PRO

Timothy James Bilecki's Legal Cases (543)

Call for a consultation Call (813) 669-5859 Message View Profile

Military law

Bilecki Walks Two-Specification Article 121 Larceny Charge Sheet Off the Case After Article 32 Setup

Dec 20, 2024

OUTCOME: All charges withdrawn and dismissed. Retained on active duty.

An Army Staff Sergeant assigned to an Air Defense Artillery unit at Kadena AB was facing a referred Article 121 larceny case on two specifications spanning two duty stations: an alleged larceny window ... at Camp Casey, South Korea, and a separate alleged larceny window at Kadena AB / Torii Station, Okinawa. The aggregate alleged loss exceeded $1,000 on each specification. Maximum exposure on a referred Article 121 larceny conviction at general court-martial: years of confinement, a punitive discharge, federal felony record, and the financial liability that runs alongside any contested larceny conviction. Our client retained Bilecki at the CID investigation stage, before any preferral. We filed a Notice of Representation to the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate scoping representation across the CID investigation and any adverse administrative actions arising from it. We requested discovery on the documentary record. We walked the trial counsel through the alleged larceny specifications before the preferral decision was made. The Government withdrew and dismissed all charges and specifications. For an Army Staff Sergeant at Kadena with a referred Article 121 charge sheet covering nearly four and a half years of alleged conduct across two prior duty stations, punitive discharge exposure on conviction, federal felony record on the line, and an Article 32 hearing pending, that was a different ending than the one the Government was driving toward.

Military law

Bilecki Closes AR 15-6 ACFT Falsification GOMOR Track on Army SFC in Korea with GOMOR Withdrawn in Its Entirety

Dec 13, 2024

OUTCOME: GOMOR withdrawn in its entirety. No AMHRR filing. No AdSep. Retained on active duty.

This was an Army Sergeant First Class at Camp Humphreys facing an AR 15-6 substantiated finding of ACFT score card falsification on an Inspector General nomination packet, a GOMOR signed by the Conveni ... ng General, and the AMHRR-filed permanent reprimand exposure that ends a senior NCO's career at the next promotion or QMP board. Maximum exposure on a permanent AMHRR filing of a falsification GOMOR for an E-7 with twelve years of senior NCO service: career end at the next board, Show Cause Board referral, and AR 135-178 administrative separation with an Other Than Honorable characterization. The Government's case was built on the AR 15-6 finding that our client had submitted an ACFT score card with a date and age that did not correspond to her actual ACFT performance, and that the card had been digitally signed by another NCO. The investigating officer recommended a GOMOR and removal from the company. The approving officer recharacterized the violation as Article 107 UCMJ false official statement (without preferring any UCMJ charge) and forwarded the matter to the Convening General. The Convening General signed the GOMOR. Our client retained Bilecki at the GOMOR notification stage. The defense surfaced the alternative documentary record of how the score card had been generated. The card had been recreated from our client's actual ACFT scores in DTMS. Scores she had earned a year earlier and the card for which she could not locate in her records. The defense produced the original ACFT card our client had been looking for; it had been retrieved from a predecessor First Sergeant's email archive and confirmed her actual prior performance. The defense produced the DTMS readout showing the same scores that appeared on the recreated card. The defense produced the medical record establishing our client had been on a permanent ACFT profile for the date the recreated card carried. A date that had transferred over from the template card the recreation had been built from, as had the age of the other NCO whose card had been the template. The recreation had been done with two senior NCOs in the room: the company ACFT coordinator (who had digitally signed the card) and the company Operations NCO (who had supervised). Neither neutral witness had been deceived. The defense produced a thirty enclosure rebuttal package: the medical record, the original ACFT card, the DTMS readout, the company ACFT coordinator's contemporaneous statement, eleven NCOERs across the senior NCO career, the awards record (six Army Achievement Medals, three Army Good Conduct Medals, two Army Commendation Medals, two Meritorious Service Medals, multiple foreign decorations), and nine character letters from O-3 to O-5 and E-9 raters across multiple commands. The Convening General withdrew the GOMOR in its entirety.

Military law

Bilecki Wins Full Acquittal on Army SFC at Camp Zama in Child Abuse Court Martial; Panel Deliberates Less Than Two Hours

Dec 06, 2024

OUTCOME: Full acquittal. Not guilty of all charges and specifications.

