No, the findings and recommendations from a line-of-duty (LOD) investigation are generally not admissible as evidence during the findings (guilt or innocence) phase of a court-martial. An LOD investigation is an administrative inquiry, usually conducted after a soldier is injured or killed, to determine if the event occurred “in the line of duty.” This determination affects eligibility for medical benefits and survivor benefits. It is not a criminal investigation and does not follow the rules of evidence.
The LOD report contains opinions, hearsay, and conclusions that are not subject to cross-examination and would be considered improper and highly prejudicial at a court-martial. A military prosecutor cannot introduce the LOD finding that a soldier’s injury was “not in the line of duty due to their own misconduct” as evidence to prove that the soldier is guilty of that misconduct at a criminal trial. This would violate the accused’s right to have their guilt determined only by the evidence presented in court.
A military defense attorney would immediately file a motion in limine to exclude any mention of the LOD investigation from the court-martial. The attorney would argue that the report is irrelevant, that it is inadmissible hearsay, and that its conclusions would usurp the role of the court-martial panel, which is to make its own independent finding of guilt or innocence based on the trial evidence. A military judge would almost certainly grant this motion, ensuring that the administrative findings of the LOD investigation do not improperly influence the criminal verdict.