The general who fired a Space Force commander for trying to rid the military of Marxism was himself castigated by a military judge in an unprecedented order for intentionally violating the constitutional rights of a serviceman.
Last month, Lt. Gen. Stephen Whiting of the U.S. Space Command relieved Matthew Lohmeier of his duties overseeing missile defense based on a judgment that informing the public about Marxist ideology in the military was dangerous.
AIR FORCE FIGHTER PILOT SUSPENDED FOR REFUSING TO WEAR MASK
But beginning in 2018, while supervising a military prosecution, Whiting violated the due process and rights to a fair trial of an Air Force engineer on three counts of rape that could have resulted in a lifetime prison sentence, according to court documents.
“This court is left to conclude that the United States of America is neither committed to ensuring the accused gets a fair trial nor taking the steps necessary to provide the accused with the relevant discovery to mount his defense,” wrote Judge W. Shane Cohen in a 13-page opinion dated Aug. 22, 2019. “This court is left with few conclusions other than the United States of America is not serious about meeting its legal obligations even when the law demands it.”
Cohen, an esteemed judge who had the 9/11 case on his docket with accused architect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, called Whiting out by his title as the person responsible for a situation in which “the government abdicated its obligations to the justice system.”
The judge went as far as saying that reasonable doubt existed regarding Technical Sgt. Keith Snyder’s guilt in the case, which is the legal standard for a not guilty verdict.
“The outstanding evidence being sought by the defense is of central importance to mounting the accused’s affirmative defense, attacking the credibility of his three accusers, and demonstrating both his innocence and the reasonable doubt in the government’s case,” Cohen wrote.
The charges against Snyder hinged on a spliced covert tape recording from his Florida home created by a woman he had dated, identified as CP in court documents.
The tape is illegal because Florida does not allow recordings without the consent of both parties. CP continuously tried to elicit a response that she was forced to have sex, while Snyder was clearly confused with the situation because they had a continuing sexual relationship, according to a review of the tape by the Washington Examiner.
Additional court evidence showed that CP and two other women were jealous that Snyder did not date them exclusively, and they colluded on social media to file rape reports with the military. The plot was spearheaded by CP, who became enraged after Snyder broke up with her. She went through his social media profiles and contacted dozens of women to vilify Snyder with claims of cheating and in the hope that his children would be taken away from him, evidence showed.
“Just found out he was sleeping with a woman named **** [and] a woman named **** and you during the same time frame,” CP texted to one woman who started their conversation with, “What do you want?”
This evidence was collected and submitted to the court by Snyder’s attorney, Aaron G. Meyer, who specializes in military cases. The prosecution refused to issue a subpoena to collect the discovery from the women, which led Cohen to take the unusual step of dismissing the case with prejudice — meaning it cannot be filed again.
Throughout the case, CP sent hundreds of texts to Snyder, often creating false identities and using burner phones to strike up new relationships. The messages sent from CP’s regular account were filled with hate and threats that alternated with begging to resume their relationship. In several texts, CP said she would be “laying landmines.” Finally, Snyder obtained a restraining order.
“It was a politically motivated prosecution,” Meyer told the Washington Examiner. “There is absolutely no sexual assault crisis in the military. Now you have [generals] scared of their own shadows with political prosecutions on nonsense allegations that would never be filed in civilian court.”
The women would post accusations on social media that the military refused to protect them after the judge issued repeated orders requiring prosecutors to turn over the electronic evidence to the defense, Meyer said.
“It’s my belief that the military was concerned about these social media posts,” Meyer said.
Gen. Whiting signed off on many of the court documents forging ahead toward trial.
Both Meyer, who has done hundreds of military cases, and retired Army Brig. Gen. Don Bolduc say the judge’s order is unprecedented in its language and remedy.
“As a general officer, if I had received this unprecedented admonishment from a judge, I would expect that the trust of my superiors and my subordinates would be justly questioned,” Bolduc told the Washington Examiner. “All around, this is a case study in bad leadership as it pertains to military justice.”
Bolduc is currently running for the U.S. Senate in New Hampshire on a platform of returning the country to patriotism.
James Carafano, a fellow with the Heritage Foundation and a retired Army lieutenant colonel who oversaw many military criminal cases, said: “There is something wrong with our senior officer corps of the military. There is some of the most irresponsible behavior that I have ever seen. If you don’t have any evidence, but you do have exculpatory evidence, I would never bring a prosecution against this person.”
As for Lohmeier, Bolduc had strong opinions about Whiting’s choice to fire the commander rather than defend his actions to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. If Whiting had strong support for Lohmeier, it’s likely that the commander would still have his job, Bolduc said.
“We got here because we have a bunch of admirals and generals who just aren’t doing their job. They aren’t protecting the military, their organization, and more importantly, they aren’t protecting their people,” Bolduc said. “They are allowing politics and this perverted version of diversity to be taught in the military.”
.jpg)
Lohmeier was fired after going on a podcast last month to promote a bestselling book he wrote on Marxism in the military. In the interview, he criticized critical race theory training in civilian schools as un-American along with similar training he was forced to give subordinates.
After the podcast, Whiting relieved him of command, with a statement from Space Force citing a “loss of trust and confidence.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Lohmeier declined to comment on this article. He still has his rank and is assigned to the Space Force, but he no longer has “a leadership role,” the statement said.
Lt. Col. Mike Andrews, Space Operations Command spokesman, issued this response on behalf of Whiting:
“The United States military takes every allegation of sexual assault extremely seriously, and will always honor the desires of a victim regarding participation in a sexual assault investigation or prosecution. In addition, the Uniform Code of Military Justice ensures the defendant has the right to hear from his accuser.
“Prior to referring the charges in US v Snyder to a General Court-Martial, the charges were first considered at a preliminary hearing that heard evidence and witness testimony, and recommended referring charges to a general court-martial.
“Lt Gen Whiting’s role was serving as the convening authority for U.S. vs. Snyder; he referred the charges to a General Court-Martial. It was the role of the presiding military judge for that General Court-Martial, not the convening authority, to rule on the defense’s motion to dismiss the charges. The government did not seek to appeal the military judge’s ruling.”
