ADDENDUM TO 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  87-04437 
COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

.m 1 9  1999 

His  dishonorable  discharge on  20  December  1948  be  upgraded  to 
honorable. 

OF CASE: 

On  30  March  1988,  the  Board  considered  and  denied  a  similar 
appeal by the applicant.  A  summary of the evidence considered by 
the Board and the rationale for its decision is set forth in the 
Record of Proceedings which is attached at Exhibit F. 
On  11 January 1989,  in response  to a White  House inquiry, the 
applicant  was  informed  that,  in  the  absence  of  additional 
relevant  evidence,  no  further  review  of  his  application  was 
possible . 
On  11  May  1995,  in  response  to  a  congressional 
inquiry, the applicant was notified that the Board determined the 
evidence submitted did not meet the criteria for reconsideration 
On  24  May  1995,  the 
and  his  request  was  again  denied. 
corresponding Member  of  Congress was  informed  that  should  the 
applicant provide additional evidence pertaining to post-service 
activities,  reconsideration  of  his  appeal  may  be  possible 
(Exhibit G) . 
The  applicant  provided  additional  new  evidence 
pertaining  to post-service activities, through his congressman, 
for possible reconsideration of his application  (Exhibit G )  . 

APPLICANT CO NTENDS THAT: 
His sentence to hard  labor and a dishonorable discharge in 1947 
was unfair and racially motivated.  In support of the applicant's 
appeal, a congressional inquiry was submitted in his behalf.  The 
congressman  indicated  that  since  the  applicant's  release  from 
prison, he  has  led  an  exemplary  life.  The  applicant married, 
raised three children, is a long time member of the West Angeles 
Church of  God  in Christ and is a retired employee of  the local 
Public Works Department.  In further support of his request, the 

applicant  obtained  affidavits  of  support  from  his  minister, 
former  employer  and  friends,  and  a  recent  police  report, 
The  congressman 
attesting  to  an  unblemished  civilian  life. 
stated that he met the applicant and believes he is a trustworthy 
man  and  deserves  clemendy  from  the  Board. 
The  congressman 
indicated that, if necessary, he would gladly appear before the 
Board  on  behalf  of  the  applicant. 
A  complete  copy  of  the 
applicant's  submission, which was forwarded to the Board through 
his congressman, is at Exhibit G. 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

In  earlier  findings,  the  Board  determined  that  there  was 
insufficient evidence to show that the applicant's  discharge was 
erroneous  or  unjust . 
After  reviewing  the  circumstances 
surrounding the applicant's  discharge, we find that his discharge 
in 1948 was proper.  The applicant's  discharge had its basis in 
his  trial  and  conviction  by  a  general  court-martial based  on 
alleged violations of the  93rd Article  of War.  We  do not  find 
persuasive  evidence  has  been  provided  which  would  lead  us  to 
believe  that  the  conviction  was  erroneous  or  unjust. 
The 
recently-accomplished affidavits relating to the altercation  in 
question are standardized statements and, in our estimation, so 
long  after  the  events,  do  not  provide  credible  support  for  a 
finding that  the applicant's  conviction was  based  on  erroneous 
information, inadequate counsel or racial bias.  In addition, the 
applicant's  post-service  submission  was  reviewed.  While  the 
authors of the supporting documents are favorably disposed toward 
him,  the  Board  majority  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  recently 
submitted  evidence  is  insufficient  to  establish,  to  their 
satisfaction, that recharacterization of his discharge based  on 
clemency is warranted at this time. 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: 
A  majority  of  the panel  finds insufficient evidence  of  error  or 
injustice and recommends the application be denied. 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive Session on 3 November 1998, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603: 

Ms. Rita S.  Looney, Panel Chair 
Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member 
Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member 

I 

By  a majority vote, Ms.  Looney  and Mr.  Shaw voted  to deny  the 
applicant's  stated  request.  Mr.  Wheeler  voted  to  upgrade  the 

2 

87- 04437 

applicant's  discharge to a general based on clemency, but  did not 
desire  to  submit  a  minority  report. 
The  following  documentary 
evidence was considered: 

Exhibit  F.  Record of Proceedings,  dated  15 Apr 88. 
Exhibit G.  Letter from a Member of Congress,  dated 18 Dec  97, 

w/atchs. 

/- Ud+ 

RITA S .   LOONEY 
Panel Chair 

I 

u 

3 

87-04437 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Office of the Assistant Secretary 

AFBCMR 87-04437 

F€B  1 9  1999 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF 

Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction 
of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A 
Stat 1 16), it is directed that: 

conditions). 

d as general (under honorable 

Director 
Air Force Review Boards Agency 

W 

’ 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Office of the Assistant Secretary 

MEMORANDUM FOR  THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR 

CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR) 

FROM:  SAFMB 
SUBJEC 

serial NW~- 

I have carefully considered all aspects of this case and do not agree with the majority of 
the AFBCMR panel that the applicant’s request for upgrade of his discharge should be denied. 
Although the evidence presented does not substantiate that the applicant’s court-martial 

and subsequent discharge were improper or conttary to the provisions of the governing 
regulations under which they were effected, the applicant has provided numerous documents 
attesting to his good post-service conduct and achievements.  Additionally, it was noted that he 
has no police record or record of any misconduct in civilian life.  The supporting documents 
indicate that he has maintained the standards of good citizenship in the community since his 
discharge in 1948. 

& 

I am convinced that the applicant’s impeccable post-service conduct over an extensive 

period of time is sufficient reason to approve an upgrade based on clemency.  However, I do not 
find that sufficient basis has been established to w m t  award of an honorable discharge as the 
applicant  requests.  I therefore agree with the minority member of the panel and direct that the 
applicant’s dishonorable discharge be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) 
discharge. 

I/ Director 

Air Force Review Boards Agency