On Friday, a military judge imposed an official reprimand and a substantial nearly $100,000 fine on Army Lt. Col. Benjamin West after he was found guilty of sexually harassing three subordinate female officers at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington. West, 43, was charged with multiple offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, including sexual harassment, conduct unbecoming an officer, dereliction of duty, and cruelty and maltreatment of a subordinate. Initially facing seven counts, he was ultimately convicted on two sexual harassment counts and one count of cruelty. The judge’s decision followed a bench trial, in which West waived his right to a jury trial, and he narrowly avoided more severe penalties, potentially jail time.
The military proceedings highlighted a common and concerning issue within the armed forces, as reports of sexual harassment remain prevalent. According to statistics, one in five soldiers witnesses sexual harassment, yet few incidents are formally reported. West’s case exemplified the destructive impact such behavior can have on victims—his actions prompted at least one officer to leave the military prematurely due to the distress and “high alert” state his harassment induced. The countless unreported and overlooked cases of harassment contribute to a culture that often leaves victims feeling isolated and powerless.
During the trial, Lt. Col. Robert Murdough, presiding over the case, made the ruling without providing a detailed explanation. The circumstances surrounding West’s behavior included a “step-by-step” escalation of harassment, which prosecutors detailed in their case. After only four months of commanding his unit, West was relieved of his duties in October 2023 due to these serious allegations. His immediate dismissal illustrated the military’s increasing willingness to hold leaders accountable for misconduct, certainly a needed shift amid ongoing challenges to addressing and combating harassment in the ranks.
In court, West expressed remorse towards the women he victimized, pleading with them to overcome the “shadow” he had cast over their lives from his “despicable behavior.” His contrition, however, raised questions among critics regarding whether such apologies could genuinely equate to accountability or if they served merely as a continuation of deflection. Defense attorney Ryan Guilds, representing one of West’s victims, described the verdict as “bittersweet,” recognizing that while the Army took punitive action against West, the outcomes for the victims were more complex and deeply troubling; one was driven to leave the military entirely as a result of his actions.
The psychological toll of West’s behavior was palpable, with one officer admitting that his harassment made her feel as though she was “a complete failure,” a harsh contrast to the pride and ambition she had initially felt in serving her country. Thankfully, she was able to recover and sought support in another unit that prioritized camaraderie and resilience among its troops. However, the damage inflicted by West’s conduct reflects broader systemic issues that female service members face, underscoring the urgent need for comprehensive reforms in military culture and procedures regarding harassment.
As the judicial outcomes unfold, West’s decision to leave the Army, whether voluntary or enforced through demotion, poses larger questions about military leadership and its responsibility to foster a safe environment for all personnel. The case underscores the significant hurdles that the military faces regarding sexual harassment and presents a pivotal moment reflecting the dire need for cultural change. Moving forward, both the military justice system and its leadership must reassess their approaches to ensure that victims’ voices are heard and that future incidents of harassment are not only reported but met with robust and effective responses.