Air Force Article 107 Cases in 2018
In 2018, 20 Air Force courts-martial charged Article 107 (false official statement). 85% of the convictions included confinement, with a median of 3 months, compared with 4 months for all Air Force cases that year.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 4 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 107 › Air Force, 2018
Short answer: In 2018, 20 Air Force courts-martial charged Article 107 (false official statement). 85% of the convictions included confinement, with a median of 3 months, compared with 4 months for all Air Force cases that year. 58% of convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge, the same share as Air Force-wide.
Drug Charges Were the Most Common Companion
Article 107 was the only charge in 1 of the 20 cases. Article 112a (drug) appeared in 10 cases, Article 92 (orders violation) in 7, Article 134 (general article) in 6, Article 121 (larceny) in 5, and Article 86 (AWOL) in 4.
Most Sentences Included Short Confinement
Confinement was part of 85% of the 20 convictions. Half of those terms were 3 months or less, and a quarter were 8 months or longer. The median for all Air Force cases in 2018 was 4 months.
10 convictions (50%) were sentenced to under 6 months, close to the 48% Air Force-wide. 5 (25%) were sentenced to 6 months to 1 year, compared with 13%. Only 3 (15%) had no confinement, compared with 18%.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force cases in 2018 |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 3 | 15% | 18% |
| Under 6 months | 10 | 50% | 48% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 5 | 25% | 13% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 2 | 10% | 12% |
| 5 years or more | 0 | 0% | 8% |
Few Terms Over One Year
2 of the 20 convictions (10%) were sentenced to more than one year, compared with 20% for all Air Force cases in 2018. Both were more than 1 year and under 5 years. None was 5 years or more.
Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement, and 6 of these 20 cases (30%) were general courts-martial. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal.
Punitive Discharges
A punitive discharge followed 58% of enlisted convictions: 10 bad-conduct discharges and 1 dishonorable discharge. The share for all Air Force cases in 2018 was also 58%.
1 convicted officer or warrant officer appears, and that officer was not dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out an administrative separation later.
Who Decided Guilt
A military judge alone decided 13 cases. Panels of members heard the rest: 5 officer panels and 2 enlisted panels. That is 35% of these cases, compared with 48% of all Air Force cases in 2018.
Rank and Installations
The accused were 11 junior enlisted members, 8 NCOs, and 1 officer, a more senior group than all Air Force cases in 2018.
JB Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, tried 3 of these cases. Minot AFB, North Dakota, Nellis AFB, Nevada, Buckley SFB, Colorado, and Vandenberg SFB, California, each tried 2. These 5 installations account for 55% of the 20 cases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so a high count alone does not mean a base has a problem with this offense.
Limits of the 2018 Records
Air Force records from 2018 rarely list a guilty plea, so no contested share is given, and they rarely list charges in a full acquittal. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, and leave out cases handled by nonjudicial punishment.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 107 on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial with a trial date in 2018 that charged Article 107 (20 cases), compared with all Air Force cases that year and with 2017.
Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in Military Trial Results, data updated October 24, 2026. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: how this data was built. Errors: content@bodiesburied.com.
Related Analysis
- Article 107 (False Official Statements): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Year (hub)
- How Air Force False Official Statement Cases Ended in 2016 (previous / next)
- False Official Statement at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2019: The Year in Numbers (previous / next)
- Fewer or More? False Official Statement Charges at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2025 (the full trend)
- False Official Statement at Army Courts-Martial, 2021: The Year in Numbers
- False Official Statement at Army Courts-Martial, 2023: The Year in Numbers
- What Sentence Follows an Air Force False Official Statement Conviction?
- Article 107 explained on the law firm's website
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
About the author. Jocelyn C. Stewart is a retired Army JAG with more than 24 years of trying courts-martial and more than 200 jury trials. She hosts Where All The Bodies Are Buried and runs the Law Office of Jocelyn C. Stewart. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.