On reflection, Navy Lt. Cmdr. James Dickerson admits he shouldn’t have posted the TikTok video of him in uniform, lip-synching a profanity-laced parody of Frozen’s “Let it Go” and giving center fingers to the digicam, his shirt’s gold oak leaf rank insignia sq. within the body with a caption that learn, “Working the day earlier than depart be like.”
The 54-year-old prior-enlisted provide officer would later say he solely anticipated household and buddies to see the joke video he made on July 14, 2023.
He probably by no means supposed for his command, the Navy Expeditionary Warfighting Improvement Middle, to catch wind of it.
However they did, and in June, Dickerson was court-martialed for the video, charged with a violation of Article 133 of the Uniform Code of Navy Justice, conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.
Dickerson’s cost sheet alleged that he “wrongfully and dishonorably” posted the video “exhibiting himself performing in a contemptuous method in direction of the Navy whereas in uniform.”
Watch the video under.
And whereas Dickerson was discovered not responsible at a judge-alone trial on June 13, the saga of the officer and his TikTok content material has outdoors attorneys questioning why he was ever charged within the first place for such an infraction.
The case additionally provides a glimpse into the murky legality concerned in court-martialing service members for social media posts, and the way no single cost within the UCMJ governs such infractions, leaving commanders throughout the providers to use the regulation as they and their authorized staffs see match.
Questions additionally stay about command choices earlier than the trial started.
For causes the Navy has not defined, the unit’s commander, Capt. Charles Eckhart, withdrew the cost in late 2023 after which re-referred it the identical day, stripping Dickerson of his proper to decide on a trial by jury within the course of.
Charging Dickerson for the video was “a misuse and abuse of prison justice,” in keeping with Rachel VanLandingham, a retired Air Drive lawyer, regulation professor and Nationwide Institute of Navy Justice president.
“That is nothing that warrants a federal prison conviction,” she instructed Navy Instances after reviewing the case.
Whereas Dickerson filming the video in his officer’s uniform was “silly,” he might have been administratively disciplined or learn the riot act by his command as an alternative, VanLandingham stated.
“I discovered it flabbergasting,” she stated. “Disgrace on the attorneys that suggested the commander to deliver this cost.”
An argument might be made that the video constituted conduct unbecoming an officer, however such conduct doesn’t warrant a court-martial, in keeping with Brian Ferguson, a civilian protection lawyer who has represented service members in social media-related proceedings.
“Was {that a} good choice for him to do this? In all probability not,” stated Marshall Griffin, a retired Coast Guard lawyer now in personal apply. “Might it have been addressed with a counseling and telling him to take it down? Sure.”
“I feel it’s heavy-handed, for positive,” he added.
Social media posts have landed troops in sizzling water in recent times, or introduced consideration to points that service members felt weren’t being addressed by their instructions.
However Patrick McLain, a retired Marine Corps choose now in personal apply, stated he had not seen a social media-related case targeted “on the foolishness or vulgarity of the content material of the social media” earlier than.
As an alternative, such instances have typically targeted on posts that contained racist, extremist or violent content material, he stated.
Dickerson’s case raises questions concerning the First Modification rights of expression for service members as nicely.
It stays unclear what number of troops have been taken to trial over social media posts in recent times.
The Military, Navy, Air Drive and Marine Corps all stated the providers don’t observe social media-related courts-martial, and outdoors authorized consultants observe that such crimes may be charged below quite a lot of UCMJ articles.
Given the final lack of public transparency within the navy justice system, such instances turn into even more durable to trace from the surface, VanLandingham stated.
The Navy declined to touch upon Dickerson’s case.
Dickerson declined remark for this report.
His civilian protection lawyer, Rob Canoy, stated in a press release that “the fitting choice was in the end reached in courtroom on the deserves.”
“Regardless of the Navy’s prison prosecution for this conduct, we don’t maintain any ailing will in direction of the command or the Navy for doing what they thought they wanted to do to take care of good order and self-discipline,” he stated.
The case provides one other instance of how troops want to consider what they put on-line, Ferguson stated.
“Posting on social media in uniform is like ingesting closely on the unit Christmas social gathering,” he stated. “It’s not going to finish nicely.”
‘However it’s humorous, proper?!’
Court docket information point out that Dickerson’s command turned conscious of the video inside a couple of weeks of him posting it.
An e mail from one employees member on July 31, 2023, states that it was dropped at the command’s consideration by one other provide corps officer.
“Undoubtedly beneath a area grade navy officer habits, however unsure it’s greater than that,” one staffer wrote to colleagues.
A screenshot included in courtroom filings means that at the very least one in all Dickerson’s subordinates noticed the video, and commented “SIRRRRR” alongside two laughing emojis.
“However it’s humorous, proper?!” Dickerson replied.
