Here is an update on the BGEN SInclair Art. 32 hearing from the Fayetteville Observer:

The woman at the center of the allegations against Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Allen Sinclair testified today about their affair.

She said she fell in love with Sinclair in Iraq, where the two began sleeping together.

“I felt like a silly school girl,” she said during a hearing on Fort Bragg. . . .

The woman testified she was originally led to believe Sinclair was in an open relationship with his wife. She said she thought she was going to meet Sinclair’s wife, but found out later that was not going to happen. . . .The woman said Sinclair kept coming up with excuses for not divorcing his wife, including his children and saying his family was moving from Germany.

The woman said her relationship with Sinclair started during their 2008 deployment to Iraq. At the time, she said, she was a lieutenant. The woman said the relationship caused friction between her and members of her unit in Iraq, and she was always terrified someone would know what was happening.

To keep the trysts secret, Sinclair forced her to urinate in garbage cans in his room, which she said she found humiliating.

She said she tried to end the relationship at one point, but she said Sinclair told her not to say anything or he would kill her.

“He said that he would kill my family and that he could do it in a way that nobody would know it was him,” she testified.

That was in Iraq, and it was the only time Sinclair threatened her, she said.

The woman said she repeatedly tried to end the relationship. At times during her testimony, the woman spoke through tears, and she was visibly shaking.

More later.

13 Responses to “Officer Testifies About Affair in BGEN Sinclair Art. 32”

  1. publius-publicola says:

    To quote Admiral Tarrant in The Bridges at Toko-Ri, “Where do we get such men?”  In my opinion, the general officer selection process in the Army needs some serious revision.  And where was the general’s aide-de-camp when all of this was going on? 

  2. k fischer says:

    “Sinclair allegedly had the women send him sexually explicit photos and videos of them, prosecutors said.”

    Considering these women were officers, does anybody really think that in today’s Army even a one star General would get away with ordering female officers against their wishes to send him sexually explicit photos AND videos of themselves?  Sounds like these women were more than willing to engage the General in these acts.

    “I felt like I knew he didn’t care about me, that I couldn’t lie to myself any more, that I couldn’t do it any more,” she said.

    The captain said she angrily responded to those emails, telling the woman that she hoped she didn’t believe she was the only woman Sinclair was sleeping with.
    “When I saw those emails I felt so stupid,” she said.
    The captain said she knew she would get in trouble for reporting the relationship. But, she said, “I had wrong in it, too.”
    She said she did not expect things to go this far.
    She said she feels like a horrible person, and she is nervous about the media attention.
    She also said that while she is afraid of Sinclair, she still loves him. 

    Translation:  This is a really strong adultery case that has been elevated to a weak sexual assault case.  Notice that these facts were brought out on the Government’s direct.  She hasn’t even been crossed, yet.  And, if the Government in this case is starting off with their strongest witness, which they should, then this case seems even weaker.  

    And, I know I’m going to get hammered for saying this, but do you really think an officer who sends naked photos and videos of herself to a GO in front of whom she urinated into garbage cans in his tent is going to say “No” to anything?  I would submit that for that particular female, a resounding, “NO!  I don’t want to give you oral pleasure!!!!!” combined with using a little too much teeth might be in order. Merely crying, particularly after a fight about your illicit relationship, is not going to cut show that you did not consent.

    And I love how military victims always explain that they did not report the assault because they were threatened and afraid.  He said he was going to kill me and my family.  Yet, how does it get reported?  By the woman who was sooooo afraid of her and her family getting killed that she did not report these horrific acts, yet she is still in love with her rapist.  Oh, and it just so happened that she mustered the courage to report it only after she found out that she wasn’t the only one he was hooking up with because she was rummaging through his e-mails, probably in violation of Federal Law. 

  3. Lieber says:


    the explicit photos and videos may be from the other 4 women…who are not alleging assault…these may be strong frat/adultery (I could care less about adultery but the CoC issues are serious) specs.

    agreed that the defense will have credibility arguments on the 120 (unless there is additional evidence) due to the victim only coming forward after finding out she wasn’t the only one.

    but this is what 32s are for.

  4. k fischer says:

    i don’t know if these facts are what 32’s are for.   A thorough CID investigation would probably do the trick on this particular female officer.

    It sounds like she has been poorly coached or that she has an agenda.  

    Explanation as to why she delayed reporting:  He threatened to kill me and my family.  
    Explanation why it wasn’t revenge when she did report it after reading his e-mails: I don’t want revenge because I still love him.
    You still loved him even after he forcibly sodomized you, threatened to kill you and your family, and lied to you?  Begin crying and shaking. 

  5. Lieber says:

    “A thorough CID investigation”

    Isn’t that like a unicorn?

  6. k fischer says:

    No, more like an albino buffalo. 

  7. Lieber says:


    “And where was the general’s aide-de-camp when all of this was going on?”  If you read the latest update…apparently sleeping with the general.

  8. Bridget Wilson says:

    The adultery/frat stuff-not so interesting. And no doubt some pretty solid 120 impeachment material. Although the “I will kill you if you: try to end the relationship or tell anyone is a different issue if true.

  9. Just Sayin' says:

    Sounds like a case of “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. 
    Frat is frat, to be sure, and the General used poor judgment and ought to be held accountable…for frat.  But accusing someone of sexual assault because you are butthurt (no pun intended) that a married man didn’t leave his wife after using you like a deployment clearing barrel is pretty weak.
    Woman screws married man thinking he’d leave his family and they would run off into the sunset, only to learn she was used.  In other news, water is wet.  Details at 11.

  10. Bill C says:

    On a curioser note, there has been no mention of the names of his civilian counsel. LTC Thompson, the RDC from Fort Bragg, has been quoted in the papers, but not his civilian attorneys.  They have been named. I find it very odd that the media would all leave this detail out. 

  11. k fischer says:


    Who are his civilian counsel?  I wonder if they advised against him doing his Al Gore impression:

    During the testimony, Sinclair repeatedly rolled his eyes, sighed audibly and stared at his former aide from the defense table.;paginationWrap
    I can only hope that this GO sent a case as questionable as this up to the old man.  Otherwise, it sounds like he is getting railroaded. 

  12. Bill C says:

    Kyle: I have no idea.  There appears to literally be a gag order. 

  13. WWJD says:

    @publius-publicola the Army does not need to review its selection process.  This creature s an oddity, one that will most likely not be duplicated in some time.  The short of it:  Its not a perfect system and a few dirtbags leak thru.
    Agree this looks like a woman scorned tale.  She did not get the General to divorce his Wife for her, now all of a sudden she was humiliated and threatened.
    I’ve changed my mind about this guy.  Typical jerk using his authority – yes.  Should be forced retired and reduced to last satisfactory grade.  But court martialed?  No.  Now Fiscus got only an Article 15….
    HERE IS A QUESTION:  If the facts of this case be true, would you rate this officers conduct worse than Fiscus who escaped with a slap on the wrist?