Skip to the main content

Worldwide military defenseTampa, Florida · We travel wherever the case requires.

Urgent: call 813-669-3500Go to the urgent telephone path Routine consultationGo to the routine consultation path
BileckiLaw Group
Urgent813-669-3500 Book a consultation
Call813-669-3500 Book

U.S. Soldier Arrested in England in an Espionage Inquiry: Jurisdiction and Your Rights

By Tim Bilecki | Published 11 November 2026

The U.S. flag, the Union flag and flags of other NATO nations fly at Imjin Barracks, Gloucester, England.
The U.S. flag, the Union flag and flags of other NATO nations at Imjin Barracks, Gloucester, home of NATO's Allied Rapid Reaction Corps headquarters, 8 July 2021. U.S. Army photo by Sgt. 1st Class Elvis Umanzor.

A 41-year-old member of the U.S. Army was arrested near Gloucester, England, on 10 November 2026 on suspicion of offenses under sections 1 and 3 of the United Kingdom's National Security Act 2023. The Metropolitan Police says the allegations relate to Russia. Counter Terrorism Policing London leads the investigation, working with U.S. authorities, the U.S. military and the FBI. No charge has been announced. He is presumed innocent.

The case matters to every service member in Europe. One act can break British law and the UCMJ at the same time. A treaty decides which country has the primary right to try it. Questions can come from British police, the FBI and Army counterintelligence, each under different rules.

Key facts

  • Counter Terrorism Policing announced the arrest on 10 November 2026. Officers arrested the 41-year-old near Gloucester that day on suspicion of offenses under sections 1 and 3 of the National Security Act 2023.
  • The release said he had been detained under the Act and was in custody at a London police station. Officers were searching two locations in Gloucestershire.
  • Police say the allegations relate to Russia and that the case is not linked to any other ongoing Counter Terrorism Policing investigation.
  • The commanding general of U.S. Army Counterintelligence Command described him as a senior Soldier. CBS News, citing a U.S. official, reported that he is based at Imjin Barracks in Gloucestershire, home of the headquarters of NATO's Allied Rapid Reaction Corps.
  • No charge has been announced. Police say the investigation continues.

Track one: the British case

Section 1 of the National Security Act 2023 makes it a crime to obtain, copy, record, retain or disclose protected information, or give access to it, for a purpose the person knows, or ought reasonably to know, is prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom, when the Act's foreign power condition (or, since 8 July 2026, its designated body condition) is met. Protected information is any information, document or other article to which access is restricted in any way, or would reasonably be expected to be, to protect the safety or interests of the United Kingdom. The maximum sentence is life imprisonment.

Section 3 makes it a crime to engage in conduct intended to materially assist a foreign intelligence service in activities in the United Kingdom, or activities elsewhere that are prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom. It also covers conduct the person knows, or ought reasonably to know, is likely to give that help. The maximum sentence is 14 years.

Detention after arrest. Section 27 of the Act lets a constable arrest without a warrant anyone the constable reasonably suspects is, or has been, involved in foreign power threat activity. A person held under that power must be released within 48 hours of arrest unless police or prosecutors apply to a judge for a warrant of further detention. A warrant runs up to 7 days from arrest, and extensions can run to 14 days from arrest. The police release says he was detained under the Act. It does not say for how long.

Which country tries the case. The NATO Status of Forces Agreement covers U.S. forces in the United Kingdom. In its terms, the United States is the sending state and the United Kingdom is the receiving state. Subject to the rest of Article VII, the sending state's military authorities may exercise criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction within the receiving state over people subject to its military law, and the receiving state has jurisdiction over members of a visiting force for offenses committed in its territory and punishable by its law. The treaty lists espionage and violations of official secrets laws as security offenses.

