. Findings: In accordance with AR 15-6, I conducted a(n) Administrative Investigation and made the following findings:

a. The allegation that SGT Gallaga and SGT Colflesh were engaged in an adulterous relationship is substantiated by a greater weight of the evidence (Exhibits H and O). Both suspected admitted through a third party to this violation which means that they violated UCMJ Article 134.

i) In order to violate Article 134 it must be demonstrated 1) that the accused wrongfully had sexual intercourse with a certain person; 2) that, at the time, the accused or the other person was married to someone else; 3) that, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline …show more content…
There is sufficient evidence that substantiate prove that CSM Hill verbally counseled both Soldier that they were not allowed to violate the no contact order for any reason (Exhibit A, C, D, N and Q). SGT Colflesh was counseled on DA4856 by SFC Hardge and briefed on the stipulations of the no contact order and later counseled by CPT Beatty on a DA 4856 for no contact with SGT Gallaga (Exhibit E and G).

iii) There is evidence that shows SGT Gallaga and SGT Colflesh violated the no contact order through via text message (Exhibit K). There is evidence provide by a witness (Exhibit H and F) that states she seen SGT Colflesh standing in the door of his old room while staring at the door of SGT Gallaga room. This incident was noted to have happened after the no contact order was issued and after SGT Colflesh moved out his old room (Exhibit E, X and Y).

iv) I found that some of the actions of SGT Colflesh violating the no contact order may have been provoked by actions of SGT Gallaga. Evidence provided by witness statements and text messages provided will show that SGT Gallaga may have been using social media and unit resources to discredit SGT Colflesh.

c. The allegation that SGT Gallaga misused her eMIPLO privileges to change the marital status of SGT Colflesh is substantiated by a greater weight of the evidence