Military hearing officer deciding whether to recommend court-martial for Pentagon leaker (2024)

BEDFORD, Massachusetts (AP) — A Massachusetts Air National Guard member who pleaded guilty in March to federal crimes for leaking highly classified military documents appeared Tuesday before a military hearing officer who will recommend whether the guardsman should face a court-martial.

Jack Teixeira, of North Dighton, Massachusetts, is facing three charges in the military justice system: one alleging he failed to obey a lawful order and two counts of obstructing justice.

Capt. Stephanie Evans said at Tuesday’s hearing that a court-martial was appropriate given that obeying orders “is at the absolute core of everything we do in the U.S. military” and that Texeira acted with “malicious intent to cover his tracks.” But one of Teixeira’s attorneys, Maj. Luke Gilhooly, argued that further action would amount to prosecuting him twice for the same offense.

Teixeira was arrested just over a year ago in the most consequential national security leak in years. He pleaded guilty on March 4 to six counts of willful retention and transmission of national defense information under a deal with prosecutors that calls for him to serve at least 11 years in prison.

READ MORE

Pentagon leaker Jack Teixeira to face military justice proceeding

Pentagon leaker Jack Teixeira pleads guilty under a deal that calls for at least 11 years in prison

Pentagon leak suspect Jack Teixeira expected to plead guilty in federal case

Referring to that agreement, Gilhooly said the government has now taken its “big feast of evidence” from the criminal courthouse and walked it “down the street here to Hanscom Air Force Base to get their own pound of flesh.”

Dressed in military uniform, Teixeira did not speak at the hearing other than to indicate he understood the proceedings, and family members in attendance declined to comment. In court, he admitted to illegally collecting some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets and sharing them with other users on Discord, a social media platform popular with online gamers.

Teixeira, who was part of the 102nd Intelligence Wing at Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts, worked as a cyber transport systems specialist, essentially an information technology specialist responsible for military communications networks.

On Tuesday, military prosecutors sought to include evidence they said showed Teixeira used Discord to ask others to delete his messages as the basis for one of the obstruction of justice charges. But his attorneys objected, saying they wanted the raw data that purportedly connected Teixeira to the messages.

“The government wants you to take a leap of logic and connect the dots when there are no dots,” Lt. Col. Bradley Poronsky said.

The hearing officer, Lt. Col. Michael Raming, initially agreed. He said he wouldn’t consider the documents in making his recommendation, but later said he would consider an amended version submitted by prosecutors. Raming’s recommendations, to be issued at a later date, will be sent to Maj. Gen. Daniel DeVoe, who will decide whether the case should continue.

Until both sides made brief closing statements, the three-hour hearing shed little light on the case as neither Teixeira’s attorneys nor military prosecutors called any witnesses. Instead, they spent the bulk of the three-hour hearing discussing objections raised by Teixeira’s lawyers to some of the documents prosecutors submitted as evidence.

The military charges accuse Teixeira of disobeying orders to stop accessing sensitive documents. The obstruction of justice charges allege that he disposed of an iPad, computer hard drive and iPhone, and instructed others to delete his messages on Discord before his arrest.

“His actions to conceal and destroy messages became egregious,” Evans said.

Authorities in the criminal case said Teixeira first typed out classified documents he accessed and then began sharing photographs of files that bore SECRET and TOP SECRET markings. The leak exposed to the world unvarnished secret assessments of Russia’s war in Ukraine, including information about troop movements in Ukraine and the provision of supplies and equipment to Ukrainian troops. Teixeira also admitted posting information about a U.S. adversary’s plans to harm U.S. forces serving overseas.

The stunning security breach raised alarm over America’s ability to protect its most closely guarded secrets and forced the Biden administration to scramble to try to contain the diplomatic and military fallout. The leaks embarrassed the Pentagon, which tightened controls to safeguard classified information and disciplined members it found had intentionally failed to take required action about Teixeira’s suspicious behavior.

