The US military failed to inform British police about an allegation that one of its airmen had been drink-driving in Suffolk, which prevented British authorities from investigating the offence. This failure broke a longstanding formal agreement with British police that allows the UK to investigate alleged crimes by US military personnel stationed in Britain.
The airman, Christopher Mooty, had spent the night drinking with two other American service personnel in a market town before driving them to buy a kebab in the early hours of the morning. The drink-driving allegation was later reported to his commanders, who used their own internal processes to discipline him. The case raises questions about how many other US military personnel based in the UK have committed crimes that were not reported to British police forces.
Mooty committed a second drink-driving offence a year later. This time he was prosecuted in a British court. These latest disclosures are part of the Guardian’s investigation into crimes carried out by American military personnel based in Britain. The series prompted the UK government and police chiefs to set up a high-level inquiry in the summer to establish whether US military personnel stationed in Britain are being brought to justice properly.
In the latest case, Mooty, then a 21-year-old airman working at the large United States Air Force (USAF) base at Mildenhall, Suffolk, went out in March 2023. He met two other American airmen in a pub in Newmarket, where he drank two or three bottles of beer in two hours, according to evidence heard at his disciplinary hearing. They then went to another Newmarket pub, where he had two or three vodka Red Bulls over another two hours.
They took a taxi to the home of one of the men in Bury St Edmunds. But they soon decided they were hungry, and at around 4am Mooty drove them in his car to a kebab shop, according to evidence at the disciplinary hearing. While he was driving, Mooty received messages from a British woman he had been in a relationship with. During the exchanges, the woman quickly suspected that he was drunk. Later that night, he went to her home. She said Mooty was “the most drunk I’ve ever seen him” when he arrived, adding: “I’m surprised he didn’t crash/get caught,” the disciplinary hearing heard. She reported him to his superiors at Mildenhall. “He is endangering the lives of the people in this country and should not be here,” she told them.
Mooty was disciplined in a US court martial for being drunk in charge of a vehicle. A military judge convicted him, sentencing him to 20 days of hard labour and a demotion. However, under the terms of an agreement in force since the 1950s, British police have primary responsibility for investigating alleged wrongdoing by US military personnel, unless the offences were committed while the Americans were on duty, or against another member of their armed forces or their property.
There are now questions about why the US military prevented the possibility of Mooty being prosecuted in a British court. Suffolk police said they were “not notified of a drink-driving incident on 3/4 March 2023 involving a US airman from RAF Mildenhall. We understand that the incident was investigated and dealt with by the USAF.” In a statement, the USAF said: “While we do not have a specific written record of this notification occurring, there is no reason to believe that verbal notification was not provided in line with standard inter-agency coordination procedures.” Asked why it decided to investigate Mooty instead of handing the case over to British police, the USAF said he “was not stopped by UK law enforcement while driving. Rather, the allegation was first reported to US military authorities well after the driving incident occurred. “So there was no chemical testing (blood or breathalyser evidence) and no first-hand observation of impairment by police officers, which UK prosecutors typically want.”
The USAF added that its military prosecutors could take Mooty to a court martial based on witness testimony and what it called “indicators of impairment.”
The USAF said its policy is to prosecute as many of its personnel as possible within the terms of its agreement with the UK. It argues this is a more effective way to maintain discipline and good order in its ranks. The USAF asks British police whether it can take over prosecutions, and British police often agree.
US military judges later overturned the court martial verdict against Mooty and approved a retrial, but it never took place because he was dismissed from the USAF after being caught drink-driving a year later.
At 4:20am on 31 March 2024, a Suffolk police officer arrested him after he drove a car over the limit in Bury St Edmunds. He resisted arrest.
He was convicted at Ipswich Magistrates’ Court in August 2024 after pleading guilty to both offences. Mooty was banned from driving for a year and ordered to pay fines and penalties totalling £871.
This time, the USAF did not step in and ask to take over the prosecution. It said it left the case to British police because it “understood prosecution of the case by local authorities to be perfectly appropriate” under the agreement with the UK.
The USAF communicated with British prosecutors about the second drink-driving offence. It said it helped British authorities reach another member of the US Air Force who contradicted Mooty’s defence that he was not driving that night.
The conduct of American military personnel on British roads is contentious, as they have a history of offences such as speeding, drink-driving and driving without insurance.
In one well-known case, it took a long campaign to bring to justice Anne Sacoolas, the American intelligence official who killed a 19-year-old motorcyclist, Harry Dunn, in a road accident outside a US base in Northamptonshire in 2019.
Frequently Asked Questions
Here is a list of FAQs based on the scenario of the US military not informing UK police about a drinkdriving allegation against an airman stationed in England
Beginner Questions
Q What exactly happened here
A A US airman stationed in England was accused of drinkdriving The US military knew about the allegation but did not tell the UK police
Q Why is this a big deal
A Because drinkdriving is a crime in the UK If the local police dont know about an allegation they cant investigate it and the public may feel that foreign military personnel are being treated differently from everyone else
Q Who is the US military in this situation
A It usually means the airmans chain of command or the US Air Force office that handles legal and disciplinary matters on the base
Q What is a Status of Forces Agreement
A Its a treaty between two countries that sets the rules for how military personnel from one country are treated while stationed in the other The US has a SOFA with the UK
Q Can UK police arrest a US airman
A Yes UK police can arrest and investigate US personnel for crimes committed in the UK The SOFA affects who prosecutes the case not whether police can act
Q What is drinkdriving
A Driving a vehicle while over the legal alcohol limit In England and Wales the limit is generally 35 micrograms of alcohol per 100 millilitres of breath or 80 milligrams per 100 millilitres of blood
Advanced Questions
Q Does the SOFA require the US to report allegations to UK police
A The NATO SOFA and the UKUS SOFA focus on jurisdiction and cooperation They do not typically contain a specific clause saying you must report every allegation to local police However both sides are expected to cooperate with each others law enforcement
Q Who has jurisdiction over the airman
A Under the NATO SOFA the UK has primary jurisdiction over offences committed on UK territory but the US can also exercise jurisdiction over offences against US property security or personnel In drinkdriving cases on UK roads the UK usually has the primary right to prosecute
Q What are the common problems in cases like this
A The main issues are
