May 2, 2021, E-5, Administrative Separation Board, United States Army Reserves, Chicago, Illinois. The accuser’s male buddy refused to proceed answering questions during the board, requesting a lawyer following the studying of his Article 31 rights as he sat on the stand. At the reservist separation board, Gapasin aggressively cross-examines the accuser, and her two buddies, revealing multiple inconsistencies between their tales and failed makes an attempt at corroboration. Sergeant (E-5) who’s new to this reservist unit is accused of sexual assault on two separate dates by a female Specialist. Gapasin elicits testimony how his ex-wife’s constant complaints and allegations that he was withholding assist, and the way she was the victim of home violence had grow to be a nuisance to the unit. Despite being so near retirement eligibility, the main receives an administrative reprimand and his unit initiates dismissal of this officer. Gapasin additionally focuses on the minor criminality of the allegations, and how separation so near retirement would not be justified in light of his client’s 17 years of devoted and honorable service.
Special Forces Major (O-4) with over 19 years of Active Duty service is charged with multiple specifications under the UCMJ, to include 2 specifications of communicating a menace, four specifications of assault and battery with one specification charging the most important with a way likely to supply loss of life or grievous bodily harm by strangulation, and with one specification together with assault and battery on a minor, 5 specs of conduct unbecoming an officer, and likewise adultery, fraternization specifications, animal abuse and endangering the psychological health of a baby beneath the age of 16. Gapasin aggressively cross-examines his client’s accusers, which includes his ex-wife and his two estranged 19 and 20-12 months-old kids. I haven’t any specific dog in that fight, I didn’t hear and wouldn’t if I could, however my own sense is that we’re right here facing the fact that even with respect to somebody that no one can personal, an event occuring in the general public area in the general public domain, the ability of broadcast to find out what it means continues to be overwhelming.
As challenging as it is to be a working mother or father, the obstacles going through a single father or mother are sometimes even more intimidating. Result: Allegations of sexual assault and sexual harassment are found UNSUBSTANTIATED by a Board composed of Officers. At trial, Gapasin reveals the government witnesses’ lack of credibility, exposing how the ex-spouse only reported her allegations after Gapasin’s client filed for divorce, which the consumer had filed for thereby denying her opportunities for any of retirement. Though sentenced to some minor confinement, O-four is just not Dismissed, thereby preserving all Retirement benefits after the trial. Result: Board RETAINS Gapasin’s client permitting him the chance to retire and receive FULL Benefits. At trial, Gapasin honed in on the accuser’s multiple versions of occasions, and attacked the actual which means of “pre-textual content messages” sent between the alleged sufferer and the client who was sitting with OSI agents on the time. At closing argument, Mr. Gapasin centered on the accuser’s multiple variations of occasions, her fabricated timeline and how the sexual intercourse needed to be consensual because of the clothes worn and the exercise in the dorm room. Dorm cameras present the first alleged sufferer walking out of A1C’s dorm room in distress, then operating to her room down the corridor.
The second Airman claims she was sexually assaulted in her room in the course of the evening when the A1C was closely intoxicated and walked in to apologize for occasions in an earlier softball game. The second accusation was that the Sergeant engaged in “hip pocket training” and touched her multiple times on her buttocks and groin in tying a “Swiss Seat” utilized in rappelling during some downtime within the headquarters. Both the accuser and her buddies clearly attempted to falsely corroborate their tales, and Gapasin revealed multiple inconsistencies and contradictions, to include a diagram the place the witnesses failed to be constant where people were supposedly standing when the “Swiss Seat” incident allegedly occurred. Gapasin cross-examined three other witnesses at the house the place the incident befell and elicited testimony that the alleged sufferer was walking, speaking and acting in a coherent manner. Gapasin also elicited testimony that clearly resembled that of the alleged victim participating in serious flirting with another witness on the home. On the Board of Inquiry, Mr. Gapasin argues how his client’s hostile ex-spouse persistently made false allegations towards him to his command multiple occasions per week. Gapasin emphasised how all of her allegations were rooted in jealousy over his client’s relationship, jealousy over his cash, and jealousy over his 7000 sqft home.