On a cold December day, the judge’s words washed over me: “… taking her from behind and throwing — putting her onto a bed when she’s screaming no … I make a finding of domestic violence was committed … against Ms. Landry.”
I was a face of military advocacy — an installation-level Military Spouse of the Year, published in national outlets, and praised by Air Force and Space Force leadership for my work on military issues. I believed in this institution and fought publicly to make it better. Then I became one of its victims, and found myself navigating the same broken system I had spent years urging others to trust.
I am one of 1,879 reported sexual assault cases for the Air Force and one of 6,321 victims of military-wide domestic abuse reported in 2024. I am also a civilian victim failed by the military justice system.
Congress enacted the Office of Special Trial Counsel in 2023 to promote accountability and restore trust in the military justice system. This largely removed victimed offenses from commanders and placed them within an independent structure. While well-intentioned, the construct lacks critical oversight and accountability.
While my case sat with the prosecution, I provided evidence, responded to two federal subpoenas, and fully cooperated. Over those 15 months, Air Force OSTC offered me repeated assurances and promises of prosecution. The day before the charging date that had been coordinated with defense counsel and after notification of imminent charging from the mandated Victim / Witness Assistance Program, I learned the case required notification to the secretary of the Air Force. Shortly after, prosecution leadership simply halted the case with no satisfactory explanation, no confirmation of notification, and declined to move forward.
My requests for lead attorney engagement have been declined, leaving no easy route to ask for reconsideration. For cases not covered by special prosecutors, command may advocate action, and a willing prosecutor can move a case forward. My case had a willing prosecutor whose judgment was overruled by his senior leadership.
A civil judge already found that domestic violence occurred, based on sworn testimony and evidence. This is not a “he-said, she-said” case. Air Force Secretary Troy Meink stated in his congressional testimony, “…domestic violence is against the values and threatens the operational readiness in the Department of the Air Force.” However, OSTC and installation lawyers noted on different occasions that misconduct must be evaluated through a marriage lens. This seemingly suggests that some level of abuse may be tolerable in the context of marriage and contradicts Meink, Article 120, and Article 128b of the UCMJ.
Recently, War Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered a review of the military justice system. From my perspective, this review proves essential. Several areas require reform, as civilian victims have fewer protections and considerations because we do not have our own commands to provide support.
First, my victim’s counsel serves as one of the few consistent advocates I’ve had throughout this process. The military should further empower the program and allow victims’ counsels to have stakeholder rights in this process, especially with a civilian victim. Part of those expanded rights could allow victims to have notification before issuing a finalized decision, allowing time to request reconsideration or create a safety plan. When victims lack timely awareness of final decisions, safety may be placed at risk.
Second, civilian victims need a de facto command — a designated senior leader to represent victim interests in command-level decisions. Without one, we have constrained internal advocacy, no command weight for case decisions, and less support with internal programs.
MAX MILLER SUING EX-WIFE EMILY MORENO FOR DEFAMATION OVER DOMESTIC ABUSE CLAIMS
Third, appropriate oversight must be accessible. With commanders, escalation within the chain of command factored into the ability to advocate appropriate action. With Air Force OSTC, my six requests to meet with the lead counsel were denied.
Congress created OSTC and stripped commanders of charging authority, hoping to fix a system that too often let conflicts of interest decide who faced justice. While the system structure has changed, culture and process problems still stand. The solution to true military justice reform is not to merely remove charging decisions from commanders. It must ensure that authority is transparent, accountable, and standardized. The decision-holders may have shifted from military brass to those with legal credentials, but the instinct to close ranks, break promises, and avoid accountability remains.
Aleha Landry is a freelance writer in Colorado. She holds a BS from Colorado Christian University and has written about military issues, including military mental health, voting by mail, and the Ukrainian War.