The military justice system reaches into parts of a service member's life that civilian prosecutors may never touch. In this case, the government tried to take a mother's discipline of her teenage son ... and turn it into criminal child abuse. We took it to trial at Camp Zama, put parental discipline squarely in front of the panel, and won a full acquittal. That mattered because the government wanted to paint her as someone who simply snapped. That was not the evidence. This was not a small child. He was a 16-year-old teenager, old enough for the panel to understand the difference between discipline of a defiant adolescent and abuse of a helpless child. She started with lesser forms of discipline. She made him do an invisible chair. She made him do front leaning rest. She made him do pushups. She did not go straight to the jump rope, which later became the most serious discipline alleged by the government. The discipline escalated only after he kept refusing to take her seriously. The government called that losing control. The defense called it what it was: corporal punishment by a strict parent trying to discipline a teenage son who was lying, disrespectful, and refusing to listen. Voir dire mattered. This panel included members with legal training, law enforcement backgrounds, medical backgrounds, prior experience with corporal punishment, and strong opinions about what parents can and cannot do. We worked to get the right members. The government wanted members who would see marks and stop there. The defense needed members who understood that corporal punishment can still be lawful, that different families and cultures approach discipline differently, and that the legal question is not whether every panel member would parent the same way. We built the defense team for that fight. Dr. Gabriel Holguin was part of the team as the forensic psychologist. We also presented expert testimony on corporal punishment and the culture of discipline in Black families, particularly in the South, including the use of a switch. That mattered because the government wanted to treat the marks as self-evidently criminal. They were not. The government came in with photos, neighbor testimony, security forces witnesses, medical testimony, and the CID investigation. We did not hide from any of it. The trial was won in the courtroom. We cross-examined the neighbors, the law enforcement witnesses, the medical witnesses, and CID hard. We put the discipline in context. We put the son's conduct in context. And we made the government prove that this was a crime, not just discipline the panel may not have liked. We also called our client. She testified about why she disciplined him, how she disciplined him, and what she was trying to accomplish. The panel heard directly from the parent the government was trying to brand a child abuser. The panel deliberated for less than two hours and acquitted her of everything. Eighteen years trying cases at Camp Zama. Still undefeated.

Military law

Bilecki Walks Article 120 Off the Charge Sheet Pre-Preferral for USMC Captain at MCBH

Nov 29, 2024

OUTCOME: Article 120 never preferred. SPCM plea on Articles 92, 133, 134. No Dismissal. No SORNA. BOI waived.

A Marine Captain at MCB Hawaii faced an NCIS Article 120 sexual assault investigation arising from an outdoor encounter with a Japanese national near the Sunabe seawall in Chatan, Okinawa. Had the NCIS ... Article 120 sexual assault theory been preferred to general court-martial, exposure on conviction would have run to years of confinement, mandatory Dismissal, federal felony record, and Tier III federal sex offender registration. The commission and the Marine Corps career on the line. The Government's case was that on the night of the conduct, our client had left a downtown bar in violation of a deployed installation Liberty Order, encountered the alleged victim on the street, and engaged in sexual intercourse with her outdoors in a public place. Three U.S. military officers walking past saw the conduct and intervened. Okinawa Police Station took primary jurisdiction. The Japanese prosecutor's office declined to pursue charges. NCIS then assumed investigative lead, interrogated our client, and processed an apprehension package on the Article 120 sexual assault theory. Our client retained Bilecki at the NCIS investigation stage, before any preferral. The work was at the OSTC table, before any charges hit the case sheet. We surfaced what the three U.S. military officers who walked past had actually described, the Japanese prosecutor's office's decline to charge, and the documentary record of the encounter to OSTC trial counsel Pacific. The Article 120 sexual assault theory the NCIS investigation had been built on did not match the third party officer accounts or the Japanese decline. OSTC declined to prefer Article 120. At the special court-martial, our client pleaded guilty to the Article 92 specifications, Article 133, and Article 134. Article 120c was withdrawn and dismissed. The Article 120 sexual assault theory NCIS had built the investigation on was never preferred. Sentence at the cap: one month confinement, reprimand. No Dismissal. No forfeitures. No SORNA. No Board of Inquiry. For a Marine Captain who walked into the case with an NCIS Article 120 sexual assault investigation, the commission on the line, and Tier III SORNA on the table, that was a different ending than the one NCIS was driving toward.

Military law

Bilecki Wins No Probable Cause Article 32 Finding and Full Dismissal of 10-Specification Article 120 OSTC GCM at JBLM

Nov 15, 2024

OUTCOME: All charges withdrawn and dismissed by OSTC. GOMOR withdrawn. Retained on active duty.

