The Thirty-Sixth Public Meeting of the Defense Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces was held on Thursday, June 27, 2024.
Arlington, VA - The thirty-sixth meeting of the Defense Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces ("DAC-IPAD" or "the Committee"), was held on Thursday, June 27th, 2024 at 3:00 pm.
The DAC-IPAD was established by the Secretary of Defense in February 2016, in accordance with section 546 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, as amended. The Committee is tasked to advise the Secretary of Defense on the investigation, prosecution, and defense of allegations of rape, forcible sodomy, sexual assault, and other sexual misconduct involving members of the Armed Forces based on its review of such cases on an ongoing basis.
During this public meeting the Committee had deliberations and voted on the draft DAC-IPAD Report: Exploring the Race, Ethnicity, and Gender of Military Panels at Courts-Martial and the proposed draft Letter to the Department of Defense General Counsel on Staffing Issues Regarding the Offices of Special Trial Counsel and Trial Defense Services.
The DAC-IPAD welcomes written input from the public on this topics or other issues under its consideration. Written comments must be received by the DAC-IPAD at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting date so that they may be made available to the Committee members for their consideration prior to the meeting. Written comments should be submitted via e-mail to the DAC-IPAD at
More information about the Committee, including the meeting agenda and materials, is available on its website at http://dacipad.whs.mil. In the event the Office of Personnel Management closes the government due to inclement weather or for any other reason, please consult the website for any changes to public meeting dates or time.
DAC-IPAD Recommendations
Report on Reforming Pretrial Procedures and Establishing Uniform Prosecution Standards, June 2023
Recommendation 48a: Amend Article 32 to provide that a preliminary hearing officer’s determination of no probable cause precludes referral of the affected specification(s) to a general court-martial—subject to reconsideration as described in Recommendation 48b—without prejudice to the government to prefer new charges.
Recommendation 48b: Amend Article 32 and Rule for Courts-Martial 405 to permit reconsideration of a preliminary hearing officer’s no-probable-cause determination upon the presentation of newly discovered evidence, or evidence that, in the exercise of due diligence, could not reasonably have been obtained before the original hearing, subject to the following:
- Trial counsel, within 10 days of receiving the preliminary hearing officer’s report, petitions the preliminary hearing officer to reopen the Article 32 preliminary hearing stating the nature of the newly discovered evidence and the reason it was not previously presented. After 10 days, a petition may be made only for good cause shown.
- The preliminary hearing officer shall reconsider their previous no-probable-cause determination one time upon reopening the Article 32 preliminary hearing to receive the evidence as described above. After reconsideration, the preliminary hearing officer’s determination as to whether probable cause exists is final but is without prejudice to the government to prefer new charges.
Recommendation 49: The Secretary of Defense revise Appendix 2.1, Manual for Courts-Martial, to align with the prosecution principles contained in official guidance of the United States Attorney General with respect to disposition of federal criminal cases. These revisions should provide that special trial counsel refer charges to a court-martial, and judge advocates recommend that a convening authority refer charges to a courtmartial, only if they believe that the Service member’s conduct constitutes an offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), and that the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction when viewed objectively by an unbiased factfinder.
Recommendation 50: The Secretary of Defense require all special trial counsel and judge advocates who advise convening authorities to receive training on the newly established prosecution standards in Appendix 2.1 of the Manual for Courts-Martial. The training shall emphasize the principle that referral is appropriate only if these special trial counsel and advisors believe that the Service member’s conduct constitutes an offense under the UCMJ, and that the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction when viewed objectively by an unbiased factfinder.
DAC-IPAD Biennial Victim Collateral Misconduct Assessment, September 2023
Recommendation 51: The DAC-IPAD recommends that Congress amend section 547 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019, Pub. L. No. 115-232, to require the Military Services to report the number of incidents of collateral misconduct by type of offense and adverse action taken, if any, in future victim collateral misconduct reports.
Recommendation 52: The DAC-IPAD recommends that Congress require the Department of Defense (DoD) to provide the Service-specific data collected pursuant to its Safe-to-Report policy in accordance with section 539A of the FY21 NDAA, to the DAC-IPAD at the same time and covering the same time periods that it currently collects and submits victim collateral misconduct data to the DAC-IPAD pursuant to FY19 NDAA section 547 biennial collateral misconduct reports.
