What Fort Knox Tried in 2025
Fort Knox tried 16 courts-martial in 2025, all decided by a military judge alone. Of 10 convicted enlisted members, 4 received a punitive discharge (40%), compared with 73% across the Army.
Understanding Trends in Military Practice · 5 min read
Trends › By Installation › Fort Knox › 2025
Short answer: Fort Knox tried 16 courts-martial in 2025, all decided by a military judge alone. Of 10 convicted enlisted members, 4 received a punitive discharge (40%), compared with 73% across the Army. Article 128b (domestic violence) was charged in 38% of cases, compared with 26% in the rest of the Army.
Discharges for Enlisted Members and Officers
A punitive discharge for an enlisted member is a bad-conduct or a dishonorable discharge. Of 10 convicted enlisted members at Fort Knox, 4 received one, all bad-conduct discharges and no dishonorable discharges. The share, 40%, is lower than the 73% across the Army.
The records show 3 convicted officers or warrant officers, and 2 were dismissed. Dismissal is the officer equivalent of a punitive discharge. A sentence without a punitive discharge does not rule out a later administrative separation.
Domestic Violence and Trainee Offenses
The charge lists cover 13 of the 16 cases, and one case can appear under several articles. Article 128b (domestic violence) appeared in 5 cases (38%), compared with 26% in the rest of the Army. Article 93a (prohibited activities with recruit or trainee) appeared in 4 cases (31%), compared with 2%.
Article 92 (failure to obey order or regulation), Article 128 (assault), and Article 134 (general article) each appeared in 2 cases (15%).
| UCMJ Article | Cases | Share here | Share, the whole Army docket |
|---|---|---|---|
| Art. 128b Domestic violence | 5 | 38% | 26% |
| Art. 93a Prohibited activities with recruit or trainee | 4 | 31% | 2% |
| Art. 92 Failure to obey order or regulation | 2 | 15% | 8% |
| Art. 128 Assault | 2 | 15% | 19% |
| Art. 134 General article | 2 | 15% | 22% |
| Art. 119b Child endangerment | 1 | 8% | 3% |
| Art. 121 Larceny | 1 | 8% | 6% |
| Art. 124 Frauds against the United States | 1 | 8% | 1% |
Confinement
Confinement was part of 85% of the 13 convictions. The median confinement was 5 months, compared with 8 months in the rest of the Army. A quarter of the sentences that included confinement were 1 year or longer.
These are adjudged sentences, set at trial before any plea-agreement cap, clemency, or appeal. Each covers every charge in the case.
Pleas and Forum
In 14 cases the accused pleaded guilty, and 2 contested at least one charge, meaning a not-guilty or mixed plea. The contested share, 12%, is lower than the 20% across the Army. Neither contested case that reached a verdict ended in a full acquittal (0 of 2).
Of the 14 guilty pleas, 11 are recorded with a plea agreement and 3 have no entry. A military judge alone decided all 16 cases, and no case went to a panel of members.
Rank and Court Level
By rank, the accused were 2 junior enlisted members, 11 NCOs, and 3 officers, a more senior group than in the Army as a whole.
Of the 15 cases with a court level listed, 5 were general courts-martial (33%), compared with 66% across the Army. The court level is not listed for 1 case. A special court-martial caps confinement at one year and cannot impose a dishonorable discharge.
Fort Drum and Fort Stewart
Fort Drum and Fort Stewart each tried 20 cases in 2025. The median confinement at Fort Knox, 5 months, was the same as at Fort Drum and about the same as the 6 months at Fort Stewart. Its enlisted punitive discharge share, 40%, was lower than the 94% at Fort Drum and the 100% at Fort Stewart.
| Installation | Cases | Contested | Full acquittals (decided contested) | Median confinement | Punitive discharge (enlisted) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fort Knox | 16 | 12% | 0 of 2 | 5 months | 40% |
| Fort Drum | 20 | 15% | 2 of 2 | 5 months | 94% |
| Fort Stewart | 20 | 5% | 0 of 1 | 6 months | 100% |
What the Data Cannot Show
Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel, not commanders, decide whether to prosecute covered offenses, and new sentencing parameters apply to offenses after December 27, 2023. The records give trial dates, not offense dates, so they cannot show which rules applied to each case. They also do not describe the evidence or the plea terms, or show nonjudicial punishment or administrative separation.
Dates and sources for the law changes mentioned here: UCMJ change timeline.
How We Counted
Every court-martial tried at Fort Knox with a trial date in 2025 (16 cases).
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
- Fort Knox: Court-Martial Data and Trends (hub)
- By Year (hub)
- What Fort Knox Tried in 2024 (previous / next)
- Fort Knox Courts-Martial, 2024–2026: What 52 Cases Show (the whole period)
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Camp Humphreys: 2024
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Camp Humphreys: 2025
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Benning: 2022
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Benning: 2023
- A Year of Courts-Martial at Fort Benning: 2025
- Search every case in Military Trial Results (members)
Military Judges Who Presided Over Cases at Fort Knox, 2025
- Gregory R. Bockin
- Kenneth W. Borgnino
- John H. Cook
- Benjamin W. Hillner
- John R. Longley III
- John R. Maloney
- Daniel L. Mazzone
- Alexander N. Pickands
- Charles L. Pritchard Jr.
- 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 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. This analysis is for education and information only. It is not legal advice, and every case is different.