Bilecki Answers Domestic Violence Allegations Across Military, Family Advocacy and Custody Proceedings

Bilecki Answers Domestic Violence Allegations Across Military, Family Advocacy and Custody Proceedings

August 2025

Kadena AB, Okinawa, Japan. Current Short-Tour Duty Location; Underlying Conduct in Fort Worth, Texas

Air Force Senior Master Sergeant – E-8

Allegations: UCMJ Article 128b Domestic Violence

Facts

This was an Air Force Senior Master Sergeant on a one-year short tour at Kadena AB whose Article 128b domestic-violence allegation routed simultaneously through Air Force Security Forces, the Family Advocacy Program, an OSTC review, and a Florida family-court Emergency Motion for Temporary Custody, and closed in every forum.

The substantive allegation was reported in March 2025 by the daughter's school therapist in Fort Worth. The Government alleged that in September or October 2024 at the family residence in Fort Worth, our client had grabbed his then-12-year-old daughter by the arm (incidentally grabbing hair) to pull her in from a shared second-story balcony, where the daughter had walked out in bra and underwear to wash dog urine.

Air Force Security Forces opened SF Incident IDs 20250157 and 20250156. The Family Advocacy Program initial assessment in April 2025 identified no safety concerns and a monthly phone-call safety plan; FAP closed unfounded.

The defense addressed two concrete concerns across the parallel proceedings: the child’s interview by law enforcement without a child forensic interviewer, and the release of investigative material that the other parent used in the custody case. Counsel requested a child forensic interview protocol for future questioning, raised the disclosure issue, and developed the records used to oppose the emergency custody motion.

The biological father of the daughter, our client's estranged ex-spouse, used the Security Forces investigation materials to file an Emergency Motion for Temporary Custody in Florida family court in July 2025. Temporary custody was granted pending hearing. The daughter was interviewed in late July 2025 by law enforcement (not by a Child Forensic Interviewer). In late July 2025, the Florida court denied the Emergency Motion. The daughter returned to Okinawa.

A separate Texas Attorney General correspondence track ran through August 2025.

The Office of Special Trial Counsel deferred charging.

No court martial. No NJP. No Letter of Reprimand. No Letter of Admonition. No GOMOR. No adverse administrative action.

The defense had to address the investigation, Family Advocacy review and custody dispute separately. FAP closed the allegation as unfounded, the Florida court denied the emergency motion, and OSTC deferred charging. None of those proceedings produced the adverse outcome our client had faced.

Result: OSTC deferred charging; FAP closed unfounded; Florida emergency custody motion denied; no court martial, NJP, LOR, LOA, GOMOR, or adverse administrative action.

---

FAQ

Q: What work was required beyond the military investigation?
The defense addressed how the child was interviewed and how investigative materials were being used in the custody dispute. Counsel requested an appropriate child forensic interview protocol for future questioning, raised the disclosure issue and developed the record used to oppose emergency custody. Each proceeding required its own response.

Q: What were the separate results?
Family Advocacy closed the allegation as unfounded. The Florida court denied the emergency custody motion, and the child returned to Okinawa. OSTC deferred charging, and no military punishment or adverse administrative action followed. One decision did not automatically dictate the others.