Conduct Unbecoming by Randy Shilts

Author:Randy Shilts
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Open Media Integrated Media

DECEMBER 14, 1982

COURT OF MILITARY APPEALS

Lieutenant Joann Newak’s Attorney, Faith Seidenberg, had argued that Joann’s right to counsel had been violated by the twisted conflicts of interest of her Air Force lawyer; that Newak could not be legally imprisoned for merely believing that she possessed amphetamines; and, from a commonsense point of view, that Newak’s seven-year sentence was “cruel and unusual punishment,” since no civilian would have been tried for her “crimes,” much less sent to prison.

But the Court of Military Appeals unanimously rejected her argument. In a thirty-seven-page concurring opinion, Justice Edward B. Miller offered an exhaustive rationale for why Newak should be imprisoned. That document included a sweeping history of the nation’s military law, supporting references from the Continental Congress and the first three Presidents, as well as citations of Supreme Court decisions dating back to 1858. In conclusion, Miller wrote, “Certainly, had the accused been tried tried on these identical charges in a civilian court, which would probably have been unfamiliar with the laws and traditions developed by the military during its long history, it is likely the court would not have had full capacity to recognize the complete impact of damage to the national security.… The accused was tried by a military court-martial that fully appreciated the seriousness of her offenses in a military context. Her sentence was entirely appropriate, in view of her offenses, and properly vindicated by the military’s disciplinary authority.”

In the weeks during which appeals court reviewed the arguments over Newak’s imprisonment, the public was beginning to hear about the case and the young lieutenant’s draconian punishment. Writers Nat Hentoff of The Village Voice and Coleman McCarthy of The Washington Post both wrote eloquent condemnations of the Air Force handling of the Newak case, and their columns prompted other reporters’ interest. Finally, Army authorities at the Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth ordered that Newak could participate in no “face-to-face interviews.” When Newak tried to reply to reporters’ questions in writing, officials ordered that interviews of any kind “are not authorized under any circumstances.” When Newak decided to write to reporters anyway, prison authorities searched her cell and confiscated letters in progress, to be held for “investigatory purposes,” according to documents filed in federal court.

When pressed in court to explain why the military would not let Newak talk to reporters, Army spokesmen argued that conversations with the press could involve breaches of national security. Meanwhile, Newak appealed for clemency from the Air Force so that she could be released from prison. It was then that word reportedly came down that if Newak wanted clemency, she should stop talking to reporters. And she did.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.