USMC Board Rejects Allegations and Retains Major Mast – The Legal Saga to Save “Baby Doe” Continues – #KeepHerSafe

On October 8, 2024, a United States Marine Corps Board of Inquiry (BOI) found no serious wrongdoing and retained Major Joshua Mast for future service in the Marine Corps based on the evidence presented. The BOI rejected the false and salacious narrative championed by the Taliban, the State Department, its DOJ enablers, big DC law firms, CAIR, ANAR, biased media, and the Taliban-affiliated Afghan man “John Doe” and his wife (who are not family of the little girl and who cannot return to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan without her).

Chief within the false media narrative was the claim that this Marine family, with bad motives from the beginning, decided to steal an Afghan baby girl from the battlefield and adopt her, knowing that there were actual family members who were able to take her in place of her dead parents – allegedly innocent villagers. The BOI rejected this false narrative based on classified and unclassified testimony and evidence proving the substantive allegations were false. Even though there have been lengthy Virginia state court proceedings (now on appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court) and two federal court cases (one still pending), this military BOI is the only body to date that has ever reviewed extensive classified testimony and evidence relating to the actual origin of the Marine family’s daughter and the terrorist organization from which she was saved.

The courts have not seen the full military evidence demonstrating that the baby girl was not Afghani, nor the child of some innocent villager and his wife killed by American forces as collateral damage, but rather the seriously wounded child of terrorists foreign to Afghanistan who was badly wounded when her foreign terrorist mother blew herself up, trying to kill American forces, while holding the baby in her arms. (See here for more details.)

The BOI rejected the following serious allegations: violations of Article 107 (“false official statements” – the most serious allegation); “substandard performance of duty” (for failing to demonstrate leadership); and violations of Article 92 (failure to obey general orders). This is consistent with the truth of what the Marine has said all along.

The BOI “substantiated” a technical violation of Article 123 (“misuse of a government computer”) for the Marine maintaining mission documents on his classified government computer from his 2019 deployment in Afghanistan and from his time at the Marine Forces Special Operations Command. Because of the Article 123 “substantiation,” and since the Marine is an officer, the BOI also “substantiated” the tack-on of Article 133 “conduct unbecoming an officer.”  Even minor infractions like “failure to maintain grooming standards” (i.e. shaving) or being cited for a traffic violation (i.e., speeding) are also technically “conduct unbecoming an officer.” This technical “substantiation,” in light of this Marine’s exemplary service record, and potential for future service resulted in the Board retaining him for future service in the Marine Corps.  Had he been found to have committed some serious infraction, he would have been dismissed from service.

Some of the key evidence presented at the BOI included eye-witness testimony that the child’s mother blew herself up while holding the baby; that the baby was recovered next to her body (not “found abandoned on the battlefield”); that the Afghan partner force attempted to murder the child because of her non-Afghan foreign fighter origin; that the child was non-Pashtun; and that at least 6 Afghanis showed up to claim they were “family” of the baby, but that these false claimants were DNA tested and tested negative for a biological relationship to the child.  In Afghanistan and certainly among the Taliban, a baby girl is worth money – to sell off for child marriage – and more so for an unrelated baby girl.

Evidence was presented that in spite of the many false claimants, U.S. Embassy Kabul dropped the DNA test requirement and caused the Masts’ daughter to be turned over to a non-relative, third-party Taliban proxy (who handed her off to “John Doe”), after two Afghan government agencies had recommended the little girl be sent to the U.S. to her U.S. guardian.  This was driven by the State Department’s desire to cut a deal with the Taliban to withdraw U.S. troops and to get rid of the “problem” of this baby girl interfering with the State Department’s negotiations.  (We all know how disastrously the U.S. withdrawal went).  U.S. Special Inspector General later found: “U.S. government officials have a ‘disincentive’ to tell the truth about the situation in Afghanistan” and behaved with “mendacity.”

The allegations that “John Doe” and his wife or any of their relatives were “family” of the Marine’s daughter, and that the Marine “lied” were thoroughly examined and rejected by the BOI. Thus, after the government’s 3-year, multi-million-dollar investigation into wild allegations based solely on the credibility of the Taliban-connected “John Doe,” who popped on the terror watchlist on entry to the U.S., and who has admitted under oath and in court to making multiple false statements, only a technical computer violation and a catch-all was found at the conclusion of the Marine’s 5-day BOI.

“The American Freedom Law Center will continue standing alongside this courageous Marine family,” said David Yerushalmi, Senior Counsel with AFLC. “We are particularly pleased that the BOI rejected the ‘false official statements’ narrative. AFLC’s work has revealed critical evidence that will defeat ‘John Doe’s’ numerous lies and expose State Department officials’ wrongdoing. We look forward to our client’s vindication.”