Randomizing Court-Martial Panel Member Selection: A Report on Improving an Outdated System, December 2023
Recommendation 53: Congress should amend Article 25(e) to remove the requirement for the convening authority to detail members who “in his opinion, are best qualified” based on “age, education, training, experience, length of service, and judicial temperament.”
Finding 1: At the time that the Article 25(e) “best qualified” criteria were established in the UCMJ in 1950, military judges did not preside over courts-martial and panel members also served as the sentencing authority. Changes in the law have resulted in the establishment of a trial judiciary with military judges presiding at every court-martial. In addition, military judges will soon serve as sentencing authority in all but capital cases, reducing the panel’s role to determining the guilt or innocence of the accused, as is the case in federal and most state courts. This tailoring of the panel’s role to fact-finding eliminates the rationale for the “best qualified” criteria in Article 25(e).
Finding 2: The Article 25(e) criteria and “best qualified” mandate result in courts-martial panels composed primarily of officers and senior enlisted Service members. There is no longer a military justification to support this composition. Seniority relative to the accused sufficiently accounts for the military’s hierarchical rank structure.
Recommendation 54: Congress should retain the Article 25(e)(4) requirement for the convening authority to detail members randomly selected under regulations prescribed by the President. The qualifying words “to the maximum extent practicable” should be removed.
Finding 3: Removal of the subjective “best qualified” criteria, along with implementation of a process to randomize member selection, will help eliminate the perception that the convening authority is selecting those members most likely to reach a certain result and thus will increase trust and confidence in the military justice system.
Finding 4: Randomizing the court-martial member selection process is not compatible with the Article 25(d) requirement for the convening authority to select members who are “best qualified” according to existing criteria.
Finding 5: Officers and enlisted members of all grades are qualified to serve on courts-martial panels.
Recommendation 55: The Joint Service Committee on Military Justice should draft an amendment to the Rules for Courts-Martial, pursuant to the requirement in Article 25(e)(4), to provide for a randomized courtmartial panel member selection process utilizing the Military Services’ personnel and pay systems to select the members. This process should preclude the convening authority or other members of command or the judge advocate office from hand selecting members. In addition to the statutory qualification requirements, the randomized selection process should provide for diversity of members based on grade.
Finding 6: The Military Services have the capability to use their personnel and pay systems to generate a randomized pool of Service members for court-martial duty based on objective criteria. This technology will enable increased efficiency, fairness, and objectivity in the panel selection process.
Finding 7: A purely random selection of Service members would result in a panel primarily consisting of junior members. Selecting panel members of different grades will lead to a more diverse panel with regard to age and experience.
Recommendation 56: The Secretary of Defense should direct that a pilot project be initiated to create a court administrator position to be responsible for the panel member selection process—rather than the staff judge advocate or command staff.
Finding 8: A randomized method of panel selection that removes from the convening authority or others in the chain of command or judge advocate office the responsibility to administer the selection process will provide more transparency and thereby increase Service members’ and the public’s trust in the court-martial process.
Recommendation 57: Congress should amend Article 25 to explicitly give convening authorities the authority to determine whether randomly selected Service members are available prior to being detailed to a court-martial panel and retain the authority in Article 25 to exempt or excuse individuals for operational requirements or personal reasons after they have been detailed.
Finding 9: In the interest of military readiness, convening authorities must retain availability and excusal determination authority.
Recommendation 58: The Joint Service Committee on Military Justice should draft an amendment to the Rules for Courts-Martial to provide a transparent method for convening authorities to document availability and excusal determinations.
Finding 10: Documentation of the bases for excusal and availability determinations increases transparency and the perception of fairness, and minimizes the risk of abuse of the process. Recommendation 59: Congress should retain the requirement in Article 25(e)(1) that when it can be avoided, no accused Service member may be tried by a court-martial in which any member is junior to the accused in rank or grade.
Finding 11: The Article 25 requirement that court-martial members be senior in rank and grade to the accused serves a specific military purpose to maintain the hierarchical rank structure of the military.
Recommendation 60: Congress should amend Article 25 to add a two-year time-in-service requirement for court-martial panel member eligibility. For Service Academy cadets and midshipman, the calculation of time in service would commence upon commissioning.
Finding 12: A minimum length of service requirement is supported by specific military purposes: to ensure that initial military training is completed and to give Service members a greater understanding of military culture.
Finding 13: A minimum length of service requirement of two years eliminates the need to require a minimum age for serving as a panel member.