An Army Captain assigned to a Special Forces Group at Joint Base Lewis-McChord was facing a referred general court-martial on a charge sheet that spanned six UCMJ Articles and ten specifications, with ... the Article 120 sexual assault counts routed through the Office of Special Trial Counsel as covered offenses. Maximum exposure on the Article 120 alone: decades of confinement, mandatory Dismissal, federal felony record, and Tier III federal sex offender registration. The case ended the commission and the Special Forces career on contact. Our client and the alleged victim had separated. They had a confrontation in their residence. The alleged victim had committed a domestic assault on our client (she sprayed lubricant on him) and was removed from the residence pending investigation of her own conduct. While she was being investigated for that assault, she contacted CID and reported four-year-old allegations dating back to the first sexual encounter shortly before they were married, a series of alleged domestic violence specifications from a two-day argument the year after the marriage, an alleged indecent recording, an alleged hamster image, alleged animal abuse of a hamster, and a threat to kill the hamster. CID built a 197-page Report of Investigation. OSTC preferred ten specifications across six Articles. Our client retained Bilecki at the CID investigation stage, before any preferral. After the original preferral, OSTC re-preferred the case the following October, dropping the Article 128b domestic violence count entirely and recharacterizing the Article 120 specifications. The defense was entitled to a fresh preliminary hearing on the re-preferred charges. We walked the preliminary hearing officer through the audio of the alleged victim's CID interview the original preliminary hearing had relied on. The CID agent had whispered with her back to the recorder during the consent questions. The portions of the audio that mattered to the consent theory were inaudible. The portions that were audible captured the alleged victim's own statements: that she had agreed to the sexual encounter she had reported as without consent, and that the inverted "stop" attribution in the CID summary was a CID error. The preliminary hearing officer found no probable cause on every charge and recommended dismissal of all charges. The PHO's report characterized the CID Report as containing "inaccuracies that straddle gross negligence and, possibly, malfeasance." The PHO's report identified the alleged victim's own admitted prior assault on our client as the predicate for the report against him. The Special Forces Command Convening General then issued a GOMOR for the underlying allegations and the alleged Military Protective Order violations. We filed GOMOR Rebuttal Matters. The Convening General withdrew the GOMOR. For an Army Captain in a Special Forces Group who walked into the case with a 197-page CID Report, ten specifications across six UCMJ Articles, OSTC running point on the Article 120 covered offenses, and the commission and the Special Forces career on the line, that was a different ending than the one the Government was driving toward.

Military law

Bilecki Closes Article 120 OSTC Investigation on AF Special Operations TSgt at Kadena

Nov 08, 2024

OUTCOME: OSTC declined Article 120 court-martial. Article 120 dropped at NJP. No SORNA. Retained on active duty.

An Air Force Technical Sergeant in the Special Operations Wing at Kadena AB was facing an Article 120 abusive sexual contact AFOSI investigation, with the Article 120 routed to the Office of Special Tr ... ial Counsel as a covered offense. Maximum exposure on a referred Article 120 conviction at general court-martial: years of confinement, mandatory punitive discharge, federal felony record, and Tier I federal sex offender registration. The Government's case was that on the night of the alleged conduct, our client had hosted a fellow Airman at his off-base residence in Chatan, Okinawa, the alleged victim had become heavily intoxicated and passed out on the couch, and our client had then carried her to his bed and digitally touched her vulva while she was unconscious. The alleged victim reported six months later to the SAPR victim advocate at her later duty station after a verbal counseling from her supervisor about a missed pickup the morning after the incident. Our client retained Bilecki at the AFOSI investigation stage. Our client invoked Article 31 at his AFOSI interview. The interview was terminated. We built the OSTC submission around the documentary record on the alleged victim. The six-month delay between the alleged conduct and her first report. The supervisor counseling that immediately preceded the report. The inconsistent outcry statements documented in the AFOSI investigation across at least five separate witnesses she spoke to in the months between the conduct and the report. The alleged victim's own conduct in remaining at our client's residence for approximately five hours after she said she woke up. The only neutral witness in the case (the Senior Airman who had also been at the residence and had departed before the alleged conduct) who told the defense that what our client had told him was inconsistent with what the alleged victim was now alleging. OSTC declined to prefer the Article 120 at court-martial. We submitted a 23-page rebuttal package with 10 enclosures and 15 character letters. For an Air Force Technical Sergeant in the Special Operations Wing at Kadena with an OSTC-routed Article 120 abusive sexual contact covered offense in motion, federal sex offender registration on the line, and the Article 120 specification carried back onto the NJP form after OSTC declination, that was a different ending than the one the Government was driving toward.

