§ Article 125 : Kidnapping

Article 125 of the UCMJ (10 U.S.C. § 925) punishes wrongfully seizing, confining, inveigling, decoying, or carrying away another person, and holding that person against their will.

Who It Applies To

Any person subject to the UCMJ who wrongfully seizes, confines, inveigles, decoys, or carries away another person, and holds that person against their will.

What It Covers

1. The accused seized, confined, inveigled, decoyed, or carried away a certain person.
2. The accused then held that person against that person’s will.
3. The accused did so wrongfully.

Key rules

• Inveigle means to lure, lead astray, or entice by false representations or other deceit. Decoy means to entice or lure by fraud, trick, or temptation.
• Held means detained, and the holding must be more than momentary or incidental. Under the Manual, holding a victim at gunpoint during a robbery is not by itself kidnapping, but involuntarily transporting the victim a substantial distance before or after the robbery may be kidnapping in addition to the robbery.
• Against the will means involuntarily, whether through force, coercion, or false representations. If the victim cannot have a recognizable will, such as a very young child, the holding must be against the will of the parents or legal guardian. The availability of means of escape, and any threats or force, are relevant.
• The holding need not be for financial or personal gain or any particular purpose; ransom may be an aggravating circumstance.
• Wrongfully means without justification or excuse. An official who unlawfully uses apprehension authority is not guilty of kidnapping but may be guilty of unlawful detention under Article 97.

Maximum Punishment

Maximum authorized punishment. Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for life without eligibility for parole.

Sentencing parameters. Category 3 (30–120 months).

The newer sentencing rules apply, subject to the capital-case rules, when the accused is convicted only of offenses committed after 27 December 2023. See How UCMJ Sentencing Rules Apply. The maximum authorized punishment and the applicable sentencing framework do not predict the sentence in a particular case.

Related and Distinguished

Kidnapping requires a wrongful seizure or taking and a holding that is more than incidental to another offense. Article 97 addresses the unlawful exercise of apprehension, arrest, or confinement authority, and Article 122 and Article 120 address offenses that may involve a brief detention without amounting to kidnapping.

What the Provision Does

Article 125 requires a wrongful seizure, confinement, inveigling, decoying, or carrying away of another person, and a holding against that person’s will that is more than incidental to another offense. It authorizes confinement for life without eligibility for parole.

History

Before 2019, Article 125 addressed sodomy. In December 2013, section 1707 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (Pub. L. 113-66) rewrote it to cover only forcible sodomy and bestiality, and in 2014 Pub. L. 113-291 changed “force” to “unlawful force.” The Military Justice Act of 2016 (Pub. L. 114-328, § 5439) replaced the article with the kidnapping offense, effective January 1, 2019; kidnapping had previously been charged as an enumerated offense under Article 134.

On June 26, 2024, Proclamation 10780 granted a pardon to persons convicted under former Article 125 — and of related attempts, conspiracies, and solicitations — of unaggravated offenses based on consensual, private conduct with persons age 18 and older, for convictions from May 31, 1951, through December 26, 2013.

Sources

• 10 U.S.C. § 925 (Article 125, UCMJ)
• Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, 2024 edition, Part IV, ¶ 74
• Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 ed.), Appendix 12B and Appendix 12C
• Proclamation 10780, Granting Pardon for Certain Violations of Article 125 Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 89 Fed. Reg. 54329 (July 1, 2024)
• United States v. Acevedo, 77 M.J. 185 (C.A.A.F. 2018) (the evidence was legally sufficient to support kidnapping by inveiglement; decided when kidnapping was an Article 134 offense, before its 2019 move to this standalone article)