An act that is a crime under only one country's law falls under that country's exclusive jurisdiction. An act that is a crime under both falls under concurrent jurisdiction. The U.S. military then has the primary right for an offense solely against U.S. property or security, solely against another member of the U.S. force or a dependent, or arising out of official duty. Britain has the primary right for any other offense. A country that decides not to exercise its primary right must notify the other as soon as practicable, and a country with the primary right must give "sympathetic consideration" to a waiver request the other country considers of particular importance. British authorities must also notify the U.S. military promptly when they arrest a member of the U.S. force.

Which country holds the primary right here depends on facts that are not public. Under the Rules for Courts-Martial, the choice of which nation exercises jurisdiction belongs to the nations involved. It is not a right of the suspect.

The British case is separate. Bilecki Law Group advises on the UCMJ and military administrative action. We do not advise on British law, and we cannot tell you whether to speak with British police or prosecutors. For advice on the British case, talk to a lawyer licensed in England and Wales.

Track two: the military side

The UCMJ applies in all places. A Soldier in England answers to it as fully as a Soldier at home.

Article 103a makes espionage a UCMJ offense. It covers communicating, delivering or transmitting national defense information, or trying to, to a foreign government or its agents, with intent or reason to believe it will be used to injure the United States or help a foreign nation. The Manual for Courts-Martial defines that intent as acting in bad faith and without lawful authority with information that is not lawfully accessible to the public. The maximum is any punishment a court martial may direct other than death. Death is authorized only for listed categories, such as war plans or cryptographic information, and only after unanimous findings. No U.S. charge has been reported.

Who asks the questions matters. Article 31b applies to any person subject to the UCMJ who questions an accused or a suspect. The Military Rules of Evidence extend it to a knowing agent of such a person or of a military unit. When the FBI questions a service member, the warnings and any waiver are judged by the rules federal district courts apply. A statement taken in violation of Article 31b is inadmissible against the accused at a court martial, and the defense can move to have it suppressed.

Questioning by foreign officials outside the United States is different. The Military Rules of Evidence do not require Article 31b or Fifth and Sixth Amendment warnings there unless U.S. military personnel or their agents, or U.S. officials, conducted, instigated or participated in the questioning. Being present or interpreting is not participating. A statement from a foreign interrogation can be used at a court martial unless it was obtained by coercion, unlawful influence or unlawful inducement. In a joint operation, whether U.S. personnel took part in the questioning can decide which rule applies.

For another case where a host nation investigation and an Army investigation run side by side, see our post on drugs sent through military mail in Korea.

What to do on the military side

If Army CID, Army counterintelligence, NCIS or OSI contacts you, or your command wants to ask about an investigation:

  • Under Article 31b of the UCMJ you have the right to remain silent. The Military Rules of Evidence also give you the right to a lawyer before and during questioning in custody.
  • You cannot talk your way out of an investigation, only into charges, so the time to get a lawyer is before you sit down.
  • If you ask for a lawyer during questioning in custody, the questioning must stop until a lawyer is present. A military defense counsel is provided at no cost. You may also hire a civilian lawyer at your own expense.
  • Do not sign a written statement for military investigators until your lawyer has read it.
  • Do not delete messages, files or accounts.
  • Call a military defense lawyer before charges are preferred.

How Bilecki Law Group helps

Military defense is all we do. Bilecki Law Group has taken more than 250 courts martial to verdict and has represented more than 500 clients.

Tim Bilecki travels to England to defend the court martial and the administrative case. We work on flat fees, with travel billed separately. Call 813-669-3500.

FAQs

Can a U.S. Soldier be prosecuted in the United Kingdom?

Yes, for an offense against British law committed in the United Kingdom. When the act also breaks the UCMJ, the NATO Status of Forces Agreement decides which country has the primary right to try it, and that country can waive it.

What is espionage under the UCMJ?

It is Article 103a. It covers passing national defense information to a foreign government or its agents, or trying to, with intent or reason to believe it will be used to injure the United States or help a foreign nation.

Does Article 31b apply to Army counterintelligence questioning?

It applies to anyone subject to the UCMJ who questions a suspect. The Military Rules of Evidence extend it to a knowing agent of such a person or of a military unit.

Sources