial] because there were concerns that the client could still get convicted of adultery [he was married] and false official statement. Mr. Bilecki prepared for jury selection and the exoneration of his client and traveled thousands of miles to Korea for the trial. One day before trial the government waived the white flag and approved the Chapter 10. All charges were dismissed, and the client did not have to face trial. He will be administratively separated from the Army.
Criminal defense
U.S. v. Marine Corps E-3 - Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii - June 2011
N/A
OUTCOME: NO CONVICTION, HONORABLE DISCHARGE
Our client was charged at a General Court Martial and accused of being the ringleader of a large-scale barracks theft operation at MCB Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii and subsequently charged with conspiracy, larc...eny, larceny of military property, sale of military property, false official statement then witness intimidation for endeavoring to influence the statements of a co-accused during the investigation. When retained, our client was facing over 50 years in prison and a dishonorable discharge.
The client retained us early on in the investigation, before charges were preferred, which allowed us to conduct an early, initial investigation and be one step ahead of the prosecution when charges were initially preferred and sent to an Article 32 investigation. The government’s alleged that our client set up a barracks larceny operation in which they would break into fellow Marine’s barracks rooms while those Marines would on duty, on leave or in the field. The stolen items where then transported to an undisclosed location, inventoried, warehoused and later sold for profit. In addition to stealing from fellow Marines, our client was also charged with orchestrating the theft of PPE and other military equipment then later selling it to civilians. The case broke when our client and his ring allegedly broke into numerous barracks rooms on at K-Bay and then faked the break-in of his own barracks room to create an alibi for law enforcement if questioned. Law enforcement was initially suspicions of our client and later found the undisclosed location where much of stolen items were located, which had evidence pointing directly at our client.
As is the case in many military courts-martial, after charges broke, everyone was pointing the finger at everyone else. The majority of the fingers, and evidence, pointed to our client. We took on an aggressive posture at the Article 32 hearing and with the assistance of attorney Kiley Hyatt (Of Counsel to our firm), showed how the investigation and evidence was circumstantial at best and illustrated how difficult of a time the government would have at trial. The Investigating Officer recommended that many of the charges be dropped and the remaining charges go to a Special Court Martial.
We continued to fight for our client after the Article 32 and were able to get the remaining charges reduced to a Summary Court Martial so that our client would not have any Federal Conviction. We litigated the Summary Court Martial and our client was not even sentenced to confinement.
Military law
United States v. O-3
N/A
OUTCOME: GCM reduced to Art 15, No conviction, No jail
Camp Casey, Korea: O-3 – July 2009
Maximum Sentence: Dismissal, 5 years confinement, total forfeiture, Federal felony conviction
Our client, a Company Commander, was charged with being drunk and ...disorderly during a command function, then assaulting his subordinate with a knife. Despite overwhelming evidence and numerous eyewitnesses, Mr. Bilecki aggressively attacked the prosecution’s case at the Article 32 hearing and demanded a fully contested panel (jury) trial. The government later agreed to DISMISS ALL CHARGES and proceed with only an Article 15. The Company Commander remains a proud member of Armed Forces.
Military law
United States v. E-4
N/A
OUTCOME: Charges Dismissed
Pearl Harbor, Hawaii / E-4, July 2010
Charges: Wrongful use of cocaine (multiple specifications)
Maximum Sentence: DD, 10 years, total forfeiture, reduction to E-1, Federal felony conviction
T...he client was placed in pre-trial confinement after nearly back-to-back positive urinalysis for use of cocaine. After urinalysis results came back, client admitted to the command that he used cocaine on multiple occasions and further admitted using other drugs. The command and prosecutors were intent on keeping the case at courts-martial and refusing any deal that would not result in a Federal drug conviction. Once retained, The Bilecki Law Group aggressively negotiated with prosecutors and demanded a fully contested trial that included the use of our own forensic toxicologist. Due to our aggressive posture, the command and OSJA relented and agreed to dismiss all charges against the client though a Separation In Lieu of Trial (SILT). Client was released from pre-trial confinement, charges were dismissed and our client was administratively discharged with an OTH (required under a SILT). Client served no additional jail time, received no Federal conviction and no Bad Conduct Discharge.
