2006
2002
United
States v. Daniels, 56 MJ 365 (a physical breaking
of the
property need not always be shown in order for there to be sufficient
evidence
that military property was actually damaged, as required by Article
108, UCMJ).
(the word "damage" must be reasonably construed to mean any change
in the condition of the property which impairs its operational
readiness).
(there was ample evidence that the removal of airplane window screws
before
or during the flight of the plane led to its failure to pressurize and
required
the commander to terminate the military mission of the plane; this was
legally
sufficient evidence to support a conviction under Article 108, UCMJ).
(a rational trier of fact could have concluded beyond a reasonable
doubt
that it was appellant who damaged the aircraft by removing the screws
from the
airplane window where: (1) there was evidence that the inspection
window was
secure some forty-five minutes prior to the flight; (2) appellant was
on the
aircraft during the period directly prior to takeoff, and he indicated
to
Sergeant Wallace that he would check the latrine for stowaways; (3)
appellant
admitted that he "found" the screws that should have secured the
windows; and (4) he made inconsistent statements to the flight crew and
the OSI
as to what he then did with them).