How an Army Captain’s Secret Act Led to a 12-Year Sentence at Joint Base Lewis-McChord

An Army captain has been sentenced to 12 years in military prison after admitting he secretly gave an abortion drug to a pregnant junior enlisted soldier, leading to the loss of her pregnancy. The case, prosecuted at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Washington, centered on nonconsensual conduct, abuse of authority, and violations of military law.

Case

Army Capt. Brandon Jones-Adams, 34, pleaded guilty during a court-martial to intentionally killing his unborn child, domestic violence, fraternization, and conduct unbecoming of an officer. A military judge sentenced him to the maximum punishment allowed under his plea agreement, which set a range of four to 12 years in confinement.

Jones-Adams was also dismissed from the Army, a punitive discharge for commissioned officers that is comparable to a dishonorable discharge for enlisted service members. He must forfeit all pay and allowances.

Incident

According to court records, the incident occurred on August 21, 2025, at Jones-Adams’ home in Puyallup, Washington. Officials said he secretly placed mifepristone in a drink that was consumed by the victim, a junior enlisted soldier who was 13 weeks pregnant at the time.

After drinking it, the victim noticed residue in her cup and became suspicious. She soon experienced severe cramping and went to the emergency room at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. Officials said she miscarried there later that day.

Investigation

Army Criminal Investigation Division agents later determined that Jones-Adams had used a false name to order mifepristone online. A forensic review of his phone showed multiple attempts to obtain the drug from various sources. When confronted by investigators, he admitted placing the pill in the victim’s drink, officials said.

The Army described the act as secret and nonconsensual, emphasizing that it was not a lawful or consensual medical procedure.

Relationship

Officials said Jones-Adams and the victim met in November 2024 while assigned to the same battalion at Joint Base Lewis-McChord. They entered a consensual relationship that continued during a nine-month deployment to South Korea.

In May 2025, the victim became pregnant. Both soldiers later returned to Washington state. Because Jones-Adams was an officer and the victim was a junior enlisted soldier, the relationship violated military rules on fraternization, which are designed to preserve discipline and command authority.

Charges

The case was prosecuted by the Army Office of Special Trial Counsel, which handles serious crimes involving service members. Lt. Col. Tyler Heimann, circuit chief for the Sixth Circuit, said Jones-Adams’ actions caused significant harm and represented a breach of officer responsibilities.

Military prosecutors treated the conduct as both a criminal offense and a failure to uphold standards expected of commissioned officers.

Drug

Mifepristone is a medication approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use with misoprostol to end an intrauterine pregnancy through 10 weeks of gestation. The drug works by blocking progesterone, a hormone necessary to sustain pregnancy.

Officials said the victim in this case was at 13 weeks, beyond the approved use window. Investigators stressed that the charge was based on deception and lack of consent, not on lawful medical use of abortion medication.

Sentencing

Jones-Adams will begin serving his sentence at the Northwestern Joint Regional Correctional Facility at Joint Base Lewis-McChord before being transferred to the United States Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

The case was handled at the Cascade Court Complex on base and is among the most serious domestic violence prosecutions conducted at Joint Base Lewis-McChord in recent years.

Context

The sentencing comes as national debate continues over abortion medication, online prescribing, and mail delivery of mifepristone. Federal agencies and courts are still reviewing regulatory and safety issues related to the drug.

Army officials emphasized that this case involved criminal conduct, not a policy dispute. Investigators said the facts focused on deception, abuse of trust, and harm inflicted without consent. No public statement has been released by the victim.

FAQs