committed a separate act of adultery with Ms. E in the back seat of his car in the parking lot of a local beach while Cpl Villanueva and the 14-year-old Ms. V waited their turn; (6) the appellant was intent on persisting in his misconduct, even after being discovered by his wife; (7) the appellant’s misconduct did not remain private and discreet, but instead led to several telephone confrontations between the aggrieved wives and the family of Ms. V, as well as a physical altercation between the appellant and his wife that required police intervention; and (8) to cover up his offenses, the appellant convinced Ms. V to lie for him, and then compounded his culpability by lying to a criminal investigator about his actions. See United States v. Collier, 36 M.J. 501, 512 (A.F.C.M.R.1992)(<HOLDING>). In light of the above, we conclude that the
holding adulterous conduct which provides incentive to commit further offenses is service discrediting and prejudicial to good order and discipline holding that service of a statecourt summons and complaint after removal to federal court is valid service holding that a communication between the judge and juror which is unrelated to the case being tried is not improper and prejudicial holding that service is not avoided by service on a partys attorney as service on an attorney is ineffective unless he has been authorized to accept such service recognizing right of this court to regulate and discipline members of the bar