A British academic who was assaulted by a United States Air Force pilot has called for greater transparency over how criminal cases involving visiting American military personnel are transferred from British police forces to the US military justice system.

The comments follow the court martial of Capt. Jacob Wulfson, a US Air Force pilot stationed in the United Kingdom, who was convicted of strangulation after an incident involving the academic during their first face-to-face meeting.

The case has renewed attention on legal arrangements governing US service personnel stationed on British soil and the process through which British authorities transfer criminal investigations to American military prosecutors.

Speaking after the proceedings, the victim said decisions by UK police forces to relinquish jurisdiction in such cases should be subject to greater public scrutiny, particularly when alleged offences involve British citizens.

She argued that the expanding presence of US military personnel in Britain makes it essential to establish a transparent and consistent framework governing how police forces determine whether investigations should remain within the UK criminal justice system or be handled by the US military.

“If we’re going to host these foreign forces here and they’re going to have an increasing presence in our country, I think there’s a necessity that we have a really clear, transparent, focused process by which constabularies hand over these cases,” she said.

The case has drawn wider attention because it involves the interaction between British law enforcement authorities and the US military justice system operating under agreements governing American personnel stationed overseas.

Under existing defence arrangements between the United Kingdom and the United States, some offences involving US service members may be prosecuted through the American military justice system rather than British civilian courts, depending on the nature of the offence and jurisdictional decisions made by the relevant authorities.

The victim, who holds a doctorate in law and has taught at several universities across the United Kingdom, said her professional research focuses on sexual safety and the prevention of violence against women and girls.

She noted that while her academic work provided an informed understanding of the issues raised by the case, experiencing the legal process personally had been particularly difficult.

According to evidence presented during the court martial, Wulfson assaulted the woman during their first in-person meeting.

Military prosecutors also alleged that Wulfson had drugged the woman before penetrating her vagina without her consent. Those allegations were prosecuted as charges of sexual assault and aggravated sexual contact under the US military justice system.

The military court ultimately acquitted Wulfson of those sexual assault-related charges after considering the evidence presented during the proceedings.
Wulfson was, however, convicted on the separate charge of strangulation.

Throughout the trial, the defence rejected the allegations made against the pilot. Wulfson’s lawyer told the court martial that his client had been “falsely accused” and was “unequivocally not guilty.”

Following his conviction on the strangulation charge, Wulfson addressed the military court before sentencing proceedings continued.

The case has prompted broader discussion among legal observers regarding jurisdictional arrangements governing foreign military personnel stationed in Britain, particularly where alleged offences involve British nationals and investigations initially fall under the responsibility of UK police forces.

The victim said increased transparency would strengthen public confidence in the handling of such cases by ensuring decisions over jurisdiction are open to examination rather than being made without public understanding of the criteria involved.

Her comments also reflect wider debates over accountability mechanisms applying to foreign military personnel operating under bilateral defence agreements, particularly as the United Kingdom continues to host significant numbers of US service members at military installations across the country.

The 47-year-old suspect, whose identity has not been officially confirmed by authorities, was arrested at Sydney Airport after arriving on a domestic flight from Brisbane, Australian Federal Police Commissioner Krissy Barrett said.

He is due to appear in a Sydney court later on Tuesday.Police allege the victims were not taking part in hostilities at the time of their deaths and were detained, unarmed, and under the control of members of the Australian Defence Force.

Barrett said the accused either directly carried out the shootings or ordered subordinate personnel to do so.The charges come as part of a broader investigation into alleged misconduct by elite Australian forces in Afghanistan.

A landmark 2020 military inquiry found credible evidence that special forces personnel unlawfully killed 39 Afghan prisoners, farmers, and other noncombatants.Barrett said the latest case involved only a limited number of personnel and emphasized that the allegations did not reflect the conduct of the wider military.

She described the accused actions as confined to “a very small section” of the defence force.The Office of the Special Investigator, established to examine war crimes allegations, has reviewed 53 incidents to date, with 39 cases concluding without charges, according to its director Ross Barnett.

The case follows separate proceedings against former SAS soldier Oliver Schulz, who has pleaded not guilty to a charge of war crime murder over the alleged killing of an Afghan man in Uruzgan province in 2012.

War crime murder is a federal offense in Australia and carries a potential sentence of life imprisonment. Around 40,000 Australian personnel served in Afghanistan between 2001 and 2021, during which 41 troops were killed.