Text messages are woven into nearly every relationship today, and prosecutions under Article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which covers rape, sexual assault, and related offenses, are no exception. Messages exchanged before, during, or after the alleged conduct often become some of the most contested evidence in the case. The short answer is that yes, text messages can be admitted as evidence in an Article 120 court-martial, but only if they clear several requirements under the Military Rules of Evidence. Understanding those requirements is essential for both sides.
Text Messages Are Treated Like Other Digital Evidence
Courts-martial follow the Military Rules of Evidence, which appear in the Manual for Courts-Martial. Text messages are a form of digital or electronically stored information, and they are handled under the same general framework that applies to emails and other electronic records. The fact that a message lives on a phone rather than on paper does not exempt it from the ordinary rules. It must be relevant, it must be authenticated, it must not run afoul of the rule against hearsay or must fit an exception, and it must survive a challenge that its prejudicial effect substantially outweighs its probative value.
Authentication Is the First Hurdle
Before a text message can be admitted, the party offering it must authenticate it. Military Rule of Evidence 901 requires the proponent to produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the item is what the proponent claims it to be. For a text message, that ordinarily means showing both that the message is an accurate, unaltered copy of what was sent or received and that it was actually sent or received by the person the proponent identifies.
Authentication can be accomplished in several ways. A witness with personal knowledge may testify that the screenshots or extracted records accurately reflect the conversation. Distinctive characteristics of the message, such as the phone number, the contents, references to events only the parties would know, or the style of communication, can support attribution to a particular author. Records obtained directly from a device through a forensic extraction, or from a service provider, can also help establish authenticity. Military Rule of Evidence 902 separately addresses categories of evidence that are self-authenticating and may be admitted without a sponsoring witness, which can be relevant to certified records of electronic communications.
Attribution deserves special attention. Showing that a message came from a particular phone number is not always the same as showing who actually typed it, because phones can be shared, borrowed, or accessed by others. A thoughtful challenge to authenticity often focuses on whether the proponent has genuinely connected the accused, or the complaining witness, to the specific messages at issue.
Hearsay and the Purpose of the Messages
Even an authenticated message must clear the hearsay rule. Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of what it asserts. Whether a text message is hearsay depends on why it is being offered.
Some messages are not hearsay at all because they are not offered for their truth. A message may be offered simply to show that a communication occurred, to show the effect on the listener, or to provide context for other evidence. Other messages may be admissible under recognized exceptions or exclusions. For instance, a message authored by the accused and offered against the accused is generally treated as a statement of a party opponent rather than hearsay. Messages may also fit exceptions for present sense impressions, excited utterances, or state of mind, depending on the facts. The analysis is message by message, and a single conversation can contain some admissible and some inadmissible portions.
Relevance and Unfair Prejudice
Text messages must also be relevant, meaning they have a tendency to make a fact of consequence more or less probable. In Article 120 cases, messages are frequently offered on the central issue of consent, on the relationship between the parties, on the timeline, or on a party’s state of mind. Even relevant messages can be excluded if their probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the members.
A particularly important limit in sexual offense cases is the rule restricting evidence of an alleged victim’s other sexual behavior or predisposition, often called the rape shield rule. Text messages that touch on a complaining witness’s sexual history may be subject to this protection, which generally bars such evidence except in narrowly defined circumstances and only after a specific procedure is followed. This rule can significantly affect which messages, if any, the defense may introduce.
Completeness and Context
Selective use of messages is a recurring concern. A single text can read very differently when isolated from the surrounding conversation. The rule of completeness allows a party to require that, when part of a writing or recorded statement is introduced, other parts that in fairness ought to be considered at the same time may also be admitted. In practice, this means a party cannot cherry-pick a damaging line while hiding the messages that put it in context.
Practical Guidance
A few points are worth emphasizing. Text messages are routinely admitted in Article 120 cases, so neither side should assume they are automatically in or automatically out. The proponent must authenticate the messages and tie them to the right author, must address hearsay, and must show relevance that is not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice. The defense should scrutinize the chain of custody, the completeness of the production, the reliability of attribution, and the application of the rape shield rule. Preserving messages properly and obtaining complete extractions, rather than partial screenshots, can be decisive.
Conclusion
Text messages can be evidence in Article 120 court-martials, and they often play a central role on issues such as consent and the relationship between the parties. Their admission, however, depends on satisfying the Military Rules of Evidence, including authentication under Rule 901, the hearsay rules, the balance between probative value and unfair prejudice, the rape shield protections, and the rule of completeness. Because these issues are technical and frequently contested, anyone involved in an Article 120 case should ensure that experienced military defense counsel handles the digital evidence carefully. This article is general legal information and not legal advice for any particular case.
Disclaimer
This article is provided strictly for general educational and informational purposes. It is intended to explain how the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the Rules for Courts-Martial, the Military Rules of Evidence, and related military administrative processes work as a matter of public legal education. It does not constitute legal advice, a legal opinion, or a recommendation about any particular case, and it is not a substitute for advice from a qualified military defense attorney who can evaluate the specific facts and command, service, and jurisdictional circumstances involved.
Reading this article, or contacting any website on which it appears, does not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader and any law firm, attorney, or author. Every court-martial, nonjudicial punishment action, administrative separation, and security-clearance matter turns on its own facts, the charged articles, the convening authority, the service branch, and the evidence, and outcomes vary widely from one case to another.
Military law also changes over time. The Military Justice Act of 2016 (effective January 1, 2019) and subsequent National Defense Authorization Acts renumbered and rewrote many punitive articles, revised the Article 32 preliminary hearing, and altered sentencing, clemency, and appellate procedures. Statutes, regulations, executive orders, the Manual for Courts-Martial, and decisions of the service Courts of Criminal Appeals and the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces may have been amended, superseded, or reinterpreted after this article was written, and article numbers or procedures cited here may have changed.
For these reasons, no reader should act or decline to act based on this content without first consulting a licensed attorney experienced in military justice about their own situation. The author and publisher make no warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or current applicability of the information provided, and disclaim any liability for any action taken or not taken in reliance on it. If you are facing investigation, charges, or an adverse administrative action, time limits may apply, and you should seek qualified counsel promptly.