> ## 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. # Article 128 Cases at Fort Campbell, 2024–2026: 20 Courts-Martial - URL: https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-campbell-article-128-2024-2026/ - Published: 2026-10-28T06:51:00.000Z - Updated: 2026-11-03T01:47:45.000Z - Description: From January 2024 to August 2026, 20 courts-martial at Fort Campbell charged Article 128 (assault). The median confinement was 1.3 years, compared with 6 months in Army-wide Article 128 cases. - Author: Jocelyn C. Stewart - Tags: Understanding Trends, Fort Campbell, Article 128, Army [Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/) › [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) › [Fort Campbell](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-fort-campbell/) › Article 128, 2024–2026 **Short answer:** From January 2024 to August 2026, 20 courts-martial at Fort Campbell charged Article 128 (assault). The median confinement was 1.3 years, compared with 6 months in Army-wide Article 128 cases. Of convicted enlisted members, 88% received a punitive discharge, compared with 72% across the rest of the Army. Based on 20 cases · 2024–2026 · Army records · data updated October 24, 2026 ## Longer Confinement Than Army-Wide Assault cases at Fort Campbell in 2024–2026 carried longer confinement than assault cases in the rest of the Army. All 20 cases ended in a conviction, and 16 of those sentences carried confinement. The median confinement was 1.3 years, compared with 6 months for all Army Article 128 cases in the same years. A quarter of the sentences were 1.5 years or longer. Sentences longer than one year were imposed in 9 of 20 convictions (45%), compared with 30% across Army Article 128 cases. These are adjudged sentences, as announced at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case. ## The Spread of Sentences Only 15% of convictions here carried under 6 months, compared with 42% for the Army as a whole. Sentences of more than 1 year but under 5 years were 35% of convictions, compared with 24%. Sentences of 5 years or more were 10%, compared with 6%. At the low end, 4 convictions (20%) carried no confinement. | Adjudged confinement | Convictions | Share here | Share, all Army Article 128 cases in 2024–2026 | | ------------------------------- | ----------- | ---------- | ---------------------------------------------- | | No confinement | 4 | 20% | 15% | | Under 6 months | 3 | 15% | 42% | | 6 months to 1 year | 4 | 20% | 12% | | More than 1 year, under 5 years | 7 | 35% | 24% | | 5 years or more | 2 | 10% | 6% | ## Mostly General Courts-Martial General courts-martial made up 80% of these cases (16 of 20), with special courts-martial handling the rest. A general court-martial can impose any lawful sentence, including long confinement and a dishonorable discharge or dismissal. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge. ## Discharges and Dismissals Of 17 convicted enlisted members, 15 received a punitive discharge: 14 bad-conduct discharges and 1 dishonorable discharge. In Army Article 128 cases overall, the share was 72%. Officers appear in this group too. All 3 convicted officers or warrant officers were dismissed, the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without one does not rule out a later administrative separation. ## Guilty Pleas, Each With an Agreement Of the 20 cases, 17 were guilty pleas and 3 were contested, meaning the accused pleaded not guilty to at least one charge. That 15% contested share is lower than the 29% in all Army Article 128 cases. All 17 guilty pleas are recorded with a plea agreement. Army records say whether an agreement existed, not what it said, so any sentence range the parties agreed on is not visible here. A military judge alone decided 19 of the 20 cases. Members heard 1, with an officer panel. The accused usually chooses the forum, and most judge-alone cases are guilty pleas. ## Assault Alongside Other Charges In 8 of the 20 cases, Article 128 was the only charge. Across the rest of the Army, 80 of 242 Article 128 cases charged it alone. Other charges here included Article 90 (disobeying an officer) in 4 cases, Article 134 (the general article) in 3, Article 120 (sexual assault) in 3, Article 93 (maltreatment) in 1, and Article 129 (burglary and unlawful entry) in 1. When assault is charged with sexual assault, the assault count often describes part of the same incident. The sentence covers the whole case. ## Caseload and Rank These 20 cases made up 23% of the 87 courts-martial at Fort Campbell in 2024–2026\. By year, there were 4 in 2024, 8 in 2025, and 8 so far in 2026, a partial year. With a group this small, a single case can change any percentage noticeably. The comparisons in this post are broad, not precise. The accused were 11 junior enlisted soldiers (E-1 to E-4), 6 NCOs (E-5 to E-9), and 3 officers, a mix similar to the rest of the Army. ## Rules for These Years Article 128 assault is not itself a covered offense. A special trial counsel who takes a covered offense, such as sexual assault, can also take related charges, such as an assault tied to it. 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. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so these trials include cases under both the old and the new rules. ## What the Records Leave Out The records do not show the evidence, the plea terms, the injuries involved, or assaults handled through nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation. They also cannot show how many assault allegations at this post never reached a court-martial at all. For what the offense covers and how it is defended, see [Article 128 on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-128/?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 Campbell in 2024–2026 that charged Article 128 (20 cases), compared with every Army case charging Article 128 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 Campbell: Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/courts-martial-at-fort-campbell/) (hub) - [Article 128 (Assault): Court-Martial Data and Trends](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/article-128-courts-martial/) (hub) - [By Installation](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/by-installation/) (hub) - [What Was Tried at Fort Campbell, 2020–2023? 99 Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-campbell-courts-martial-2020-2023/) - [Inside 87 Courts-Martial at Fort Campbell, 2024–2026](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-campbell-courts-martial-2024-2026/) - [Article 128 Cases at Fort Campbell, 2020–2023: 46 Courts-Martial](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-campbell-article-128-2020-2023/) - [Article 128 at Fort Campbell Before and After 2024](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/fort-campbell-article-128-before-after-2024/) - [Army Article 128 Cases by the Numbers, 2021–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/army-article-128-trend-2021-2025/) - [Article 128 explained on the law firm's website](https://www.ucmj-defender.com/practice-areas/court-martial/article-128/?ref=bodiesburied.com) - [Search every case in Military Trial Results](https://www.bodiesburied.com/military-trial-results/) (members) ## Military Judges Who Presided Over Article 128 Cases at Fort Campbell, 2024–2026 - [Larry A. Babin Jr.](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-larry-a-babin-jr/) - [John H. Cook](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-john-h-cook/) - [Frederic P. Gallun](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-frederic-p-gallun/) - [John R. Longley III](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-john-r-longley-iii/) - [John R. Maloney](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-john-r-maloney/) - [Daniel L. Mazzone](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-daniel-l-mazzone/) - [Carrie L. Ward](https://www.bodiesburied.com/judge-carrie-l-ward/) 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. **Compare: federal court.** [Aggravated Assault: Federal Sentences vs. Article 128 Courts-Martial, 2016–2025](https://www.bodiesburied.com/trends/federal-aggravated-assault-vs-article-128/) **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.