____

This story has been updated to correct the spelling of the last name of Lt. Col. Michael Raming and to show Maj. Luke Gilhooly, not Lt. Col. Poronsky, made the comments about double jeopardy.

Military hearing officer deciding whether to recommend court-martial for Pentagon leaker (2024)

FAQs

Military hearing officer deciding whether to recommend court-martial for Pentagon leaker? ›

The hearing officer, Lt. Col. Michael Raiming, initially agreed. He said he wouldn't consider the documents in making his recommendation, but later said he would consider an amended version submitted by prosecutors.

Which type of courts-martial Cannot be used to try an officer? ›

Only enlisted soldiers may be tried by summary court-martial. A single officer presides over the hearing. The accused has no right to counsel but may hire an attorney to represent him. A special court-martial is an intermediate level composed of either a military judge alone, or at least three members and a judge.

What court hears appeals of military court martials? ›

United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces exercises worldwide appellate jurisdiction over members of the armed forces on active duty and other persons subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

What are the names of the two courts that hear cases involving military personnel? ›

Criminal cases in the military are heard in the: Courts-martial. Court of Criminal Appeals. United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

What is military court-martial? ›

A court-martial is empowered to determine the guilt of members of the armed forces subject to military law, and, if the defendant is found guilty, to decide upon punishment. In addition, courts-martial may be used to try prisoners of war for war crimes.

What is the burden of proof in a court-martial? ›

The burden of proof at Summary, Special, and General Courts-Martial is “beyond a reasonable doubt” which is the highest legal burden. Rules of Evidence (hearsay, for example) apply at Summary, Special, & General Courts-Martial only.

Who decides which type of court-martial to award? ›

Upon receipt of preferred charges, the CA may refer the charges for trial by summary, special or general court-martial (if a GCMCA) or make other appropriate recommendations. The CA also assigns court members (jurors) based on their age, education, training, experience, length of service and judicial temperament.

What are the three types of court-martial? ›

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) provides for three different types of courts-martial: summary, special, and general. These forms of courts-martial differ in their make-up and the punishments which may be imposed. The Military Rules of Evidence apply to all classifications of courts-martial.

What is the punishment for court-martial? ›

WHAT TYPES OF PUNISHMENT CAN BE IMPOSED IN CORTS-MARTIAL CASES? The UCMJ authorizes nine types of punishment for offenses: punitive discharge, confinement, hard labor without confinement, restriction, reduction in grade, fine, forfeitures, reprimands, and death.

Do military court martials show up on background checks? ›

A court-martial conviction remains on the person's record depending upon which databases the information was input into and depending upon the type and the nature of the background check.

Can an officer be tried at a special court-martial? ›

Additionally, officers cannot be confined by a special court-martial or dismissed from the service. For that reason, officers are not typically tried by special court-martial.

Can civilians be tried in a court-martial? ›

In addition to trying members of the military, military courts can also try civilians who are accused of serious offenses, such as terrorism or espionage. These civilians are tried in military courts because their crimes are a threat to national security.

What is the difference between a general court-martial and a special court-martial? ›

The sentencing options in a special court-martial are less severe than in a general court-martial but more significant than in a summary court-martial. Possible punishments include confinement for up to one year, forfeiture of pay, reduction in rank, and a bad-conduct discharge.

References

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Recommended Articles
Article information

Author: Nathanael Baumbach

Last Updated:

Views: 5902

Rating: 4.4 / 5 (75 voted)

Reviews: 90% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Nathanael Baumbach

Birthday: 1998-12-02

Address: Apt. 829 751 Glover View, West Orlando, IN 22436

Phone: +901025288581

Job: Internal IT Coordinator

Hobby: Gunsmithing, Motor sports, Flying, Skiing, Hooping, Lego building, Ice skating

Introduction: My name is Nathanael Baumbach, I am a fantastic, nice, victorious, brave, healthy, cute, glorious person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.