Crisp and Associates, LLC

Attorneys - at - Law

Jonathan W. Crisp, Esq. Donald W. Gordon, Esq.

Admitted in PA Admitted in PA
4031 North Front Street, Suite 200
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Jeremy N. Snyder, Esq. Adam F. Leydig, Esq.
Tel.: (717) 412-4676
Admitted in VA*, NC*, PA Admitted in PA
Fax.: (717) 412-4679
Austin J. Langon, Esq. Kathryn D. Freiburger, Esq.
1717 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 1025
Admitted in PA Of Counsel
Washington, D.C. 20006
Admitted in VA, FL
Tel.: (202) 559-9280
Owen J. Hoover, Esq.**
Of Counsel Adam J. Grabill, Esq.
www.mymilitarylawyers.com
Admitted in PA Of Counsel
Admitted in PA
* Inactive Member
**Attorney Hoover is mobilized on Title 10 orders until 30 Sep 2022

10 May 2022

MEMORANDUM FOR LTC Jerry Woods, Commander, 4th Squadron, 2nd CAV Regiment

FROM PFC Arnaldo Marrero Fernandez, thru counsel

SUBJECT PFC Arnaldo Marrero’s response to Nonjudicial Punishment

1. In accordance with Part V. para. 4c. MCM (2019 ed.), PFC Marrero respectfully offers the
following materials to be considered during your evaluation of Nonjudicial Punishment. As an
initial matter, he emphatically denies that he committed the misconduct alleged in the Record of
Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ; namely, he did not commit abusive sexual contact against
PFC Samuel Hoang in violation of Article 120 of the UCMJ, nor did he commit indecent
exposure against PFC Samuel Hoang in violation of Article 120(c) of the UCMJ. He requests
you evaluate the following response and consider the evidence contained herein before making
a decision as to his guilt for the alleged violations of the UCMJ.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

2. Both PFC Marrero and PFC Hoang are in P Troop, 4-2 CR and are 20 years old and reside in
Rose Barracks, Vilseck, Germany. On the evening of 6 November 2021, both Soldiers began
texting one another in a flirtatious manner on snapchat. These texts were set to automatically
delete within 24-hours and no longer exist on either Soldiers’ phone. The texts contained

Page 1 of 4
 pictures of both Soldiers’ genitals and both Soldiers were intoxicated that evening. According
to the CID Law Enforcement Report, CCTV footage from the Rose Barracks showed PFC
Marrero leaving his room and entering PFC Hoang’s room around 0118 on 7 November 2021.
See Exhibit 1. According to a sworn statement taken from SGT Blades, the NCO on staff duty
that night, who later reviewed the CCTV footage, PFC Marrero was then seen leaving PFC
Hoang’s room about 15 minutes later. See Exhibit 2.

3. PFC Hoang then left his room and went to a friend’s room named PFC Brendan Hafer and
relayed to him that an unknown male had come to his room that night and exposed his penis,
asked PFC Hoang to perform oral sex on him and offered to do the same while grabbing PFC
Hoang’s genitals. See Exhibit 3. PFC Hafer relayed in his statement that PFC Hoang told him
he asked the male to leave multiple times and that he was not interested in any sexual activity
with him and threatened to get his roommate to make the male leave, which he eventually did.
See id. PFC Huang also explained to PFC Hafer that he had been texting back and forth with
the male via snapchat and that the male had the screenname of “Andres” and sent a video of his
penis to him but refused to send a picture of his face when asked by PFC Hoang. See id. PFC
Hoang then relayed the same story to SGT Blades at the CQ desk after leaving PFC Hafer’s
room and SGT Blades noticed that PFC Huang’s speech was slurred and that PFC Huang
appeared intoxicated and admitted to having some drinks. See Exhibit 2.

4. SGT Blades then led PFC Hoang back to his barracks room and ensured the door was locked
and then went to check on PFC Marrero who was asleep on the floor of his own room and
appeared heavily intoxicated. See Exhibit 2. The next morning, SGT Blades notified both
Soldiers’ chain of command and an MPO was initiated. See id. A CID investigation then ensued
after a complaint was made and SGT Blades and PFC Hafer both gave sworn statements and
PFC Hoang was interviewed. PFC Marrero declined to make a statement and invoked his right
to counsel. Both PFC Marrero and PFC Hoang’s phones were searched and no evidence
pertaining to the case was found. CID concluded its investigation on 28 February 2022 and PFC
Marrero hired undersigned counsel on 6 April 2022. PFC Marrero was given his first reading
on 6 May 2022 for the two charges explained in the preceding paragraphs. He was given until
10 May 2022 to elect to go to court-martial or continue with the Article 15 process. Since that
time, undersigned counsel has reached out for the remaining evidence, including the CCTV
footage from Rose Barracks mentioned in the CID Law Enforcement Report, and has been given
no response. See Exhibit 4.

