Posted on Mar 7, 2019
Court marshaled after being retired for a non military offense?
5.59K
35
21
5
5
0
So recently the Supreme Court declined to consider if it is constitutional that retired service members are subject to the UCMJ trial by court martial for actions taken in the civilian world against civilians. What this means is that they agree that it is constitutional, that you can be court marshaled and sentence while being retired. Did you know this? Do you agree? In two of the cases where the navy did this to one and I believe the army did this to another they reduce in rank, dishonorable discharge, and prison time. One was enlisting and the other was officer. This means they lost their pension as well.?
Posted in these groups: 
Retirement
UCMJ
Retirement UCMJ
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 12
4
4
0
I think it is profoundly stupid to say receiving a military pension is consent to UCMJ.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
2
2
0
One of the qualifiers to this little GEM will be is it cost effective to bring SPC back on AD, assign a JAG officer, quarter, pay and tie up resources because he SAID a POTUS was a POOPYHEAD or flipped the bird to some COL. I think it would not be cost effective to do this and I think it is just a tool in the tool box for something actually serious. I have no fears of being recalled for another blue book for being an A-hole.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I hope so!!! I see a lot of insurrectionists that need a little UCMJ!!!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I did not reed the whole article, But my understanding of the U.C.M.J. is that if they wher indead on some sort of reserve list at the time of the aleged crime's.
Then they are in deed subject to the U.C.M.J. and all it's rulings.
I think if there are any J.A.G. officers out ther that would like to weigh in on this.
Then they are in deed subject to the U.C.M.J. and all it's rulings.
I think if there are any J.A.G. officers out ther that would like to weigh in on this.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Supreme Court: Retirees Can Be Court-Martialed for Crimes Committed After Service
In denying a recent petition, the U.S. Supreme Court preserves UCMJ jurisdiction for retirees.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
The offense was against a dependent and overseas. IMO the UCMJ is the perfect jurisdiction for this guy. See this part of the brief to the court: "Petitioner’s victim, identified here by her initials (KAH), worked as a bartender at Teaserzand was the dependent wife of an active-duty Marine sergeant sta-tioned at MCAS Iwakuni." https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-306/78823/ [login to see] 0058681_18-306%20Larrabee%20-%20Opp.pdf
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I may be wrong, but I'm 95% sure that the standard is for offenses committed while they were in but were only tried after they were out. And at that rate they get called back to service for their trial and punishments to be charged.
What I stated above, I think is fair. However, if in fact retired members can be punished under UCMJ for offenses committed after service, than I agree it is questionable.
But based on my understanding of UCMJ (as taught to me by a JAG during my MP training) it only applies to prior service members that are being tried for offenses committed while they were in service.
What I stated above, I think is fair. However, if in fact retired members can be punished under UCMJ for offenses committed after service, than I agree it is questionable.
But based on my understanding of UCMJ (as taught to me by a JAG during my MP training) it only applies to prior service members that are being tried for offenses committed while they were in service.
(0)
(0)
SSG Trevor S.
The alleged sexual assault he videoed himself performing was against a dependent and in an overseas area near a base. IMO, being part of the retired reserves, and having the offense be against a dependent which is also an offense against a service member, is justification for him to be tried under the UCMJ.
(0)
(0)
MAJ Byron Oyler
UCMJ while retired can touch you for the rest of your life. That being said, it has to be in the best interests of the Government to do so and is quite rare.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Personally I think this should only be exercised in a case that could be considered a capital crime. But if you look at what the original law was for it does make sense. This gives the government a chance to determine if a criminal, who just so happens to be retired, should no longer be entitled to benefits and entitlements that a civilian court has no authority over.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It's legal because that's how Congress wrote the law. Do I like it, no. Am I worried, no.
If I were a retired military serving overseas, who sexually assaulted someone, especially a citizen of the host nation, then I'd be worried. As I recall, that's about what the 2-3 times this has been applied.
Getting Congress to change this stands as much chance as them passing term limits.
If I were a retired military serving overseas, who sexually assaulted someone, especially a citizen of the host nation, then I'd be worried. As I recall, that's about what the 2-3 times this has been applied.
Getting Congress to change this stands as much chance as them passing term limits.
(0)
(0)
1SG David Niles
I think that the local government would have been harder on him. But as a US citizen I have a constitutional right to be tried by my piers. Not a panel of officers and enlisted
(0)
(0)
1SG (Join to see)
I agree that the local government would have been harder.
You do have a right to be tried by a jury of your peers, however, you are also still subject to the UCMJ, according the 47 CFR UCMJ I. Section 802. Art. 2. (a) The following persons are subject to this chapter: (4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay*.
*The term “pay” includes basic pay, special pay, retainer pay, incentive pay, retired pay, and equivalent pay, but does not include allowances.
Never heard of this until it was posted a few days ago. I do recall a MSG recalled to active duty around 2007, who was subsequently CM for some sort of fraud or embezzlement that he had committed before he retired.
I still don't like it.
You do have a right to be tried by a jury of your peers, however, you are also still subject to the UCMJ, according the 47 CFR UCMJ I. Section 802. Art. 2. (a) The following persons are subject to this chapter: (4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay*.
*The term “pay” includes basic pay, special pay, retainer pay, incentive pay, retired pay, and equivalent pay, but does not include allowances.
Never heard of this until it was posted a few days ago. I do recall a MSG recalled to active duty around 2007, who was subsequently CM for some sort of fraud or embezzlement that he had committed before he retired.
I still don't like it.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google