Rape/Date Rape

Rape is an incredibly serious criminal charge for which Mr. Karns has represented numerous service members. It is the type of offense for which the accused is often prejudged to be guilty, regardless of the evidence. Just being accused of rape can have a significant personal impact and potentially ruin a career. If an allegation of rape is made against you, it must be aggressively defended in order to avoid a rush to judgment against you. If the case against you is not defended properly and it results in a conviction, you could be faced with the maximum punishment of life in prison and sex offender registration. It is imperative to have an experienced military attorney such as Mr. Karns defend you against this type of accusation.

Many rape cases are based on circumstantial evidence—they are the result of a "he said, she said" situation, one in which the government has relied solely upon the statement given by an accuser to charge you with the offense. Often alcohol is involved and events are distorted or exaggerated. The accuser may have less than a clear memory of what happened and when and may even have ulterior motives for making the accusation. Because it is a sex crime, the accused is often perceived as guilty prior to any due process or opportunity to present his side of the case. In addition, the government often relies on witnesses who may have personal biases against the accused, or whose credibility is otherwise tainted. Mr. Karns can examine the government’s evidence against you, including the statements of its witnesses. As an experienced military attorney, Mr. Karns can develop the circumstances of the case which are favorable to your side of the story and expose the biases and discredit the testimony of the witnesses being used against you. An experienced military attorney is indispensable to developing evidence for your side of the case, as well as dismantling the case that has been made against you.

Because rape cases can engender sympathy for the accuser, it can be difficult for the public and jurors to neutrally examine and scrutinize the facts—even if you have been falsely accused. It takes an experienced military attorney such as Mr. Karns to get the jury to focus on the facts in a manner and to the degree that will afford you a fair trial.

Past Cases

Marine Corporal was indicted by a civilian grand jury for raping a civilian female after a house party had died down. Client admitted to the detectives that the complainant had a lot to drink, threw up, and passed out in a bedroom. He admitted that after everyone left the party, he went into the bedroom along with a co-defendant to “check up on her.” Eventually, the co-defendant and the complainant had sex. Client denied having sex with the complainant, but she claimed she was raped by both the Client and the co-defendant. Client hired Attorney Karns. The prosecutor offered to settle the case if Client would plead guilty to a lesser offense. Attorney Karns advised Client not to accept the offer but proceed to trial, even though he was facing up to twenty years confinement and having to register for life as a sex offender if convicted. After Client rejected his offer, Attorney Karns explained to the prosecutor that the complainant claimed that she was raped because she had an ex-boyfriend that she wanted to get back together with and was worried that he would find out about her spending the night at the co-defendant’s house. A few weeks prior to the trial, the prosecutor dismissed all charges against Client.

NCO charged with rape and adultery. General Court-Martial panel returned verdict of Not Guilty on both charges.

Soldier charged with rape and sodomy. General Court-Martial panel returned a verdict of guilty on a reduced charge of indecent acts and guilty on the sodomy charge. Mr. Karns convinced the Division Commanding General not to approve the court-martial panel’s verdict and thus clearing the soldier of all charges.

Army Specialist was charged with rape and sodomy by force. Charges were preferred after a female NCO claimed that she was raped and sodomized by force by Client after going to the Client's room and passing out. She reported she was raped the next day, and while at the hospital, a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner examined her and found that she had multiple vaginal lacerations, one which was 4.5 cm long. Upon being interviewed, Client admitted to CID that he knew she was "extremely drunk." Another witness who saw her minutes before testified that she was "falling down drunk."

During a lengthy cross-examination of the NCO at the Article 32 hearing, Mr. Karns got her to admit that even though she was very intoxicated, she understood the nature of the acts and did not clearly communicate to Client that she was not consenting to the acts. Mr. Karns also exposed that: 1) she offered no resistance, 2) was married at the time of the incident and may have claimed rape to avoid a charge of adultery, and 3) may have claimed rape because she was afraid that word would get out to the unit that she had sex with a junior enlisted. Despite there being a lower standard of proof ("reasonable grounds") at an Article 32 hearing to determine whether charges should be referred to a court-martial, the Investigating Officer recommend that charges not be referred. Subsequently, the commander directed that all charges be dismissed.