This article takes the findings from the Capital Jury Project (CJP) and applies them to military court-martial practice, taking note of military specific rules and case law that gain new meaning when placed in a CJP-informed context. This article covers themes in aggravation and mitigation and discusses the underlying juror beliefs that drive those themes. Throughout, the article explores how counsel on both sides of a capital court-martial can use these findings to improve their trial practice but pays special attention to how admission defenses address these themes.