Recommendation 61: The Joint Service Committee on Military Justice should draft an amendment to the Rules for Courts-Martial to establish uniform criteria for automatic exemption from serving as a court-martial member. For example, federal courts require jury members to be proficient in English, have no disqualifying mental or physical condition, and not be subject to felony charges or be convicted of a felony. The amendment should delegate authority to each Military Department Secretary to promulgate regulations that establish additional bases for automatic exemption. To ensure maximum transparency, any additional exempting criteria established by the Military Departments should be made public through the Federal Register and by other appropriate means.
Finding 14: Federal courts require jury members to be proficient in English, have no disqualifying mental or physical condition, and not be subject to felony charges or be convicted of a felony. Department of Defense accession regulations ensure that all Service members are proficient in English and have no disqualifying mental or physical condition.
Recommendation 62: Congress should amend Article 25(e)(2) and (3) to remove the requirement that the convening authority detail panel members at the time the court-martial is convened. Instead, it should provide that the convening authority must detail panel members within a reasonable time prior to the swearing in of the detailed members and the assembly of the court-martial.
Finding 15: The requirement to detail members at the time a case is referred to court-martial often results in excusal and replacement of a significant number of the originally and subsequently detailed members, creates an administrative burden, and does not serve a military purpose, given the length of time from referral to empanelment and the low percentage of courts-martial in which the accused elects to be tried by members.
Finding 16: Providing the flexibility to detail members later in the process will enable the convening authority to determine more accurately the appropriate number of qualified members to detail to a specific court-martial.
Recommendations for a Uniform Policy for Sharing Information with Victims and Their Counsel, December 2023
Recommendation 63: The Joint Service Committee on Military Justice should draft an amendment to the Rules for Courts-Martial to establish uniformity with respect to the sharing of the following information with a victim and their counsel, if represented:
- All recorded and written statements of the victim to investigators or government counsel.
- The record of any forensic examination of the person or property of the victim, including the record of any sexual assault medical forensic exam of the victim that is in the possession of investigators or the government.
- Any medical record of the victim that is in the possession of investigators or the government.
The rules should specify the government’s obligation to inform individuals that these three categories of information, including copies of statements, recordings, or documents, shall be made available promptly upon request by a victim or their counsel, subject to the following conditions:
- The prosecutor shall disclose the information requested promptly, in consultation with the military criminal investigation organization (MCIO), unless otherwise prohibited by law; or
- Unless a military judge or military magistrate finds, upon a written submission by the prosecutor demonstrating good cause, that disclosure of the record of a forensic examination would impede or compromise an ongoing investigation. The prosecutor shall state in writing any reasons for nondisclosure and may do so in camera to a military judge or magistrate.
- The rules should ensure that, in any case, the policy must not be construed to interfere with the provision of health care to a victim or with a victim’s access to veterans’ benefits.
Recommendation 64: The Joint Service Committee on Military Justice should draft an amendment to the Rules for Courts-Martial to provide a process for issuance of a protective order by a military judge or military magistrate, upon a showing of good cause, that disclosure of the record of a forensic examination would impede or compromise an ongoing investigation, to accompany disclosures to victims and counsel before referral of charges, in accordance with Article 30a, UCMJ.
Recommendation 65: The Secretary of Defense should modify DoD instructions to align with the new rules for sharing these three categories of information.
DAC-IPAD Committee Members
Marcia Anderson
Marcia Anderson was the Clerk of Court for the Bankruptcy Court Western District of Wisconsin starting in 1998 until her retirement in 2019. In this role she was responsible for the management of the budget and administration of bankruptcy cases for 44 counties in western Wisconsin. Major General Anderson recently retired in 2016 from a distinguished career in the U.S. Army Reserve after 36 years of service, which included serving as the Deputy Commanding General of the Army’s Human Resources Command at Fort Knox, Kentucky. In 2011, she became the first African American woman in the history of the U.S. Army to achieve the rank of major general. Her service culminated with an assignment at the Pentagon as the Deputy Chief, Army Reserve (DCAR). As the DCAR, she represented the Chief, Army Reserve, and had oversight for the planning, programming, and resource management for the execution of an Army Reserve budget of $8 billion that supported more than 225,000 Army Reserve soldiers, civilians, and their families. She is a graduate of the Rutgers University School of Law, the U.S. Army War College, and Creighton University.
