Military News, News From Iraq & Afghanistan - Military Times

Adultery trial for supply officer begins

A Navy supply officer formerly with a West Coast-based coastal warfare unit is scheduled to stand trial Wednesday in San Diego on charges that she had an affair with a married junior officer and lied about it later, according to charge sheets.

But the officer says her prosecution is part of a yearlong reprisal by her command after she made complaints about financial misconduct by military officials and civilian contractors within Navy Expeditionary Combat Command.

Lt. Cmdr. Syneeda Penland, 36, is charged with adultery, indecent acts, conduct unbecoming an officer and making a false official statement. She could face as many as 16 years in prison and be dismissed from the Navy if convicted on all counts.

Her defense lawyer, Marine Capt. Patrick Callahan, said it was unusual for an adultery case to be taken to a general court-martial, where any finding of guilt, even on a lesser charge, would be a felony conviction that would follow Penland for life. It’s also unusual, he said, that the adultery charge is not accompanied by more serious charges, and because of his client’s rank and nearness to retirement. Penland has served 19 years.

Penland is single. The man with whom she is alleged to have had an affair is a married lieutenant junior grade, and is a prosecution witness, Callahan said. Penland, in a telephone interview with Navy Times, denied having a sexual relationship with the man.

The trial is expected to last four days.

Wayne Johnson, a retired Navy lawyer, said that since Penland refused mast, her superiors had a great deal of discretion as to how they would deal with her, but he also said the general court-martial in an adultery case was unusual but not unheard of.

Johnson said adultery cases frequently are based on witness testimony — usually that of the second person in the relationship, who is often granted immunity in exchange for his or her testimony.

Johnson said that if a sexual relationship were proven, prosecutors would also have to show that it was prejudicial to good order and discipline in order to win an adultery conviction. Since Penland and the man were both officers, were not members of the same command, and are not alleged to have carried on the affair in public, that might be difficult to prove, he said.

Lt. Cmdr. Kevin Messer, lead prosecutor in the case, did not return calls requesting comment.

Penland, a supply officer who was commissioned through Officer Candidate School in 1997 after serving seven years as an enlisted sailor, said she was warned several times by superiors to stop questioning financial practices within San Diego-based Naval Coastal Warfare Group 1 in the months after she arrived at the command in 2006.

She said her command failed to win approval from Naval Installations Command and Naval Facilities Command before completing multimillion dollar construction and renovation projects at the Navy Outlying Landing Field in San Diego; hired contractors in government positions without first advertising those positions to the public; and allowing civilian contractors to supervise military personnel and approve government contracts.

Steve McDonald, director of Business Development for the contractor, Logistics Support Inc., declined to comment on Penland’s allegations. A Navy spokeswoman at the Pentagon was unable to provide responses to the allegations as of Tuesday afternoon.

In a separate command investigation completed by NECC officials regarding allegations of racial and gender discrimination — Penland is black — by her command, a Navy captain suggested that Penland raised the allegations only after learning that she was facing adultery charges. The report was obtained by Navy Times. Penland turned down mast on March 26, and was referred to court-martial on June 5.

Penland filed a complaint with Rep. Bob Filner, D-Calif., on Feb. 21, a complaint with the NECC inspector general March 30, and a second complaint with the Defense Department inspector general April 10. Her first complaint to Filner occurred more than one month before she went to mast.

As of Tuesday afternoon, NECC had not responded to requests under the Freedom of Information Act for investigation findings. Penland provided documents to prove that she requested the investigation. A spokesman for the DoD inspector general’s office said he was unable to provide results because its investigation of Penland’s allegations is still underway.

Callahan said the fact that the NECC investigation was not yet completed more than a year after it was filed was unusual because inspector general investigations involving complaints of command reprisal are normally completed within six months.

Callahan said he asked that the trial be postponed until the IG investigations are concluded, but trial judge Cmdr. Robert Redcliff denied that request.