Command members scrambled to protect the video, with some uncertain how TikTok labored or how they might save the video if Dickerson deleted it.
Underneath the topic line, “Inappropriate TikTok?” one Navy commander requested seize it “earlier than we inform him to take it down.”
“Worst case possibly if somebody in your workplace has ticktock (sic) we might use a second cellphone to report the primary?” the officer questioned. “And display screen shot the feedback?”
Two days after the video, the unit’s commanding officer, Eckhart, issued a social media coverage for his unit, reminding sailors of finest social media practices and the way they’re at all times representing the Navy.
“The web doesn’t neglect and on-line habits depart digital footprints,” Eckhart wrote. “It’s crucial that we set ourselves up for fulfillment by way of deliberate, worthwhile and wholesome social media use.”
He additionally reminded his sailors that such habits is topic to the UCMJ.
A couple of weeks after he posted the video, Dickerson emailed his superiors on Aug. 2, 2023, to clarify himself and apologize, courtroom information present.
“I wish to specific how ashamed and embarrassed that I’m (sic) that I created that video,” Dickerson wrote. “I didn’t reside as much as the excessive requirements and expectations of our officer corp (sic).”
Dickerson wrote that he had a bodily remedy appointment that morning and had seen a parody of the “Let It Go” track earlier than his appointment.
After the appointment, he went house to bathe and gown for work.
“In some unspecified time in the future throughout this, I got here up with the concept for the video based mostly on my spouse (sic) years of feedback, ‘Why do you’re taking depart, you find yourself working by way of it anyhow,’” he wrote. “I made and posted the video for her and my buddies, anticipating them to see me being goofy and anticipating that this trip can be the identical as some other working trip.”
The video was meant to be self-deprecating and for an viewers who would know him and acknowledge that he was simply “performing foolish,” Dickerson wrote.
“I perceive that nothing on the web is personal, however I’ve felt that I might cover below the anonymity of enormous numbers,” he continued. “I by no means felt I used to be anybody’s selection for viewing a video I made.”
The TikTok acquired at the very least 81 likes, eight feedback and was shared by 4 customers and saved by 18 customers, in keeping with courtroom information.
Dickerson famous the video wasn’t directed towards the navy or any individual or command.
He wrote how he was “blessed to get a second probability at service,” and the way he regretted letting sailors down “with this silly mistake.”
“I perceive the robust place this locations you, the XO and CO in,” Dickerson added. “I hope that you just weigh this remoted misstep in opposition to no matter worth that you just place on my previous service.”
An Aug. 22, 2023, memo included in courtroom information summarized the manager officer’s inquiry into Dickerson’s video.
Dickerson enlisted within the Navy in 1988, the memo states, and had been an officer for greater than 13 years, serving because the second-in-command of Navy Cargo Dealing with Battalion 1 from February 2022 to February 2023.
The Florida native’s enlisted service resulted in 1996, and he got here again into the fleet as an officer in 2009, in keeping with service information.
His awards and decorations embody floor warfare provide corps officer, SSBN deterrent patrol insignia and enlisted submarine warfare specialist.
“If I knew it might come to this, I’d not have made the video,” Dickerson instructed his XO, in keeping with the memo.
“I ordered a break for LCDR Dickerson to regain his composure,” the XO wrote within the memo.
A couple of months later, on Nov. 30, 2023, Eckhart referred the cost in opposition to Dickerson for violating Article 133 of the UCMJ.
That authentic referral to a particular court-martial contained no particular directions, which means Dickerson had the authorized proper to go for a jury trial, his civilian lawyer, Canoy, argued in a courtroom submitting earlier this yr.
After that, the unique cost “lingered with out motion” and was by no means submitted to the courtroom or placed on the trial docket, Canoy wrote.
Then, for causes the Navy has not defined, the unique cost was withdrawn and dismissed with out prejudice on Dec. 27, 2023, practically a month after it was initially filed, Canoy wrote.
Eckhart signed a memorandum noting the withdrawal, but it surely “contained no purpose for the withdrawal,” the lawyer wrote.
That very same day, the identical cost was filed in opposition to Dickerson once more, however with one caveat: The trial can be a judge-only continuing, and Dickerson wouldn’t be capable of go for a jury trial.
Canoy alleged in filings that the unique cost was withdrawn, and the brand new cost filed the identical day, solely to disclaim Dickerson a jury trial.
Eckhart declined to clarify this sequence of occasions when queried by Navy Instances.
“The convening authority, Capt. Eckhart, has declined to offer a remark,” Lt. Cmdr. Kara Handley, a spokesperson for Navy Expeditionary Fight Command, stated in an e mail to Navy Instances. “We don’t have something further so as to add presently.”
The judge-alone particular court-martial choice for commanders is a comparatively new authorized choice that went into impact in 2019.