Martha Bashford
Martha Bashford served in the New York County District Attorney’s Office starting in 1979 until her retirement in 2020. At the time of her retirement, she was the chief of the New York County District Attorney’s Office Sex Crimes Unit, which was the first of its kind in the country. She served in this role starting in 2011. Previously she was co-chief of the Forensic Sciences/Cold Case Unit, where she examined unsolved homicide cases that might now be solvable through DNA analysis. Ms. Bashford was also co-chief of the DNA Cold Case Project, which used DNA technology to investigate and prosecute unsolved sexual assault cases. She indicted assailants identified through the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) and obtained John Doe DNA profile indictments to stop the statute of limitations where no suspect had yet been identified. She is a Fellow in the American Academy of Forensic Sciences. Ms. Bashford graduated from Barnard College in 1976 (summa cum laude) and received her J.D. degree from Yale Law School in 1979. She is a Fellow in both the American College of Trial Lawyers and the American Academy of Forensic Sciences.
William E. Cassara
William E. Cassara is a former Army prosecutor, defense counsel and appellate counsel, with more than 30 years of military law experience. Mr. Cassara holds a law degree from University of Baltimore and an undergraduate degree in business administration from Florida State University. He is a former professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law and the University of South Carolina School of Law. Mr. Cassara has been in private military law practice since 1996 focusing on court-martial appeals, discharge upgrades, security clearance and all other administrative military law matters.
Margaret “Meg” Garvin, M.A., J.D
Margaret “Meg” Garvin, M.A., J.D., is the executive director of the National Crime Victim Law Institute (NCVLI), where she has worked since 2003. She is also a clinical professor of law at Lewis & Clark Law School, where NCVLI is located. In 2014, Ms. Garvin was appointed to the Victims Advisory Group of the United States Sentencing Commission, and during 2013–14, she served on the Victim Services Subcommittee of the Response Systems to Adult Sexual Assault Crimes Panel of the U.S. Department of Defense. She has served as co-chair of the American Bar Association’s Criminal Justice Section Victims Committee, as co-chair of the Oregon Attorney General’s Crime Victims’ Rights Task Force, and as a member of the Legislative & Public Policy Committee of the Oregon Attorney General’s Sexual Assault Task Force. Ms. Garvin received the John W. Gillis Leadership Award from National Parents of Murdered Children in August 2015. Prior to joining NCVLI, Ms. Garvin practiced law in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and clerked for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. She received her bachelor of arts degree from the University of Puget Sound, her master of arts degree in communication studies from the University of Iowa, and her J.D. from the University of Minnesota.
Suzanne Goldberg
Suzanne Goldberg has served in the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights since day one of the Biden-Harris administration as Acting Assistant Secretary (January – October 2021) and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Strategic Operations and Outreach. Secretary Goldberg brings extensive experience in civil rights leadership, with expertise in gender and sexuality law, and many years as a university administrator and faculty member. Before joining the U.S. Department of Education, she was the inaugural Executive Vice President for University Life at Columbia University and on the faculty of Columbia Law School, where she is on a public service leave from her role as the Herbert and Doris Wechsler Clinical Professor of Law at Columbia Law School. She founded the Law School’s Sexuality and Gender Law Clinic, the first of its kind in the nation, and was co-founder and co-director of the Law School’s Center for Gender and Sexuality Law. She earlier served as a senior staff attorney with Lambda Legal, a national legal organization committed to the full recognition of the civil rights of LGBT people and people living with HIV. Secretary Goldberg holds a law degree with honors from Harvard University and a bachelor’s degree with honors from Brown University and was a Fulbright Fellow at the National University of Singapore.
Judge Paul W. Grimm
Judge Paul W. Grimm serves as a District Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. He was appointed to the Court on December 10, 2012. Previously, he was appointed to the Court as a Magistrate Judge in February 1997 and served as Chief Magistrate Judge from 2006 through 2012. In September 2009, he was appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States to serve as a member of the Advisory Committee for the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Additionally, Judge Grimm is an adjunct professor of law at the University of Maryland School of Law, where he teaches evidence, and also has taught trial evidence, pretrial civil procedure, and scientific evidence. He also has been an adjunct professor of law at the University of Baltimore School of Law, where he taught a course regarding the discovery of and pretrial practices associated with electronically stored evidence. Before joining the Court, Judge Grimm was in private practice in Baltimore for thirteen years, during which time he handled commercial litigation. He also served as an Assistant Attorney General for the State of Maryland, an Assistant State’s Attorney for Baltimore County, Maryland, and a Captain in the United States Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps. While on active duty in the Army, Judge Grimm served as a defense attorney and prosecutor while assigned to the JAG Office at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, and thereafter as an action officer in the Office of the Judge Advocate General of the Army (Administrative Law Division), The Pentagon. In 2001, Judge Grimm retired as a Lieutenant Colonel from the United States Army Reserve. Judge Grimm received his undergraduate degree from the University of California Davis (summa cum laude), his J.D. from the University of New Mexico School of Law (magna cum laude, Order of the Coif) and his LLM from Duke Law School.
