Sgt. 1st Class Charles Martland’s Army Return Is A Welcome Reversal For Supporters
Green Beret Sgt. 1st Class Charles Martland, who was discharged for standing up for a young boy, who was molested, is now allowed to return to the Army.
Sgt. 1st Class Charles Martland, who has been fighting since 2011 to get his post back, has finally been allowed to do so. On Thursday, Martland received the news that the Army Board for Corrections of Military Records had finally decided to modify the poor performance evaluation, which was used to oust him.
By doing so, the Army made it possible for Sgt. 1st Class Charles Martland to get back to serving his country. Upon learning the decision, Martland said:
“Kicking me out of the Army is morally wrong, and the entire country knows it. While I understand that a military lawyer can say that I was legally wrong, we felt a moral obligation to act.”
Rep. Duncan Hunter, a California Republican and former Marine, who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, and who had been fighting for Sgt. 1st Class Charles Martland to get his position back, issued a statement that read:
“This is the absolute right decision and I commend the Army for showing true leadership. Charles did what anyone in a similar situation should do, he stood up for a defenseless child. That should never put his career in jeopardy.”
“The fact Sgt. Martland has a future in the Army signals that the new Army leadership is right for the job.”
So, why did the Army discharge a decorated Green Beret and former Special Forces team leader? In September 2011, Sgt. Martland and his team leader, Capt. Daniel Quinn, had an altercation with an Afghan police chief on their base after a woman revealed that the man had raped her 12-year-old son over the course of many days.
Both men were disciplined for the incident, but while Capt. Quinn decided to leave the Army, Sgt. Martland chose to fight the unjust decision. Sgt. Martland appealed the resolution on numerous occasions but failed; he eventually petitioned the Army’s records correction board with the argument that his performance evaluation was technically flawed and should thus be removed from his service jacket – and he won.
The offending line in his evaluation, which read “Demonstrated poor judgment, resulting in a physical altercation with a corrupt ALP member. Judgment and situational awareness was lacking during an isolated instance” has been removed, and he will be allowed to continue to serve through the end of his enlistment.