Military law

Bilecki Closes Article 120 OSTC Investigation on Army PFC at JBLM via Deferral for Insufficient Evidence

Oct 25, 2024

OUTCOME: OSTC deferred for insufficient evidence. No charges preferred. No SORNA.

An Army Private First Class in the medical and nursing pipeline at JBLM was under an Article 120 CID investigation that had arisen from a retaliatory counter-complaint after our client filed his own ha ... rassment report against a fellow PFC trainee. Maximum exposure on a referred Article 120 court-martial: years of confinement, mandatory Dishonorable Discharge, federal felony record, and federal sex offender registration. The Government's case had a context the CID file did not capture on its face. Our client retained Bilecki the same week the counter-allegation was reported. We built the OSTC submission around the documentary record of the prior harassment MFR, the timeline showing the counter-allegation post-dated the harassment report, the absence of a percipient witness on the alleged conduct, and the documented relationship between the two counter-complainants. We walked OSTC trial counsel through that record before the disposition decision was made. OSTC deferred the case in October 2024 for insufficient evidence to meet the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard. No charges preferred. No NJP. No Letter of Reprimand. No GOMOR. For an Army PFC in the medical and nursing pipeline at JBLM with an OSTC-routed Article 120 sexual assault investigation in motion, mandatory Dishonorable Discharge exposure on conviction, federal felony record on the line, and Tier III federal sex offender registration on the table, that was a different ending than the one the Government was driving toward.

Military law

Bilecki Walks Article 134 CSAM and Article 92 GCM Off Charge Sheet for Air Force Major at Wright-Patterson

Oct 11, 2024

OUTCOME: All charges withdrawn and dismissed. SecAF approved Resignation in Lieu of Court-Martial. No SORNA. No federal felony.

An Air Force Major at Wright-Patterson AFB was facing a referred general court-martial on a five-specification charge sheet: one Article 92 specification for deployed AOR sexually explicit material pos ... session at Al Udeid AB, Qatar, and four Article 134 specifications charging knowing wrongful possession of CSAM. Two of the Article 134 specifications covered U.S. conduct between 2016 and 2018. Two covered deployed AOR conduct in early 2020. Maximum exposure: decades of confinement, mandatory Dishonorable Discharge, federal felony conviction, and federal sex offender registration. AFOSI had not started the file from a CSAM tip. The file started in November 2019 when our client's then-wife reported to base Security Forces alleging our client had shared her private photographs with another woman. Our client's then-wife was herself an Air Force Captain divorcing our client during his Al Udeid AB deployment and conducting an affair with a different Air Force Major during the deployment window. The investigation expanded from that predicate to a deployed AOR Apple device search authorization at AUAB in February 2020, an iPhone manual search the next day, and an external hard drive search the day after that. The CSAM the Government charged was found in deleted file space on the external hard drive. AFOSI's full digital forensic effort across the seized devices located approximately a few dozen CSAM files in deleted file space, among tens of thousands of legal adult pornographic files and hundreds of thousands of non-pornographic files. Our client retained Bilecki at the AFOSI investigation stage. We filed a Motion to Suppress Digital Evidence challenging the probable cause nexus between the deployed AOR iPhone search authorization and the subsequent external hard drive search. The Military Judge denied the motion. The suppression record was developed and preserved for the Resignation in Lieu of Court-Martial pathway. We filed a 56-page RILO package in March 2023. The package documented the deleted file space posture of the CSAM count, the documentary record of the investigation's predicate, our client's career record (Bronze Star earned in Afghanistan, Meritorious Service Medal as a wing executive officer, consistent top stratification across multiple wing assignments), and a slate of character letters from senior officers across the Air Force. A second round of allegations from the ex-wife surfaced in summer 2023. With the unrelated third party identified and the pattern letter on the record, the RILO was reactivated. The Government filed a Notice of Withdrawal of all charges in September 2024. The Secretary of the Air Force granted the RILO in October 2024 with Under Other Than Honorable Conditions characterization. For an Air Force Major facing four Article 134 CSAM specifications, an Article 92 deployed AOR possession specification, mandatory Dishonorable Discharge exposure, a federal felony conviction on the line, and federal sex offender registration on the table, that was a different ending than the one AFOSI was driving toward.