A.J. Kramer
A.J. Kramer has been the Federal Public Defender for the District of Columbia since 1990. He was the Chief Assistant Federal Public Defender in Sacramento, California, from 1987 to 1990, and an Assistant Federal Public Defender in San Francisco, California, from 1980 to 1987. He was a law clerk for the Honorable Procter Hug, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Reno, Nevada, from 1979 to 1980. He received a B.A. from Stanford University in 1975, and a J.D. from the University of California at Berkeley in 1979. Mr. Kramer taught legal research and writing at Hastings Law School from 1983 to 1988. He is a permanent faculty member of the National Criminal Defense College in Macon, Georgia. He is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers. He was a member of the Judicial Conference of the United States’ Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules and the ABA Criminal Justice System Council from 2014 - 2020. He was a member of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Scientific Approaches to Understanding and Maximizing the Validity and Reliability of Eyewitness Identification in Law Enforcement and the Courts. In December 2013, he received the Annice M. Wagner Pioneer Award from the Bar Association of the District of Columbia. In 2019, he received the American Inns of Court Professionalism award from the D.C. Circuit.
Jennifer Gentile Long, M.G.A., J.D
Jennifer Gentile Long (M.G.A., J.D.) is CEO and co-founder of AEquitas and an adjunct professor at Georgetown University Law School. She served as an Assistant District Attorney in Philadelphia specializing in sexual violence, child abuse, and intimate partner violence. She was a senior attorney and then Director of the National Center for the Prosecution of Violence Against Women at the American Prosecutors Research Institute. She publishes articles, delivers trainings, and provides expert case consultation on issues relevant to gender-based violence and human trafficking nationally and internationally. Ms. Long serves as an Advisory Committee member of the American Law Institute’s Model Penal Code Revision to Sexual Assault and Related Laws and as an Editorial Board member of the Civic Research Institute for the Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Reports. She graduated from Lehigh University and the University of Pennsylvania Law School and Fels School of Government.
Jenifer Markowitz
Jenifer Markowitz is a forensic nursing consultant who specializes in issues related to sexual assault, domestic violence, and strangulation, including medical-forensic examinations and professional education and curriculum development. In addition to teaching at workshops and conferences around the world, she provides expert testimony, case consultation, and technical assistance and develops training materials, resources, and publications. A forensic nurse examiner since 1995, Dr. Markowitz regularly serves as faculty and as an expert consultant for the Judge Advocate General’s (JAG) Corps for the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. Past national activities include working with the Army Surgeon General’s office to develop a curriculum for sexual assault medical-forensic examiners working in military treatment facilities (subsequently adopted by the Navy and Air Force); with the U.S. Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) to develop a national protocol and training standards for sexual assault medical- forensic examinations; with the Peace Corps to assess the agency’s multidisciplinary response to sexual assault; with the U.S. Department of Defense to revise the military’s sexual assault evidence collection kit and corresponding documentation forms; and as an Advisory Board member for the National Sexual Violence Resource Center. In 2004, Dr. Markowitz was named a Distinguished Fellow of the International Association of Forensic Nurses (IAFN); in 2012, she served as IAFN’s President.
Ralph Martinez
Sergeant Major Ralph Martinez, US Army, retired, completed 34 years of active duty in the U.S. Army. During his career SGM Martinez held several key leadership positions at major commands which include the United States Army Forces Command, United States Central Command, United States European Command, and United States Army Africa Command. He completed five combat deployments in support of Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom and deployed in support of Operation Joint Forge. SGM Martinez’s last assignment on active duty was to serve as the nineth U.S. Army Chaplain Corps Regimental Sergeant Major (RSGM). During his tenure as the RSGM he played a significant role in the start of the Army’s Spiritual Fitness Initiative. He is a graduate of the Executive Leaders Course, U.S. Army War College and earned the Bachelor of Science in Liberal Studies with a concentration in Leadership from Purdue University Global. Since retiring, SGM Martinez has been employed by CACI International as a Senior Advisor/Consultant currently supporting Department of the Army, G-6 and serves as Board Member on the U.S. Army Chaplain Corps Regimental Association. SGM Martinez has been married to his spouse Laura of Orlando, Florida, for over 34 years. Together they have one daughter – Sarah (spouse Juan), one son – Nicholas; and one granddaughter – Elizabeth.