MATTERS IN DEFENSE, EXTENUATION AND MITIGATION

5. First and foremost, PFC Marrero adamantly denies that he groped PFC Hoang’s genitals or
placed his hand on PFC Hoang’s shoulder. In fact, PFC Marrero denies that he touched PFC
Hoang at all. PFC Marrero also adamantly denies that he exposed his genitals to PFC Hoang
when he stood at his door or inside PFC Hoang’s room that night. PFC Marrero does admit that
he exchanged flirtatious texts via snapchat and that both exchanged pictures of their naked bodies

Page 2 of 4
 and genitals with each other via snapchat that day and evening and that he did go to PFC Hoang’s
room in an attempt to romantically pursue him. PFC Marrero admits that he did knock on PFC
Hoang’s roommates’ door and asked where PFC Hoang’s room was. When he arrived at PFC
Hoang’s room, PFC Marrero did state that he was interested in consensual sexual activity with
PFC Hoang and the two Soldiers did speak for several minutes. However, at no point in time
did PFC Marrero pull down his own pants exposing his erect penis, nor did he lay a hand on PFC
Hoang or touch him in any way. Both Soldiers were intoxicated when they spoke at PFC
Hoang’s room and when PFC Hoang stated he was not interested in sexual activity at that time
with PFC Marrero, PFC Marrero returned to his own room and passed out on the floor.

6. For an Article 15 proceeding, it is important to note that “[b]efore finding a Soldier guilty, the
commander must be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the Soldier committed the
offense(s).” AR 27-10, paragraph 3-16(d)(4). According to Black’s Law Dictionary, reasonable
doubt can be defined as “belief that there is a real possibility that a defendant is not guilty.”1 It
goes on to explain further, “[i]t is that state of the case, which, after the entire comparison and
consideration of all the evidence, leaves the minds of jurors in that condition that they cannot
say they feel an abiding conviction, to a moral certainty, of the truth of the charge.”2

7. Respectfully, the burden of proof here is on the Army to show beyond a reasonable doubt that
PFC Marrero actually committed the act of exposing his erect penis to PFC Hoang and that PFC
Marrero groped PFC Hoang’s genitals. PFC Hoang admitted he was intoxicated to SGT Blades
and SGT Blades noticed PFC Hoang’s speech was slurred when PFC Hoang recounted what he
believed happened between him and PFC Marrero. CCTV footage, which has still to be turned
over to undersigned defense counsel, despite the request, shows only that PFC Marrero went to
PFC Hoang’s room for several minutes and, according to the CID report, shows nothing of what
went on between the two within the room or at the threshold of the door. This is one person’s
word against another, with no other third-party witnesses stating they observed or heard anything
of the incident itself except for what was recounted to them later by PFC Hoang. Respectfully,
there is plenty of reasonable doubt here as to what actually happened. This means that the burden
of proof is not met and PFC Marrero should be found not guilty.

8. In addition, PFC Marrero respectfully requests you consider his duty performance and excellent
character as part of your determination. He has a good reputation as a hard worker and SGT
Blades, when interviewed, explained in the final sentence of his statement that “Marrero isn’t a
bad guy it honestly shocked me when I learned of all this, he is a good Soldier and aside from
this I haven’t heard or had any problems with him, in all honesty I’ve seen him as this nice, goofy
guy who probably couldn’t hurt a fly even if he wanted.” See Exhibit 3. PFC Marrero admits
that the texts he sent via snapchat to PFC Hoang were foolish and inappropriate and that he
should not have sent them. However, he would never, and did not, sexually assault PFC Hoang,

1
See Black’s Law Dictionary, 1457 (10th ed. 2014)(emphasis added).
2
See id.

Page 3 of 4
 nor did he expose himself while standing at PFC Hoang’s door. It is clear that PFC Marrero has
a good reputation and the nature of these accusations runs contrary to the type of individual he
is; and on these additional grounds he requests you find him not guilty.

Respectfully,

Adam J. Grabill, Esq.

Civilian Defense Counsel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hereby affirm that the information presented in this document is accurate and truthful to the
best of my knowledge.

__________________________ _________________
PFC Arnaldo Marrero Fernandez Date

Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT 3
EXHIBIT 4