Military law
United States v. E-9
N/A
OUTCOME: Charges not preferred
Allegations: Larceny of prescription medication
Maximum Sentence (if charged with larceny): DD, 10 years, total forfeiture, reduction to E-1, Federal felony conviction, loss of retirement
Our c...lient was a CSM suspected of stealing prescription medication from one of his Soldiers during health and welfare inspections. Our client became a suspect early in the investigation and when questioned by CID, invoked his rights and retained The Bilecki Law Group almost immediately after being questioned. We worked aggressively with prosecutors so that our client would not be charged at a courts-martial. We successfully negotiated the case to an Article 15 and drafted a compelling mitigation and extenuation memorandum to the Commanding General. The CG subsequently suspended all punishment against our client. Early and aggressive intervention kept charges from ever being preferred and all punishment was suspended. No Federal conviction, all punishment suspended, retirement saved.
Military law
United States v. E-7
N/A
OUTCOME: NOT GUILTY
The client was found NOT GUILTY after being charged with larceny, false official statement and dereliction of duty for allegedly stealing over a quarter million dollars in cash out of a military disbur...sing section cash vault and allegedly losing all funds playing high stakes Baccarat at a local casino. Initially, the evidence seemed almost insurmountable; our client was the cash-disbursing officer for the finance office and the only individual with access to an extremely secure vault. When the client took over responsibility for the vault, it contained over $250,000 cash; a few days later, the client called his command and confessed to taking the money out of the vault and gambling it away at a local casino. A subsequent cash count revealed that the vault was nearly empty and over a quarter-million dollars was missing. Potentially more damning were gambling records obtained by the government that revealed that, during the time the money went missing, the client was playing $10,000+ hands of Baccarat and lost over $250,000 at the casino. The government thought this was a done deal and nearly everyone questioned why we plead not guilty and took this case to trial.
We believed the client, a Cambodian national and Khmer Rouge survivor, had an outstanding extenuation and mitigation case based on his family background. In search of alternate defenses, both Mr. Bilecki and military counsel CPT Sam Kim traveled to Phnom Penh, Cambodia, to meet the client’s family and ferret out a possible duress defense. Bilecki and Kim steered the prosecution toward the Cambodia/duress defense, all the while intending to use the “Plan B” defense (blame someone else) at trial.
The defense never backed down or gave in to numerous “deals” offered by the prosecution, and subsequently won a motion suppressing a good portion of the client’s confession and all casino records. With the government so concerned with what we may or may not have discovered in Cambodia, and without the confession or casino records, Bilecki put the command on trial, exposed the sloppy security procedures of the cash vault and implicated the Korean national who was in control of the vault immediately before the client took over (The Plan B). Defense made a case that the Korean national continued to have access to the vault after she turned it over to the client and further, were cleverly able to put her near the scene of the crime during the time in question. After nearly six days of trial, the panel found our client NOT GUILTY of all the larceny charges in less then one hour. Our client is still happily serving in the US Army.
Military law
United States v. E-1
N/A
OUTCOME: All Charges Dismissed
Camp Casey, Korea: E-1 – May 2009
Maximum Punishment: DD, 11 years and 7 months confinement, total forfeiture, reduction to E-1, Federal felony conviction
The Soldier was charged with three spe...cifications of desertion, one failure to report, and dishonorably failing to pay a debt; he was placed in pre-trial confinement. Mr. Bilecki convinced a military magistrate to release the client from confinement before the Article 32 hearing. The defense submitted mitigating evidence at the Article 32, demonstrating the Soldier’s mistreatment by the command. After the Article 32, while being escorted to the defense attorney’s office for a meeting, the client escaped and went AWOL again. The command wanted to throw the book at the Soldier when he was apprehended, but Mr. Bilecki negotiated with prosecutors and the command to have the charges dismissed in exchange for an administrative separation. CHARGES WERE DISMISSED and client has NO FEDERAL CONVICTION.