Jennifer O’Connor
Jennifer O’Connor is the Vice President, Associate General Counsel and Sector Counsel for Northrop Grumman’s mission systems sector. Prior to joining Northrop Grumman, Ms. O’Connor served as the General Counsel for the Department of Defense. In that role, she was the chief legal officer of the Department and the principal legal advisor to the Secretary of Defense. Earlier in her career, she served in numerous positions and agencies throughout the federal government. Her past positions include service in the Obama administration as Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy White House Counsel responsible for the litigation, oversight and investigations portfolios; Senior Counsel at the Department of Health and Human Services; and as Counselor to the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service. Ms. O’Connor also worked in the Clinton Administration as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy at the Department of Labor, Special Assistant to the President in the Office of the White House Deputy Chief of Staff; Special Assistant to the President in the Office of Cabinet Affairs; and as Deputy Director of the White House Office of Management and Administration. Ms. O’Connor received a Bachelor of Arts degree from Harvard University, a Masters in Public Administration from Columbia University’s School of International Public Affairs, and a Juris Doctor degree from Georgetown University.
BGen James (Jim) Schwenk
BGen James (Jim) Schwenk was commissioned as an infantry officer in the Marine Corps in 1970. After serving as a platoon commander and company commander, he attended law school at the Washington College of Law, American University, and became a judge advocate. As a judge advocate he served in the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, and Headquarters, Marine Corps; he served as Staff Judge Advocate for Marine Forces Atlantic, II Marine Expeditionary Force, Marine Corps Air Bases West, and several other commands; and he participated in several hundred courts-martial and administrative discharge boards. He represented the Department of Defense on the television show American Justice, and represented the Marine Corps in a Mike Wallace segment on 60 Minutes. He retired from the Marine Corps in 2000. Upon retirement from the Marine Corps, BGen Schwenk joined the Office of the General Counsel of the Department of Defense as an associate deputy general counsel. He was a legal advisor in the Pentagon on 9/11, and he was the primary drafter from the Department of Defense of many of the emergency legal authorities used in Afghanistan, Iraq, the United States, and elsewhere since that date. He was the principal legal advisor for the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” for the provision of benefits to same-sex spouses of military personnel, in the review of the murders at Fort Hood in 2009, and on numerous DoD working groups in the area of military personnel policy. He worked extensively with the White House and Congress, and he retired in 2014 after 49 years of federal service.
Detective Lisa Shepperd
Sergeant Lisa Shepperd is a twelve-year veteran of the Prince George's County Police Department, with nine years of extensive investigative experience. During her tenure with the Prince George's County Police Department, she has handled hundreds of investigations including investigations into sexual assault and child sexual abuse. This includes writing and obtaining legal authority for several hundred search warrants, obtaining and determining probable cause for more than 100 arrest warrants, and conducting countless victim, witness, and suspect interviews. Her experience extends to both patrol and investigative best practices and includes the handling of domestic violence, child abuse, sexual assault, serial rape cases, and homicide cases. Sergeant Shepperd successfully worked with local prosecutors to prepare court cases and has testified in a wide variety of cases resulting in numerous convictions.
