Captain Jacob Wulfson: The Protection of his Uniform
And maybe it is also the protection of my government.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/29/cambridgeshire-police-face-questions-sexual-assault-case-us-military
A court martial is a proceeding which can be restricted for the non-military public. I am not sure regarding how this particular court martial was convened and carried out. But, problematic - the victim of the crime is a United Kingdom civilian. This case should have received attention in the British courts. Why was it allowed circumvent the British Ministry of Justice? And what did Britain gain from this transactional relationship?
Military court martial follows the framework provided by the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). The penalties are actually more harsh than those on the civilian side of the house, as charges can be "laddered up" with Article 79 which allows for "lesser included offenses". An example would be "Conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman." And drugging and choking a victim could also be addressed.
What is also one of many unknown facts related to the story is if Captain Wulfson is/was married. Because were it my husband....
Adultery alone, has brought down the stellar career trajectory of senior flag rank officers. Brigadier Jeffrey Sinclair comes to mind. And of course... General David Patraeus provides a cautionary tale; except that he managed to avoid a court martial and merely resigned from his position as Director of the "We See Everything You Do" agency.
In the category of the Darwin Award, we have this:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/navy-submarine-commander-faked-death-in-order-to-end-affair-with-mistress/
AI-generated response has this to say regarding a change in the UCMJ:
For offenses committed on or after 27 Dec. 2023 the penalty for rape under Article 120 shifted from a traditional maximum punishment model to structured sentencing In the 2024 Manual for Court Martial rape is classified as a Category IV offense. The authorized confinement range is 10-20 years.
As an officer, I certainly understand the need to assure the physical well-being of our military member who has been accused of committing a crime on foreign soil. So I find it acceptable for the United States government to retain custody of the member (we have our military brigs) during a civilian trial with a final negotiation with the hosting nation which allows the member to then serve their sentence on U.S. soil. Captain Wulfson should not be part of the population of HM Prison Belmarsh. He should be housed here.
But the questions remain and are worrisome. The victim was "ghosted" from the process. She was not provided with a barrister to represent her own interests with courtroom advocacy. And while I am not privy to what was hammered out between England and our military regarding Ms. Steele and the accusation which she brought against a member of our military - it reminds me once again - our "warriors" reign supreme. And to hell with good order and discipline.
This issue needs to be prioritized by the incoming Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
swoffordwrites@gmail.com
Comments
Post a Comment