U.S. Navy v. CDR (Board of Inquiry)

The Board was held at NAS Jacksonville, Florida. Our client faced allegations that he disobeyed his superior commissioned officer, that he failed to obey an order and that he was substandard in performance. Despite finding that our client was substandard in performance, the board voted that the evidence did not support the notion that he willfully disobeyed is Commander nor failed to follow his order. This case stemmed from the Navy Medical School house at JBSA. A particular Sailor filed an appeal to be recycled to class despite multiple academic failures and a sexual harassment complaint. Our client’s boss opted to grant the Sailor’s appeal, in spite of our client’s recommendations and misgivings. Our client then took steps to execute his bosses order, sending out several emails. A few weeks later, the executive officer, acting as the Commander, signed the denial of appeal on the Sailor. In his statement, the XO stated he knew the Sailor in question and the he remembered he was under investigation. Yet, he also stated that when he saw the memo, he didn’t recognize the Sailor’s name (which was unique) and that he merely signed the memo as a matter of course without reading it. Ultimately, the blame fell out our client’s feet. Despite a thorough investigation, the conclusions were puzzling. Several individuals provided contradictory statements about who told them to write the denial letter. Ultimately, no objective evidence existed that our client ordered the denial written. In fact, the objective evidence showed our client was acting in accordance with his Commander’s intent. Where our client went wrong was properly policing his NCO who appeared to have given different instructions to inexperienced Sailors regarding the processing of the memo. Despite this, the board ultimately voted to Retain our client. This recommendation is binding because of his status as an Officer in the Navy.