Sinclair’s accuser testifies, ‘I was just being used for sex’

FT. BRAGG, N.C. - The military intelligence captain who has accused Brig. Gen. Jeffrey A. Sinclair of sexually abusing her testified Monday that their rocky three-year affair left her feeling desperate and helpless, with no way to end an illicit relationship with her high-ranking commander.

“I felt completely trapped,” the 34-year-old Army captain told a military judge at Sinclair’s sentencing hearing. “I was just being used for sex.”

The accuser’s mother testified shortly afterward that the affair, which stretched over two war zones and three continents, left her daughter distraught and fearful. She said the accuser later slept with a gun and got a 95-pound Doberman for protection.

“She was wound tighter than a corkscrew,” the mother, from Nebraska, told the court. “She’d just sit there and cry uncontrollably.”

Army prosecutors put the two women on the stand to underscore the Army’s contention that Sinclair, 51, mistreated his mistress and took advantage of the vast discrepancy in their ranks to control the much younger woman.

The captain worked directly for Sinclair for much of their relationship, which was conducted in Iraq, Afghanistan, Germany, North Carolina, Texas and Arizona.

The captain, who is also an Arabic linguist, said she feared that the 82nd Airborne Division, where Sinclair was deputy commander, would cover up the affair, “and it would mean the end of my career.”

She described Sinclair as “the only person in the world who could get me out of that situation, and he refused to.”

Because of the stress of the illicit relationship, the captain said, she is anxious and guarded now around senior commanders. “I’m constantly wondering ... how are they abusing their rank ... and how might they abuse me or someone else?’’

Under brief cross-examination, the captain acknowledged that she was trying desperately to get Sinclair’s attention when she threatened suicide after he stopped returning her calls. She also testified that she knew the general probably would not divorce his wife, yet continued to have sex with Sinclair.

Even after Sinclair allegedly twice forced her to perform oral sex and threatened to kill her and her family if she divulged the affair -- according to the captain -- she sent the general a thank-you card that gushed about his leadership and stature.

She thanked him for allowing her to work for him, calling it “my greatest honor.” She added, “I owe you, sir” – code between the lovers for “I love you,” according to previous testimony.

Pressed by Sinclair’s lawyer to concede that the affair was voluntary, the captain responded, “I would have left a long time ago if it was completely up to me.”

The accuser said Sinclair used vulgar and abusive language to disparage female officers. When she challenged him, she testified, he uttered a profanity and told her he was a general and could say whatever he wanted.

“As a female, it was extremely discouraging to hear someone at that level, at that rank, call women by those names,” she testified.

Challenged by Sinclair’s lawyer that everyone in the military curses, including the captain, she responded that profanity is much different than vulgar, sexually explicit insults directed only at women.

The former lovers sat a few paces from each other but did not appear to make eye contact. The captain, sometimes holding back tears, often spoke with her head down and did not look in Sinclair’s direction. The general sat back in his chair, a somber look on his face as he listened intently to the woman’s testimony.

Earlier Monday, Sinclair admitted using vulgar language to describe several female officers. But he said his comments about a general being able to do whatever he wanted was an inside joke among his command staff, and was said in jest.

Sinclair pleaded guilty to maltreating the captain, telling a military judge in a halting voice that he deceived her during their illicit affair and caused her “emotional distress.” He also said he lied to her about divorcing his wife.

Sinclair, one of only a handful of generals to face a court-martial in the last 60 years, also pleaded guilty to twice misusing his government charge card to pursue the affair, disobeying an order not to contact the captain, and making derogatory comments about female officers.

As part of a plea deal signed over the weekend, the Army has agreed to drop charges of sexual assault; threatening to kill the captain and her family; and engaging in “open and notorious” sex in a parked car and on a hotel balcony.

On March 6, Sinclair pleaded guilty to adultery; impeding an investigation by deleting sexually explicit emails to and from a civilian woman; possessing pornography in a war zone; conducting inappropriate relationships with two other female officers; and improperly asking a female lieutenant for a date.

Sinclair faces a maximum of 25 1/2 years in prison when he is sentenced by the military judge overseeing the case, Col. James L. Pohl, after the hearing. However, the plea deal reached this weekend between prosecutors and the defense puts a cap on Sinclair’s punishment. Terms of the agreement were not disclosed.

Sinclair’s lawyers have said they will seek a sentence that would allow the general to avoid prison and to retire at the reduced rank of lieutenant colonel.

Prosecutors said Monday that they intended to call four more witnesses on Tuesday.

Richard L. Scheff, Sinclair’s civilian attorney, said he would call at least 20 witnesses to testify about the general’s character and his 27 years of military service, which included five combat deployments. Scheff said Sinclair’s wife, who has stood by him despite his adultery, will submit a letter to the judge.

Sinclair himself will make an unsworn statement to the judge at sentencing, said Scheff, but no decision has been made on whether to have Sinclair testify under oath.

Follow LATimes National on Facebook

ALSO:

Duke Energy accused of mishandling more coal ash wastewater

Take our St. Patrick’s Day quiz: Gingers, shamrocks, parades, more

Presumed 9/11 mastermind rejects claims about Bin Laden’s son-in-law

david.zucchino@latimes.comTwitter: @davidzucchino