Army Article 119b Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
From 2021 to 2025, members (a panel) decided guilt in 17 contested Army cases that charged Article 119b (child endangerment). Of 11 convicted enlisted members, 5 received a punitive discharge (45%), compared with 53% across all contested Army Article 119b cases.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 4 min read
Trends › By Offense › Article 119b › Decided by members
Short answer: From 2021 to 2025, members (a panel) decided guilt in 17 contested Army cases that charged Article 119b (child endangerment). Of 11 convicted enlisted members, 5 received a punitive discharge (45%), compared with 53% across all contested Army Article 119b cases. Full acquittals came in 3 of the 17 cases (18%), compared with 13% for all contested Army Article 119b cases.
Most Verdicts Were Partial Acquittals
All 17 cases reached a verdict. Of those, 13 ended in a partial acquittal (76%), meaning not guilty of at least one charge or specification but guilty of another. Army records list findings charge by charge, so partial acquittals appear often in Army data.
Another 3 cases ended in a full acquittal (18%), with a not guilty finding on every charge. That rate was higher than the 13% for all contested Army Article 119b cases.
The accused usually chooses whether a military judge alone or a panel of members decides guilt. Cases tried each way are not alike, and these figures do not show what the forum caused.
Domestic Violence Charges in 13 Cases
Article 119b was the only charge in 1 of the 17 cases. Across all contested Army Article 119b cases, it was the only charge in 1 of 23.
Article 128b (domestic violence) was charged with it in 13 cases, and Article 128 (assault) in 8. Article 134 (general article) and Article 120 (sexual assault) appeared in 4 each, and Article 92 (orders violation) in 3.
Sentences After Conviction
There were 14 convictions, and confinement was part of 64% of them. The median confinement was 8 months, the same as for all contested Army Article 119b cases. A quarter of the sentences with confinement were 2 years or longer.
These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each sentence covers every charge in the case, including the companion charges above.
Punitive Discharges and Dismissals
Of 11 convicted enlisted members, 5 received a punitive discharge: 3 bad-conduct discharges and 2 dishonorable discharges. The share, 45%, was lower than the 53% for all contested Army Article 119b cases.
There were 3 convicted officers or warrant officers, and 1 was dismissed. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.
Panels and Rank
Enlisted panels decided 12 of these cases, and officer panels decided 5. Across all contested Army Article 119b cases, members heard 74%.
The accused were 3 junior enlisted members, 10 NCOs, and 4 officers. The group is more senior than all contested Army Article 119b cases.
Dates and Limits
The records hold these cases from September 2021 through March 2025: 2 in 2021, 3 in 2022, 5 in 2023, 5 in 2024, and 2 in 2025. Army records in this data are sparse before 2021.
The records give trial dates, not offense dates. They do not describe the evidence or the plea terms. Cases handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation are not included.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Army courts-martial with trial dates in 2021–2025 that charged Article 119b, had a not-guilty or mixed plea and a result posted, and record members (a panel) as deciding guilt (17 cases), compared with all 23 such contested Army Article 119b cases. The accused usually chooses the forum, so the two groups are not alike.
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 119b (Child Endangerment, Numbered Since 2019): Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- Army Courts-Martial: Data and Trends (hub)
- Sentences (hub)
- Army Article 107 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 107 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 115 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 128 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 80 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 80 Trials Before a Military Judge Alone: Verdicts and Sentences
- Army Article 92 Trials Before Members (A Panel): Verdicts and Sentences
- 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.