Guilty Pleas in Air Force Indecent Recording And Exposure Cases: How Often, and What Came Next
The records hold 20 Air Force courts-martial from 2016–2025 in which the accused pleaded guilty to charges including Article 120c (indecent recording and exposure). The median confinement was 2.5 years, compared with 4 months for all Air Force guilty pleas.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 120c › Guilty Pleas in Air Force Indecent Recor
Short answer: The records hold 20 Air Force courts-martial from 2016–2025 in which the accused pleaded guilty to charges including Article 120c (indecent recording and exposure). The median confinement was 2.5 years, compared with 4 months for all Air Force guilty pleas. Of convicted enlisted members, 89% received a punitive discharge, compared with 60%.
Guilty Pleas With Long Sentences
Most Air Force guilty pleas end in short confinement. This group is an exception. Every case here is a guilty plea to a set of charges that included Article 120c, which covers offenses such as indecent recording, broadcasting, and exposure. The comparison group is every Air Force guilty plea in the same years.
Confinement was part of 95% of the 20 convictions. The median term was 2.5 years, compared with 4 months across Air Force guilty pleas. A quarter of the sentences were 5.4 years or longer. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal, and they cover every charge in the case.
How Long Were the Sentences?
Sentences longer than one year were more common here than in Air Force guilty pleas overall: 14 of 20 convictions (70%), compared with 22%. Sentences of 5 years or more made up 30% of these convictions, compared with 5% across all guilty pleas.
Short sentences were less common. Only 10% of convictions were under 6 months, compared with 55% across Air Force guilty pleas. 1 conviction included no confinement.
| Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Air Force guilty pleas in those years |
|---|---|---|---|
| No confinement | 1 | 5% | 7% |
| Under 6 months | 2 | 10% | 55% |
| 6 months to 1 year | 3 | 15% | 16% |
| More than 1 year, under 5 years | 8 | 40% | 17% |
| 5 years or more | 6 | 30% | 5% |
Why the Court Level Matters Here
Of the 20 cases, 17 were general courts-martial (85%), compared with 43% in all Air Force guilty pleas. Only a general court-martial can adjudge more than one year of confinement or a dishonorable discharge. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year.
The records show a high general court-martial share and a high share of long sentences in the same group. They cannot show why any case went to a particular court level.
Charges Pleaded Alongside Article 120c
Article 120c was the only charge in 7 of the 20 cases. The other cases included at least one more charge: Article 120 (sexual assault) in 6, Article 134 (general article) in 6, Article 117a (intimate image) in 3, Article 131b (obstruction, numbered since 2019) in 3, and Article 128b (domestic violence, numbered since 2019) in 2.
A sentence covers every finding in a case. The confinement figures therefore include findings on any sexual assault or other charge pleaded at the same time. The records do not break the sentence down by charge.
Discharges and Dismissals
Of 18 convicted enlisted members, 16 received a punitive discharge: 9 dishonorable and 7 bad-conduct. Across Air Force guilty pleas, the share was 60%. The group included 2 convicted officers, and both were dismissed, the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge.
A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation. These records do not track administrative separations.
Who Pleaded Guilty
By rank, the accused were 13 junior enlisted members, 5 NCOs, and 2 officers. That rank makeup is similar to Air Force guilty pleas overall. A military judge alone decided all 20 cases, which is typical for guilty pleas. No case was heard by a members panel.
Where the Cases Were Tried
Five installations had 2 cases each: Misawa AB, Japan; Seymour Johnson AFB, North Carolina; JB Andrews, Maryland; Maxwell AFB, Alabama; and Kadena AB, Japan. Together they account for 50% of the cases. The other cases were tried at other bases. Larger installations try more cases of every kind, so these counts say little about any one base.
Cases Begin in 2020
The period runs 2016–2025, but the records show no cases in this group before 2020. The 20 cases were tried from March 2020 to August 2025: 3 in 2020, 4 in 2021, 6 in 2022, 2 in 2023, 2 in 2024, and 3 in 2025. Air Force records from 2016 to 2019 rarely list a guilty plea, so earlier guilty pleas may be in the data without being identifiable as pleas.
Article 120c is a covered offense. Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute it. New sentencing parameters apply when every guilty finding is for an offense after December 27, 2023. The Military Justice Act of 2016, effective January 1, 2019, introduced written plea agreements.
What the Air Force Records Do Not Show
Air Force records never report plea agreements, so any negotiated cap on confinement does not appear here. The records give trial dates rather than offense dates. As a result, the newer sentencing rules cannot be matched to individual cases. The records also omit the evidence and any matter handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.
For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see Article 120c on the law firm's website. Dates and sources for the law changes: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Air Force courts-martial tried 2016–2025: where the accused pleaded guilty to charges including Article 120c (indecent recording and exposure) (20 cases), compared with all Air Force guilty pleas in those years.
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 120c (Other Sexual Misconduct): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Sentences (hub)
- Fewer or More? Indecent Recording And Exposure Charges at Air Force Courts-Martial, 2016–2025
- What Sentence Follows an Air Force Indecent Recording and Exposure Conviction?
- When Army Accused Plead Guilty to Indecent Recording And Exposure (another service)
- Pleading Guilty to Article 120c in the Navy-Marine Corps: What Sentences Followed? (another service)
- Guilty Pleas in Air Force Child Sexual Abuse Cases: How Often, and What Came Next
- Article 120c 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.