Identified amongst attorneys as a “short-martial,” it’s a commander’s choice for instances the place the utmost punishment is proscribed to 6 months of confinement or pay forfeitures.
It additionally isn’t used. 4 out of 165 tried court-martials in 2023 had been carried out in that discussion board, in keeping with Navy information.
Convening authorities have the fitting to withdraw a cost after which refer it once more, and choosing such a judge-alone discussion board means the accused faces much less extreme punishment, in keeping with the personal lawyer McLain.
“The accused is now disadvantaged of the fitting to trial by members, however concurrently the punishment is way much less,” McLain instructed Navy Instances in an e mail.
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/ARQ2TI573JGGTO5VLKYCH4EL4M.jpg)
Canoy argued in a movement to dismiss the case that the change mirrored an “try to intervene within the accused’s capability to have a trial earlier than (a jury).”
VanLandingham agreed, and stated the withdrawal and re-referral of the cost was achieved “in a really abusive and manipulative method.”
“They had been afraid this wasn’t a robust sufficient cost,” she stated. “And it wasn’t.”
Commanders threat undermining themselves after they take such instances to trial and an acquittal ensues, civilian lawyer Ferguson stated.
“For a commander to have a case like this go to trial and lose, he most likely is considering he ought to have gone nonjudicial punishment,” Ferguson stated. “Clearly this has backfired.”
‘Profanity is as widespread within the common naval workspace as espresso’
Court docket information present Canoy filed a number of unsuccessful motions to dismiss the cost earlier in 2024 earlier than Navy Choose Cmdr. Mishonda Mosley discovered Dickerson not responsible in June.
In a single, Canoy argued that the conduct unbecoming an officer cost doesn’t apply to Dickerson’s conduct within the video.
He argued that the command’s social media steering launched after Dickerson’s video “accommodates no prohibitions relating to using profanity or gestures which specific profanity.”
Whereas the command’s steering famous that on-line conduct needs to be no completely different from offline conduct, Canoy wrote that “profanity is often used all through each Navy workspace across the nation.”
“Profanity is as widespread within the common naval workspace as espresso,” he wrote. “Equally, profanity appears to accompany the execution of practically each navy mission ― much more so in fight and excessive stress environments.”
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/T2MX7B2TXFDMXISYXJG3VKWDJY.jpg)
Whereas vulgarity has been a “mainstay of navy parlance since 1775,” the smartphone age signifies that such language is out within the on-line world for all to see, as an alternative of confined to a navy unit’s workspace, McLain stated.
“Like pornography, the web and smartphones have launched silly habits out of a veritable Pandora’s field, by no means to be retrieved,” he stated.
Canoy additionally argued in courtroom that conduct unbecoming an officer offenses laid out below regulation embody being drunk, “ethical turpitude” crimes and false official statements, not the kind of habits in Dickerson’s TikTok.
“An officer posting a meme of himself lip synching a parody track is ― at worst ― a misplaced try at humor, nothing extra,” he wrote. “It actually doesn’t state an offense as a federal crime.”
Canoy additionally contended that Dickerson’s conduct had no impact on his unit’s navy mission, and that he’s not the one navy member to submit such content material.
“The web is actually stuffed with lots of upon lots of of movies of navy members in uniform saying outlandish issues,” he wrote. “These navy members are both venting, depicting precise navy occasions, or just making movies in an effort for comedy.”
Free speech within the navy is inherently a grey space, Ferguson instructed Navy Instances.
“That’s why it’s important in these instances to have a jury of unbiased officers, in order that one individual can’t set a regular after the actual fact,” he stated.
‘All this stink, and an acquittal’
VanLandingham, the retired Air Drive lawyer, stated Dickerson’s case needs to be a name to maneuver extra prosecutorial choices out of the fingers of navy commanders, at the same time as these commanders retain their disciplinary authority.
“Any time there’s a cost, you’re going to remove somebody’s liberty and provides them a federal conviction that might observe them the remainder of their lives,” she stated. “The commander might have prevented all this stink, and an acquittal.”
Some prosecutorial authority has been faraway from commanders in recent times, and navy entities outdoors the accused’s chain of command now determine whether or not severe instances like sexual assault needs to be prosecuted.
“Commanders nonetheless want disciplinary authority, however they haven’t proven they’ll deal with prison prosecutorial authority in a accountable method,” VanLandingham stated. “This case is Exhibit A.”
Whereas some steering exists, the navy must do some “soul-searching” about how they deal with social media on the whole, she stated.
“This case was full overkill,” VanLandingham stated.
Geoff is the managing editor of Navy Instances, however he nonetheless loves writing tales. He lined Iraq and Afghanistan extensively and was a reporter on the Chicago Tribune. He welcomes any and all types of ideas at geoffz@militarytimes.com.
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/QLIV6ZPFLJDYPMAQZM3IER5I7M.jpg?w=75&resize=75,75&ssl=1)
