Army plays it best "support the troops" card

[boutons_]

Army Pays $725 in Set-Aside World War II Case

Source: NYT (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/01/us/01lawton.html) (11-30-07)

A month after the Army said it made a mistake when it court-martialed Samuel Snow and 27 other black soldiers in World War II, the Pentagon has cut Mr. Snow a check for back pay, money withheld while he served a year in prison on a rioting conviction.

The check was for $725. No interest. No adjustment for inflation. http://spurstalk.com/forums/images/smilies/smilol.gif

Mr. Snow, now 83, says $725 is not nearly enough for the anguish he endured as part of what was possibly the largest Army court-martial of the war. He has no plans to cash the check.

=============

$725/1945 is $8030/2006.

Where do I enlist? http://spurstalk.com/forums/images/smilies/smilol.gif

http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/45155.html

[Wild Cobra]

Boutons...

Why do you post things like this?

I never seen a post from you condemning Murtha for using his influence for getting marines thrown in the slammer for actions the are innocent of. Why haven't you championed their cause?

[boutons_]

For entertainment.

It's hilarious to contrast the yellow ribbon bullshit, the anti-war = anti-troops bullshit with how badly the suckered troops get treated by the military.

$500B/year to play with, 10s of $Bs wasted, every fucking year, and the Army couldn't find $8000 for this wronged sucker? GMAFB

[Wild Cobra]

For entertainment.

It's hilarious to contrast the yellow ribbon bullshit, the anti-war = anti-troops bullshit with how badly the suckered troops get treated by the military.

$500B/year to play with, 10s of $Bs wasted, every fucking year, and the Army couldn't find $8000 for this wronged sucker? GMAFB
If you look into the longer story, you don't find it saying he was cleared of the charges, just that he had insufficient defense.

Funny how things look when you take a past case tried under then current rules, and apply today’s jurisprudence to them.

Tell me. Does it say anywhere he was innocent, or claimed innocence?

[boutons_]

So "insufficient defense" (I wonder how that could possibly happen to a military black man in the 1940s) justifies his getting 1940s dollars instead of his 2007 dollars?

If "insufficient defense" exonerates the military, why is the military even bothering to insult him with crumbs?

Spin your spin.

[PixelPusher]

If you look into the longer story, you don't find it saying he was cleared of the charges, just that he had insufficient defense.

Funny how things look when you take a past case tried under then current rules, and apply today’s jurisprudence to them.

Tell me. Does it say anywhere he was innocent, or claimed innocence?
Apparently, you've never heard of "innocent until proven guilty"...it's the foundation of law in this country (and that includes military tribunals).

[Wild Cobra]

Apparently, you've never heard of "innocent until proven guilty"...it's the foundation of law in this country (and that includes military tribunals).
Do you always extrapolate incorrect assumptions?

He was found guilty. After an appeal process in 1975 to change his military record to honorable, he then was able to find a good lawyer to throw the conviction aside, and return money lost. It may have been some agreement. I'm not going to do much, if any legwork on this case. You can bet however if the military was found grievously at fault and he was innocent, he would get at least inflation adjusted restitution and lawyer expenses. Probably damages and interest as well.

I really doubt we will see that. He was found guilty. The conviction was overturned on a technicality, and because of the circumstances. The Army acknowledged a mistake and overturned the conviction. They did not acknowledge he was innocent.

It is not the same thing. Not guilty does not equal innocent. Now Mr. Snow has the burden of proof if he wishes to collect more.

[PixelPusher]

It is not the same thing. Not guilty does not equal innocent. Now Mr. Snow has the burden of proof if he wishes to collect more.
Not guilty = Not guilty...how hard is that concept for you to understand? You must suffer the delusion that everyone found guilty must "really" be guilty regardless of whether or not the process was fair and proper.

[Wild Cobra]

Not guilty = Not guilty...how hard is that concept for you to understand? You must suffer the delusion that everyone found guilty must "really" be guilty regardless of whether or not the process was fair and proper.
Sorry, you are wrong. We generally see guilty and not guilty verdicts, but a third one is innocent! Not guilty does not mean innocent, just that guilty isn't proven.

Did you know Mr. Snow even admitted to the crime?

Point is, unless he gets a finding that he was innocent, he will probably never see more than he has. Even the $725 was conditional that if he cashes the check, the case is over. He can try to get more, but I don't see it happening.

[PixelPusher]

A Court of Law is not a level playing field between the prosecution and the defense, the burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove it's case, and if it the prosecution violates the legal process, they forfeit their case.

The defense doesn't have to "prove innocence". Seriously, how do you not understand this foundational legal principle?

[Clandestino]

i have a feeling the 725 was adjusted for inflation. how much could he have possibly made in the army over 60 years ago?

when i joined in 95 my basic monthly was like 700 a month.

[Wild Cobra]

i have a feeling the 725 was adjusted for inflation. how much could he have possibly made in the army over 60 years ago?

when i joined in 95 my basic monthly was like 700 a month.
You should read the article. He was in jail for some time, I think it says a year.

[Wild Cobra]

You know, as I do more reading of articles, it becomes clear that the conviction was not overturned. The process was only the status change of his discharge from dishonorable to honorable. The military board tried to do something nice so he can get vetrans benifits, and look what happens...

He was convicted! It still stands! The backpay comes with the change of discharge status. There is no privision for inflation or interest.

Keep in mind, the UCMJ is jifferent than civilian justice. Just like senator Kerry had a review board change his discharge status, so did Mr. Snow. There was no change in the verdict.