Military law

Bilecki Holds Florida Reverse Prostitution Sting and Army Article 134 Pandering GOMOR for Army Intelligence Major

Sep 27, 2024

OUTCOME: Florida criminal case dismissed via Nolle Prosequi. Army GOMOR filed. No court-martial. No AdSep. TS/SCI clearance retained.

An Army Intelligence Major at MacDill AFB was facing a parallel Florida civilian solicitation charge and an Army GOMOR track on Article 134 pandering. Maximum exposure on a referred court-martial: fede ... ral felony record, a punitive discharge, end of commission, and revocation of TS/SCI clearance ending the intelligence officer career. The Government's case was that our client had responded to a fictitious online escort advertisement run by the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office Human Trafficking Section, negotiated terms by text with an undercover deputy, entered the operational Tampa hotel room, re-negotiated the same terms in person, provided U.S. currency, and been taken into custody on the predetermined signal. Audio and video of the entire encounter were on the record. Florida charged solicitation under Florida Statute §796.07(2)(F). The Army characterized the same conduct as Article 134, UCMJ pandering. Our client retained Bilecki the day of the arrest. On the Florida track, we coordinated with Tampa criminal defense counsel Omar Abdelghany. The State Attorney's Office filed a Notice of Nolle Prosequi in late July 2024. The Florida criminal case was dismissed. The Army track moved next. The GOMOR was filed in the AMHRR. The Show Cause Board did not follow. The Board of Inquiry did not follow. There was no administrative separation, no NJP, no court-martial referral, no officer elimination action. The TS/SCI security clearance was retained. For an Army Intelligence Major at MacDill who walked into the case with a Florida solicitation arrest, audio and video of the entire encounter on the record, an Army Article 134 pandering track, federal felony exposure on a parallel court-martial, the commission on the line, and the TS/SCI clearance that runs the intelligence career on the table, that was a different ending than the one the Government was driving toward.

Military law

Bilecki Suppresses M.R.E. 404(b) Propensity Evidence and Wins Article 134 Acquittal at Osan OSTC SPCM for Air Force MSgt

Sep 20, 2024

OUTCOME: Article 134 NOT GUILTY. No punitive discharge. Retained on active duty.

An Air Force Master Sergeant at Osan Air Base, Korea was facing an OSTC-referred Special Court-Martial on four specifications across UCMJ Articles 92, 128, and 134. Maximum exposure on the charge sheet ... at SPCM: confinement up to twelve months, forfeitures, reduction to E-1, reprimand, and Bad Conduct Discharge with the federal conviction characterization that follows. Our client retained Bilecki at the AFOSI investigation stage. The Government had built a propensity record around the Senior Airman from the Article 92 matter. The record included a Snapchat sex video our client had sent her during the relationship and a recording in which she addressed him as "Master Sergeant" during sex. The Government's theory was that this evidence proved the touching of the Article 128 alleged victim was for sexual gratification rather than a drunken accident. With the propensity evidence in, the Government would have had a sexual touching theory at sentencing that drove the Bad Conduct Discharge ask harder. We filed a Motion in Limine. The Military Judge excluded the Snapchat video and the "Master Sergeant" recording for purposes of the Article 128 propensity theory. The Government had not shown that the proffered evidence actually proved the propensity element it claimed. With the propensity record stripped, the Government's Article 128 theory was confined to the night-of testimony. Cross-examination of the lead Government corroboration witness, the Staff Sergeant who had been walking our client on the other side from the alleged victim, produced this testimony at trial: "After reviewing the footage, I did not see any grabbing or groping of my chest. I don't know if he grabbed my chest." That walked back one of the Government's M.R.E. 404(b) corroboration items in real time. The Military Judge returned NOT GUILTY on the Article 134 drunk and disorderly. The Military Judge convicted on the Article 92 dereliction and on both Article 128 specifications and adjudged 50 days confinement, reduction to E-5, and a reprimand. No punitive discharge. No forfeitures. No DoDI 1325.07 sex offender notification. The post-trial administrative separation board retained the Airman. For an Air Force Master Sergeant at Osan with an OSTC SPCM charge sheet, an M.R.E. 404(b) propensity record built on a Snapchat sex video and a "Master Sergeant" recording, and a Bad Conduct Discharge on the line, that was a different ending than the one the Government was driving toward.