> ## Content Index > Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.bodiesburied.com/llms.txt > Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further. # 28 Domestic Violence Courts-Martial at Fort Bragg, 2024–2026: What the Records Show - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-article-128b-2024-2026/ - Published: 2026-10-28T06:33:51.000Z - Updated: 2026-10-30T08:05:34.000Z - Description: Fort Bragg tried 28 courts-martial charging Article 128b (domestic violence) from 2024–2026. 29% were contested, compared with 24% across the Army. 65% of convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge, compared with 72% in Army Article 128b cases overall. - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Fort Bragg, Article 128b, Army [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) › [Fort Bragg](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-fort-bragg/) › Article 128b, 2024–2026 **Short answer:** Fort Bragg tried 28 courts-martial charging Article 128b (domestic violence) from 2024–2026\. 29% were contested, compared with 24% across the Army. 65% of convicted enlisted members received a punitive discharge, compared with 72% in Army Article 128b cases overall. Based on 28 cases · 2024–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026 ## A Large Share of Fort Bragg's Cases This post covers Fort Bragg courts-martial from January 2024 through August 2026 that charged Article 128b. These 28 cases were 33% of all 85 courts-martial at the base in that period. 9 were tried in 2024, 14 in 2025, and 5 in 2026, a partial year. Article 128b applies only to offenses on or after January 1, 2019\. Earlier conduct of this kind was charged under other articles. Article 128b is also a covered offense, so since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute it. ## All Contested Cases Were General Courts-Martial Contested cases differed most by court level. 47% of the 17 general courts-martial were contested. None of the 11 special courts-martial were contested. A case is contested when the accused pleads not guilty to at least one charge. The median confinement was 8 months in general courts-martial and 6 months in special courts-martial. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. The general court-martial share of 61% was about the same as the 64% across the Army. ## Pleas and Recorded Agreements Of the 28 cases, 20 were guilty pleas and 8 were contested. The contested share of 29% was higher than the 24% in Army Article 128b cases overall. All 20 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement. Army records say whether an agreement existed, not what it said, so any limits the agreements placed on a sentence are not in the data. ## Sentence Lengths About the Same as Army-Wide Of 25 convictions, 22 included confinement. The median confinement was 6 months, about the same as the 5 months for Army Article 128b cases in 2024–2026\. A quarter of the sentences were 1 year or longer. These are adjudged sentences, before any plea-agreement limit, clemency, or appeal, and they cover every charge in the case. Sentences longer than one year were about as common as across the Army: 5 of 25 convictions (20%), compared with 21%. The main difference was in the middle range. 24% of Fort Bragg convictions were from 6 months to 1 year, compared with 21% across the Army. 16% were more than 1 year and under 5 years, compared with 17%. | Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, Army-wide Article 128b cases | | ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ----------------------------------- | | No confinement | 3 | 12% | 15% | | Under 6 months | 11 | 44% | 43% | | 6 months to 1 year | 6 | 24% | 21% | | More than 1 year, under 5 years | 4 | 16% | 17% | | 5 years or more | 1 | 4% | 4% | ## Fewer Punitive Discharges Of 23 convicted enlisted members, 15 received a punitive discharge: 12 bad-conduct discharges and 3 dishonorable discharges. That 65% share was lower than the 72% in Army-wide Article 128b cases. Of 2 convicted officers or warrant officers, 1 was dismissed. For enlisted members, a punitive discharge is a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge. For officers, it is a dismissal. A sentence without one does not rule out a later administrative separation. ## Other Charges in the Same Cases Article 128b was the only charge in 15 of the 28 cases. When other articles were charged, the most common were Article 120 (sexual assault) in 5, Article 128 (assault) in 4, Article 115 (communicating threats) in 4, and Article 90 (disobeying an officer) and Article 134 (general article) in 3 each. A sentence covers every charge in the case, so the confinement and discharge figures above describe the whole case. For example, a domestic violence case that also included a sexual assault charge is sentenced on both findings together. The records do not split the sentence by charge. ## Rank and Forum The accused were 13 junior enlisted members (E-1 to E-4), 11 NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 4 officers or warrant officers. That mix was more senior than Army-wide Article 128b cases, where 53% were junior enlisted. A military judge alone decided 23 cases. Panels of members heard the rest: 3 enlisted panels and 1 officer panel. The members share was 15%, compared with 16% across the Army. The accused usually chooses the forum, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas. ## Sentencing Rules in Transition When every guilty finding in a case is for an offense after December 27, 2023, the military judge sets the sentence within new sentencing parameters. Whether a case falls under the old or new rules depends on the offense date. The records give trial dates, not offense dates. Trials from 2024 on include cases under both sets of rules, and the data cannot show whether either change affected the figures. The records also do not include the evidence, the plea terms, or anything handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see [Article 128b on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-128b-domestic-violence/?ref=bodiesburied.com). Dates and sources for the law changes: [UCMJ change timeline](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/ucmj-change-timeline/). ### How We Counted Courts-martial tried at Fort Bragg in 2024–2026 that charged Article 128b (28 cases), compared with every Army case charging Article 128b in those years. Source: public court-martial records (Article 140a, UCMJ) in [Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/), data updated October 24, 2026\. Definitions, sources, and known gaps: [how this data was built](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/how-the-military-trial-results-data-was-built/). Errors: content@bodiesburied.com. ## Related Analysis - [Fort Bragg: Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-fort-bragg/) (hub) - [Article 128b (Domestic Violence, Numbered Since 2019): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-128b-courts-martial/) (hub) - [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) (hub) - [Fort Bragg Courts-Martial, 2020–2023: What 143 Cases Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-courts-martial-2020-2023/) - [What Was Tried at Fort Bragg, 2024–2026? 85 Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-courts-martial-2024-2026/) - [Domestic Violence Cases at Fort Bragg: 2021–2023 vs. 2024–2026](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-article-128b-before-after-2024/) - [24 Domestic Violence Courts-Martial at Fort Bragg, 2021–2023: What the Records Show](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-bragg-article-128b-2021-2023/) - [Is Army Domestic Violence Prosecution Rising or Falling? Article 128b, 2021–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-128b-trend-2021-2025/) - [S1 H6: Shady Sh\*t Going Down at Fort Liberty](https://www.bodiesburied.com/s1h6-shady-sh-t-going-down-at-fort-liberty/) (podcast, members) - [Article 128b explained on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/ucmj/article-128b-domestic-violence/?ref=bodiesburied.com) - [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members) ## Military Judges Who Presided Over Article 128b Cases at Fort Bragg, 2024–2026 - [Gregory B. Batdorff](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-gregory-b-batdorff/) - [Robyn M. Chatwood](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-robyn-m-chatwood/) - [John H. Cook](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-john-h-cook/) - [Jerrod B. Fussnecker](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-jerrod-b-fussnecker/) - [Willie F. Gore](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-willie-f-gore/) - [Tyler J. Heimann](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-tyler-j-heimann/) - [Benjamin W. Hillner](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-benjamin-w-hillner/) - [Thomas P. Hynes](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-thomas-p-hynes/) - [Michael E. Korte](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-michael-e-korte/) Names and links only. Each judge's record of pleas, findings, and sentences is on their Know Your Judge page, part of the [Court-Martial Characters](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judges/) membership. **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](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/?ref=bodiesburied.com). This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.