The Rank That Ruined Him: When Command Influence Crosses the Line
It starts, sometimes, with something as ordinary as a handshake or a shared laugh on temporary duty.
For one West Point cadet, young, driven, and following the rules and it started on a trip to Hilo, Hawaii. Her superior officer, Col. William Wright, was not just a respected leader, he was her leader. She couldn’t have known then that his words, actions, and decisions would derail more than just trust in the system. They could have cost her everything.
Col. Wright, formerly director of the Geospatial Information Science Program at the U.S. Military Academy, faced charges for allegedly supplying alcohol to a cadet and making sexual comments during official travel. The legal saga that followed twisted through procedural delays and jurisdictional disputes, until a military judge dismissed the case with prejudice in April 2025 due to a flawed retirement revocation and improper jurisdiction.
Legally, it’s over for Col. Wright.
But for the cadet at the center of it, justice likely never began.
The Problem: Power Without Accountability
One of the problems with how the military handles fraternization and undue command influence is the public often only hears the names of commanders involved. Rarely do they hear from the junior service members left reeling, often alone and punished by a system that pretends power dynamics are neutral.
Fraternization is not simply about who fraternized with whom, it’s about who had power, who controlled the situation, and who paid the price.
When “Mentorship” Masks Manipulation
In case after case, we see this imbalance play out: a commander misuses their position under the guise of mentorship or familiarity. A junior enlisted soldier or cadet, trained to follow orders and show respect, tries to navigate an impossible terrain where saying “no” may risk retaliation, evaluation damage, or alienation in their unit.
But when the relationship crosses a line?
It’s the young service member, not the senior officer, who often faces:
- Article 15 punishment
- Administrative separation
- Loss of benefits
- In some cases, court-martial
Consent Is Complicated When Command Holds the Pen
Under UCMJ Article 134, fraternization is punishable because it risks good order and discipline. But legal nuance matters, and it’s time the military justice system reckons with the fact that true consent cannot exist in an environment dominated by command authority.
In any civilian court, power imbalance is often a mitigating or even exculpatory factor. The military must apply the same standard.
“If a young service member is told by their O-6 commander that they’re ‘special,’ or encouraged to spend time off-duty, or placed in isolated professional situations — the system must ask not what they did, but what choice they realistically had.” David P. Sheldon, Founding Attorney
Article 37 of the UCMJ was created to prevent command interference in legal proceedings, yet it is almost never invoked in fraternization cases involving grooming or coercion. It should be.
What’s at Stake When the Law Gets It Wrong
The cadet in the Wright case has not been publicly named, rightly so. But it’s not hard to imagine what could have happened had procedural technicalities not derailed the charges.
If the command chose to protect itself…
If jurisdictional flaws hadn’t intervened…
If institutional preservation outweighed truth…
…the cadet’s career could have been extinguished.
Military careers don’t just end — they unravel.
- A flagged file
- Denied re-enlistment
- Revoked GI Bill
- Student loan repayment lost
- A hollow DD-214 in place of retirement
- And the mental toll? Lifelong
Let the Legal Burden Match the Rank
This isn’t about condemning all commanders. It’s about accountability and proportional justice.
“When officers cross the line, the weight of that misconduct shouldn’t fall on the shoulders of the most vulnerable. Let’s stop pretending rank doesn’t matter in relationships. Let the law and the culture evolve.” David P. Sheldon, Military and Federal Defense Attorney
Because sometimes, a single compliment can cost a cadet everything. And sometimes, the wrong uniform walks away untouched.
Citation
Military Times, “West Point colonel’s court-martial dismissed over retirement revocation issue”, April 5, 2025. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/2025/04/05
About the Law Offices of David P. Sheldon
The Law Offices of David P. Sheldon, based in Washington, DC, is a premier military and federal employment law firm. The firm represents service members and federal employees in complex matters ranging from court-martials and administrative separation to medical retirement, security clearance revocations, and appeals before the Boards for Correction of Military Records.
With over 30 years of experience, David P. Sheldon and his team fight for those who serve, protecting rights, restoring dignity, and pursuing justice across all branches.
www.militarydefense.com
100 M Street SE, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20003
(202) 546-9575
Legal Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or legal representation. If you or someone you know is facing injustice or abuse of authority within the military, consult a qualified attorney experienced in UCMJ and federal employment law.