Judge Karla N. Smith (Chair)
Judge Karla N. Smith (Chair) was appointed to the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, Maryland in December 2014 by Governor Martin O’Malley. Judge Smith served on the District Court of Maryland from August 2012 until her appointment to the Circuit Court. In addition, Judge Smith serves as the Judiciary’s representative on the State Council on Child Abuse and Neglect; the Operations Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee on Equal Justice; and she represents the Circuit Court on the Montgomery County Domestic Violence Coordinating Council (DVCC). Prior to her appointment, Judge Smith worked as a prosecutor for over 15 years. For five years, Judge Smith served as the Chief of the Family Violence Division of the Montgomery County State’s Attorney’s Office. Additionally, she sat on the Montgomery County Child Fatality Review Team; the Multidisciplinary Case Review Team for Child Abuse and Neglect; the Elder and Vulnerable Adult Abuse Task Force, which she chaired; the Interagency Sex Offender Management Team; Domestic Violence Case Review Team; and the Montgomery County Teen Dating Taskforce. It was during this time that Judge Smith was integral to the development of the Montgomery County Family Justice Center and the drafting and passage of a criminal child neglect statute that was signed into law in 2011. Judge Smith received her Bachelor of Arts degree from the University of Maryland and her Juris Doctor from the University of Virginia. A life-long resident of Montgomery County and a product of Montgomery County Public Schools, Judge Smith currently lives in Bethesda with her husband and three sons.
Cassia Spohn
Cassia Spohn is a Regents Professor in the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Arizona State University and an Affiliate Professor of Law at ASU’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. She is a Fellow of the American Society of Criminology, the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, and the Western Society of Criminology. She is the recipient of numerous academic awards, including the University of Nebraska Outstanding Research and Creative Activity Award, the W.E.B. DuBois Award for Contributions to Research on Crime and Race/Ethnicity, the Lifetime Achievement Award from the American Society of Criminology’s Division on Corrections and Sentencing, and Arizona State University’s Faculty Achievement Award for Defining-Edge Research in the Social Sciences. Dr. Spohn’s research interests include the correlates of federal and state sentencing outcomes, prosecutorial decision making, the intersections of race, ethnicity, gender, crime and justice, and sexual assault case processing decisions. She is the author of eight books, including How Do Judges Decide: The Search for Fairness and Justice in Punishment and Policing and Prosecuting Sexual Assault: Inside the Criminal Justice System. She is the author of more than 140 peer-reviewed publications. Dr. Spohn currently is working on a National Science Foundation-funded project evaluating the impact of Arizona’s recent ban on peremptory challenges and a series of papers on the imposition of life sentences in the U.S. District Courts.
Meghan Tokash
Meghan Tokash is a trial attorney with the Human Trafficking Prosecution Unit, Criminal Section, Civil Rights Division at Department of Justice. Prior to her current position, she served as an Assistant United States Attorney at the Department of Justice. Previously, she served as a special victim prosecutor in the U.S. Army Judge Advocate General’s Corps for eight years, litigating cases related to homicide, rape, sexual assault, domestic violence and child abuse. She worked in the Army’s first Special Victim Unit at the Fort Hood Criminal Investigation Division Office. She deployed to Iraq as the senior trial counsel for U.S. Forces Iraq, and prosecuted special victim cases across U.S. Army Europe and U.S. Army Central Command. Ms. Tokash was an attorney advisor for the Judicial Proceedings Panel prior to her 2017 appointment by Secretary of Defense Ash Carter to serve on the Defense Advisory Committee on the Investigation, Prosecution and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces. In 2021, Ms. Tokash served on the 90-day Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military that was established by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin at the direction of President Biden.
Judge Walton
Judge Walton was born in Donora, Pennsylvania. In 1971, he graduated from West Virginia State University, where he was a three year letterman on the football team and played on the 1968 nationally ranked conference championship team. Judge Walton received his law degree from the American University, Washington College of Law, in 1974. Judge Walton assumed his current position as a U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia in 2001. He was also appointed by President George W. Bush in 2004 as the Chair of the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission, a commission created by Congress to identify methods to reduce prison rape. The U.S. Attorney General substantially adopted the Commission’s recommendations for implementation in federal prisons; other federal, state, and local officials throughout the country are considering adopting the recommendations. U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist appointed Judge Walton in 2005 to the federal judiciary’s Criminal Law Committee, on which he served until 2011. In 2007, Chief Justice John Roberts appointed Judge Walton to a seven-year term as a Judge of the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and he was subsequently appointed Presiding Judge in 2013. He completed his term on that court on May 18, 2014. Upon completion of his appointment to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, Judge Walton was appointed by Chief Justice Roberts to serve as a member of the Judicial Conference Committee on Court Administration and Case Management. Judge Walton traveled to Russia in 1996 to instruct Russian judges on criminal law in a program funded by the U.S. Department of Justice and the American Bar Association’s Central and East European Law Initiative Reform Project. He is also an instructor in Harvard Law School’s Advocacy Workshop and a faculty member at the National Judicial College in Reno, Nevada.