Bilecki Exposes Changed Allegation and Omitted Witness Accounts; Sergeant Major’s GOMOR Withdrawn

Bilecki Exposes Changed Allegation and Omitted Witness Accounts; Sergeant Major’s GOMOR Withdrawn

July 2021

Camp Humphreys, Korea

Army Sergeant Major – E-9

Allegations: UCMJ Article 120 Abusive Sexual Contact; UCMJ Article 93 Cruelty and Maltreatment of Subordinates

Facts

A Sergeant Major in Eighth Army with twenty-eight years of service, no prior accusation of any kind, and a career on track for retirement was hit with a GOMOR signed by the Eighth Army Commanding General in late June 2021. The GOMOR cited Article 120 abusive sexual contact and was set to be filed permanently in the AMHRR with an associated sex-related personnel flag. That filing would have put the rest of his career and his retirement at risk.

Our client and the accuser had been part of a New Year's Eve group that went out in the bar district outside post in late 2019. The group included our client, a Command Sergeant Major, the SFC who became the alleged victim, and several other senior NCOs. Drinks. Two clubs. Past midnight, the SFC said she was tired. Our client and the CSM walked her back to a hotel the group had booked as a contingency, then left to get food and walk around. They came back to retrieve her the next morning.

She did not report it for over a year.

What changed in early 2021 was not her memory. It was her assignment.

Her aviation directorate had been double-slotted in a personnel audit. The SFC was the "extra," and command moved her to a different division. She had received $6,000 in Assignment Incentive Pay to remain in Korea, but wanted to remain at Eighth Army rather than move to the other division. She told a Sergeant Major that if our client tried to move her, she would report him. She told a Colonel the same thing. The Colonel told her she was being moved either way and that our client had nothing to do with the decision.

A week later, she walked into her SARC's office and reported him.

The reporting timeline broke the case open.

In her first CID interview in February 2021, she said she woke up naked next to our client. She said nothing about a sexual act. CID determined there was no probable cause for sexual assault. The case had nowhere to go. So she went back. After meeting with her SVC and using the command's open-door policy to complain to the chain of command, she returned for a second interview in March 2021 with the Special Victim Prosecutor. This time she "remembered" more. She said our client's erect penis had touched her leg. Her revised account added an allegation of sexual contact. More than a year after the alleged conduct, after one storyboard revision, the case became actionable.

CID's own work undercut her. The CSM who had been with our client the entire night, who had walked the SFC to the hotel and gone with our client to pick her up the next morning, gave CID an exculpatory statement that matched our client's account. CID never put him under oath. They never included his statement in the investigation packet. A separate retired SGM the SFC had specifically named in her own report told CID he saw nothing inappropriate.

Our client retained Bilecki the week the Eighth Army CG signed the GOMOR.

We compared her statements against the personnel audit, the officers’ accounts of her threatened complaint, and the witness who placed our client elsewhere that night. The point was specific: the command needed to consider the reason for the accusation and the evidence contradicting it before deciding to put a sexual-assault reprimand in his permanent record.

We submitted the GOMOR Rebuttal Matters to the Convening General in July 2021. Tim Bilecki traveled to Camp Humphreys, Korea for the rebuttal audience with the CG. Twenty-eight years of service. No prior accusation. A documented motive to fabricate. A revised story. A buried alibi witness. A second alibi witness the accuser herself had named.

The GOMOR was withdrawn in its entirety.

Result: GOMOR withdrawn in full. No AMHRR filing. No L3 flag. No QMP. Retirement preserved.

---

FAQ

Q: What did withdrawal of this GOMOR accomplish?
The reprimand was withdrawn before permanent filing in the Army personnel record. The Sergeant Major’s career and retirement had been at risk. The reported result was full withdrawal, no resulting L3 flag or QMP referral, and preservation of his retirement.

Q: What was the dispute over the accuser’s assignment?
She had received $6,000 in Assignment Incentive Pay to remain in Korea. A personnel audit identified a double-slotting problem, and she was being moved from Eighth Army to the 2nd Infantry Division. The rebuttal relied on her threats to report the Sergeant Major if she was moved, followed by her complaint and changes in her account. It did not establish that this transfer within Korea would take away the incentive pay.

Q: What did the omitted witness account add to the defense?
The Command Sergeant Major described being with our client through the night and returning with him to the hotel the next morning. His account supported our client, but CID had not put him under oath or included his statement in the packet. Bilecki put that omitted account before the General, together with the retired Sergeant Major’s separate statement that he saw nothing inappropriate.