Posted on 10/13/2004 12:54:03 AM PDT by politicket
Edited on 10/13/2004 1:07:27 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Excerpt:
Mystery Surrounds Kerry's Navy Discharge
BY THOMAS LIPSCOMB - Special to the Sun
October 13, 2004
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/3107
An official Navy document on Senator Kerry's campaign Web site listed as Mr. Kerry's "Honorable Discharge from the Reserves" opens a door on a well kept secret about his military service.
The document is a form cover letter in the name of the Carter administration's secretary of the Navy, W. Graham Claytor. It describes Mr. Kerry's discharge as being subsequent to the review of "a board of officers." This in it self is unusual. There is nothing about an ordinary honorable discharge action in the Navy that requires a review by a board of officers.
According to the secretary of the Navy's document, the "authority of reference" this board was using in considering Mr. Kerry's record was "Title 10, U.S. Code Section 1162 and 1163. "This section refers to the grounds for involuntary separation from the service. What was being reviewed, then, was Mr. Kerry's involuntary separation from the service. And it couldn't have been an honorable discharge, or there would have been no point in any review at all. The review was likely held to improve Mr. Kerry's status of discharge from a less than honorable discharge to an honorable discharge.
A Kerry campaign spokesman, David Wade, was asked whether Mr. Kerry had ever been a victim of an attempt to deny him an honorable discharge. There has been no response to that inquiry.
The document is dated February 16, 1978. But Mr. Kerry's military commitment began with his six-year enlistment contract with the Navy on February 18, 1966. His commitment should have terminated in 1972. It is highly unlikely that either the man who at that time was a Vietnam Veterans Against the War leader, John Kerry, requested or the Navy accepted an additional six year reserve commitment. And the Claytor document indicates proceedings to reverse a less than honorable discharge that took place sometime prior to February 1978.
The most routine time for Mr. Kerry's discharge would have been at the end of his six-year obligation, in 1972. But how was it most likely to have come about?
bump
Bookmark
TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART II > CHAPTER 59 > §§ 1162, 1163 Prev | Next
§§ 1162, 1163. Repealed. Pub. L. 103–337, div. A, title XVI, § 1662(i)(2), Oct. 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 2998]
Release date: 2004-03-18
Section 1162, acts Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 89; Sept. 2, 1958, Pub. L. 85–861, § 1(27), 72 Stat. 1450, related to discharge of Reserves. See sections 12681 and 12682 of this title.
Section 1163, acts Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 89; Sept. 7, 1962, Pub. L. 87–651, title I, § 106(a), 76 Stat. 508; Dec. 30, 1987, Pub. L. 100–224, § 4, 101 Stat. 1538, related to limitations on separation of Reserve members from their reserve components. See sections 12683 to 12686 of this title.
I just don't think anyone will ask the questions that should be asked.
%%
Alas! I share your cynicism.
Section 38303xx is the section dealing with procedures for letters of resignation. Don't bother getting to excited over the U.S. codes and BUPERSMAN. Every action that the Navy takes (i.e. every document) will cite an authority, and these will generally be pretty .."general".
More "interesting" history. BUPERS used to be "The Bureau of Personnel, or maybe B. of Naval P., can't recall. So "BUPERS" regs were simply directives from the DoN Personnel department. Then they changed it to NMPC (Naval Manpower & Personnel Command) and kept the BUPERS instructions as BUPERSMAN (because the old salts hated NMPC so much they declined to change the title of the documents).
SFS
Yes you can buy replacement medels. In sKerrys case he had the citation rewritten not once but 3 times, this is what makes them questionable.
i dont wanna read about kerry's discharge.
just get a towel and some 409 and clean it up
:)
other thread..
To: BigKahuna
Here's 10 U.S.C.S. 1162 and 1163.. Both have since been repealed in 1994. Note 1163.
§ 1162. Reserves; discharge
(a) Subject to other provisions of this title [10 USCS §§ 101 et seq.], reserve commissioned officers may be discharged at the pleasure of the President. Other Reserves may be discharged under regulations prescribed by the Secretary concerned.
(b) Under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, a Reserve who becomes a regular or ordained minister of religion is entitled upon his request to a discharge from his reserve enlistment or appointment.
10 USCS § 1163 (1992)
§ 1163. Reserve components: members; limitations on separation
(a) An officer of a reserve component who has at least three years of service as a commissioned officer may not be separated from that component without his consent except under an approved recommendation of a board of officers convened by an authority designated by the Secretary concerned, or by the approved sentence of a court-martial. This subsection does not apply to a separation under subsection (b) of this section or under section 1003 of this title [10 USCS § 1003], to a dismissal under section 1161 (a) of this title [10 USCS § 1161(a)], or to a transfer under section 3352 or 8352 of this title [10 USCS § 3352 or 8352].
(b) The President or the Secretary concerned may drop from the rolls of the armed force concerned any Reserve (1) who has been absent without authority for at least three months, or (2) who is sentenced to confinement in a Federal or State penitentiary or correctional institution after having been found guilty of an offense by a court other than a court-martial or other military court, and whose sentence has become final.
(c) A member of a reserve component who is separated therefrom for cause, except under subsection (b), is entitled to a discharge under honorable conditions unless--
(1) he is discharged under conditions other than honorable under an approved sentence of a court-martial or under the approved findings of a board of officers convened by an authority designated by the Secretary concerned; or
(2) he consents to a discharge under conditions other than honorable with a waiver of proceedings of a court-martial or a board.
(d) Under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary concerned, which shall be as uniform as practicable, a member of a reserve component who is on active duty (other than for training) and is within two years of becoming eligible for retired pay or retainer pay under a purely military retirement system, may not be involuntarily released from that duty before he becomes eligible for that pay, unless his release is approved by the Secretary.
456 posted on 10/13/2004 2:05:10 AM PDT by GAGOPSWEEPTOVICTORY
so if he resigned...he might have avoided a court martial?
That's what my friend who is a huge NASCAR fan said about driver Dick Trickle. His wife is related to Trickle.
The article cites a review by a "board of officers." This means there was a process, and at least several people were involved in it. Will any of those who were involved come forward to substantiate what happened?
Went to U.S. Code 10 Sections 1162 1163: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/10/subtitles/a/parts/ii/chapters/59/sections/section_1162,_1163.html
Gad! Tried links and... Talk about smoke & mirrors!
They will try, but if it hits Drudge it will be impossible to keep under control. As long as it was just speculation I never thought it would go anywhere since it is so serious. This reporter has gone beyond hypotheticals. He's asking questions that have been generated by the documents that are currently available. It also makes sense now as to why Kerry will not release all his records. It would be the end of his candidacy. As to Mass, I suppose your right, but let's not forget Mondale in 84. I believe he lost even Mass, didn't he?
He threw away some or all during a protest in 1971.
Since John Kerry did have his discharge upgraded to "Honorable" in 1978, after a board of officers by direction of the President reviewed his discharge;
We are left to conclude that his Initial Discharge was Less Than Honorable.
Thanks for the input.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.