Posted on 05/18/2005 9:22:17 AM PDT by robowombat
Nightmare On 32nd Street The Court martial-lite of Petty Officer 3rd Class Pablo Paredes… [J. F. Kelly, Jr.] 5/17/05
Friday the 13th of May was an appropriate date for the public to read about the verdict and sentence of a Navy court-martial convened in the case of Petty Officer 3rd Class Pablo Paredes, who refused to board his ship, USS Bon Homme Richard, for its scheduled distant duty deployment last December. His sentence for intentionally missing movement, a serious military offense, was reduction to Seaman Recruit plus two months of restriction to the Naval Station at 32nd Street and three months of “hard” labor to be served concurrently. No brig time. No dishonorable discharge. This, obviously, is not your father’s Navy.
The San Diego Union-Tribune, reporting on the trial, described those in the courtroom as “slightly shocked”. I would describe the reaction of those of us elsewhere in the military community in somewhat stronger terms. “Stunned” and “outraged” come to mind. I’ll think of others after I get over this attack of nausea.
Victor Paredes, father of the sailor (I cringe at honoring him with that title) was quoted by the Union-Tribune as saying, “I’m so confused. I don’t know what it means.” He is not alone. Many of us who served are wondering, also. Has the Navy gone soft on traitors or has a military judge gone soft in the head? Paredes said that he refused to board his ship because he felt that the war in Iraq was unethical. Will the slap on the wrist he received encourage others to miss movement also because they have decided that their government’s military operations are unethical? You know the answer.
Talk show hosts have branded Paredes a coward. I don’t know whether he is or not. His duties aboard the amphibious assault ship weren’t likely to place him personally in harm’s way. As it turns out, in fact, the ship was diverted to humanitarian duty in Indonesia. He certainly is a grandstander, though, inviting the media to witness his shameful and traitorous behavior on the pier in front of his shipmates and their loved ones who came to bid them a tearful goodbye as they sailed away on their country’s business.
His actions and defiance of military authority were a slap in the face to his shipmates, his service and his country. Moreover, they constituted a serious threat to the good order and discipline that is utterly essential in military units. The insults and damage inflicted by his actions were compounded by the leniency of the military judge’s sentence. One wonders if the judge, a relatively junior JAG Lieutenant Commander, appreciates the implications of all of this.
While the anti-military and anti-war crowd seek to make Paredes a hero of their movement, a few other military malcontents will inevitably get the idea that it is no huge deal to abandon their duties if they decide to disagree with national policy or military operations. Apologists for Paredes argue that it’s the duty of every service member to follow his conscience. This, of course, is a deliberate distortion of the responsibility of a service member to decline to execute an illegal order and to promptly seek direction from the next available senior officer. The burden is upon the former to prove the illegality of the order, by the way.
Nothing in the Uniform Code of Military Justice gives service members the right to abandon their duties because they disagree with the nation’s defense policies or military operations. Can you imagine the chaos that would occur if service members could pick and choose which wars or campaigns they would support and which they would not?
In over thirty years of naval service including ten distant duty deployments, the most difficult times for me were not the operations themselves but rather the ten times we had to say goodbye to our loved ones as we left for deployments ranging in length up to seven months. It’s an awful feeling knowing that you won’t see your wife and children for a long time. Most civilians, including the misguided fools who applaud Paredes’ actions, haven’t a clue how that feels.
Parades made a media circus out of that somber but proud day when his shipmates hugged their loved ones goodbye on the pier. Because of his despicable actions, he does not deserve to wear the Navy uniform for one more day. What he does deserve is an immediate discharge that accurately reflects the dishonor he has brought upon it. He also deserves the contempt of all patriotic citizens.
As for the military judge, Lt. Cmdr. Robert Klant, perhaps he could tell his version of this sorry story in a future episode of “JAG”, that popular TV show that has many of its viewers actually believing that it reflects the real Navy. tOR
J.F. Kelly, Jr. is a retired Navy Captain and bank executive who writes on current events and military subjects. He is a resident of Coronado, California
copyright 2005 J. F. Kelly, Jr.
I have seen that sentence once before, the solider went to his place of duty at his assigned time.
He had 4 hours of rest a day mandate,and one hour for religious services a week, but was always doing something else.
A DD would have been to nice, you can chip a lot of paint, paint a lot of areas and chip it again for 20 hours a day, all you need is a few NCO's to volunteer to supervised the hard duty.
Plus the guy has to fulfill his original obligation as an E-1 with no chance of advancement. I have hope that a Chief will take a personal interest in this young mans character development for the rest of his enlistment.
It used to be, back in the 80's that missing ships movement would get you three days of bread and water in the brig, plus some other assorted fun stuff. Intentionally missing ships movement is in a different class altogether....unbelievable that this guy got off with what he did.
They don't do bread and water anymore. Unfortunate. On my ship, people would get that for disrespect. They were very respectful after pulling that sentence. One guy (total jerk) got three days bread and water, three days to "recover", then three more days bread and water. He was a very respectful guy after that. He remembered to say "yes, sir" to officers instead of his usual response, which I can't say here.
He should've gotten the Big Chicken Dinner. What's happened to my Navy?
He would have welcomed the DD. The hard labor is a good punishment.
Anyone here go to Boot Camp at San Diego in the 70's remember the red footprints or big bertha?
Hard labor is HARD labor in the military...and it's "bad time" (doesn't count towards obligated time). And he spends a year as an E-1, pulling every crap detail known to the Navy.
"I have hope that a Chief will take a personal interest in this young mans character development for the rest of his enlistment."
Please.... Sign me up, I'd be more than happy show this young "man" the light.
Oh yeah, I remember those marching parties, thank God I never had one. The guys in our company who went had to wear that raincoat they issued us which made it that more unbearable!
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.