1. Inadequate questioning of L/Cpl Nita, my son's roommate and owner of the gun that killed him, as well as inadequate questioning of his two friends, Michael Foreman and Del Stackhouse, who provided Mr. Nita with his alibi for the day. Mr. Nita kept the gun illegally in a storage locker outside the base retrieving it from the person who owned the locker saying he was going to do some target practice. He later stated that he took it from the locker because my son had asked to borrow it. No one witnessed James asking to borrow the gun, or Mr. Nita giving the gun to him. No one ever saw my son with that gun. Mr. Foreman and Mr. Stackhouse refused my request to take polygraphs and Mr. Nita became very upset at the suggestion, without really responding.

2. The gun was found with the safety on. This is part of the NCIS report and the JAG report. Several conflicting theories have been advanced, none by the NCIS, who chose to ignore this fact. I spoke with every person who was in that room. All categorically deny touching the gun. I believe they would remember because they would have had to pick it up and they would have gotten blood on their hands.

3. In the JAG manual investigation, it says that Michael Ray spoke to Leo Nita in his room at approximately 7 pm., 1 hour 20 minutes before he came to Sgt. Briedt with his suspicions that my son had shot himself in the bathroom.

4. The bullets were a very unusual type which I have been unable to trace in the Seattle area. There were only five bullets found in my son's room that would fit that gun. One killed him, one was in the gun, three were on his dresser. Two were a different type than the one that killed him. Bullets come in boxes. No attempt was made to trace these bullets by the NCIS.

5. There was no note, my son called me approximately 5 hours before his death to discuss shipping his car to Washington, and the items he wanted sent with it. He bought and mailed a money order for this purpose that day. He also bought a new watch. He had recently inherited $5000 from his grandmother's estate, his car was paid for before he inherited that money, so he had no money problems. He also had no girl problems.

6. My son supposedly shot himself at 6 p.m. No one heard a gunshot.

7. No fingerprints were taken anywhere in the room. I understand that the gun's outside surface was too bloody to fingerprint, but they could have fingerprinted the cartridge, the remaining bullet, the case the gun came in, and the inside of the room.

8. Gunpowder residue tests taken on the hands of I don't know who, because the NCIS wouldn't tell me, were thrown out without being tested.

9. The bathroom door, according to Lt. Col. Harmon, the commanding officer at the time, could have been locked from the outside. I don't know how perhaps with the screwdriver that opened it. It took them about 15 seconds to open the door with the screwdriver and no damage was done to the lock or the door. This was never checked out by the NCIS.

10. My son had a roll of film developed that day at a 1-hour film processing store. He picked up the package at 3:30 pm. When I received the evidence package from the NCIS in June 1992, 7 (seven) of the pictures were missing from the package and all the negatives were gone. I asked the NCIS about this and they said they never noticed they were missing.

I am also concerned about morale problems on the base as evidenced in off-therecord statements of boys I have spoken and statements from Lt. Col. Harmon. These are:

1. Evidence of harassment of "newbies"-Lt. Col. Harmon admitted to me that this was a problem he was trying to overcome. A Corporal Elliot was said to have harassed my son and other new Marines. He is no longer in the Marine Corps, but all my questions about this individual were rebuffed. 2. The existence of the "Mexican Connection"— -a derogatory term for a group of boys who were my son's friends. Lt. Col. Harmon lied to me telling me that most of these boys were drunks or on drugs and were not credible witnesses. He told me that most of them were being sent away from the base or discharged. I found a list of them and called their mothers. At the time I confronted Lt. Col. Harmon with the information that I'd found outthat none of the boys had been discharged, he could only stammer and I never did get a satisfactory explanation from him for his lie.

3. Several people alluded to the fact that my son was given a bad time for being a Mormon. I don't know the extent of this.

There was evidence to support a conclusion of suicide. It is not my job to present that evidence in this statement. I will say, that there was just as much evidence to suggest that he intended to continue his life. That being the case, it makes the lack of physical evidence crucial in the conclusion of suicide. My son deserved the benefit of the doubt in this situation and he did not get it. He was convicted without benefit of counsel or the right to defend himself. We were not given that right on his behalf. It was taken from us in the first hours after his death, when the NCIS decided it was suicide and failed to collect evidence necessary to rule out homicide. Robert Power, then assistant to the director of the NIS, in a conversation we had after I received their report, told me that I was lucky to get anything, that if my son had died on a city street somewhere, I'd have received a 3 x 5 card saying he'd shot himself. Aside from demonstrating an appalling lack of sensitivity (typical NCIS behavior), his statement showed the very attitude that causes problems within the NCIS and the reason for these hearings today. The NCIS is a dangerous combination of Keystone Cops mentality coupled with monstrous arrogance. These are my suggestions for change in the investigative process:

1. Get a preliminary report to the parents/next of kin within 1 month. Most information has been gathered at this point and it will relieve the stress and distrust the parent may be going through. This will allow the parent to question and clear up discrepancies. Often the parent's lack of trust is magnified during this initial period and they feel as if the military is hiding something. In the case of a possible suicide, it heightens the suspicion of homicide and/or a cover-up.

2. Always assume a worst-case scenario in these cases. Realize that a greater burden of proof will be expected by the parents because the death is in the military. The military investigative bodies be held to a higher standard than any other investigative body. Our boys deserve it.

3. Realize that the parent or next of kin plays as important a part of the process as the investigator. Do not dismiss their concerns as inability to accept suicide as a conclusion. Train investigators to avoid condescension in communication with the parents. Do not talk down to them, most of them are as smart as the investigator or smarter. Each case is individual, of course, but most parents can deal with painful truths and facts better than has been realized.

4. Clear up the "Privacy Act" excuse. The NCIS whited out alot of their report citing the privacy act. The JAG didn't white out anything. Which is the rule? I believe we as parents or loved ones have the right to know the names of the persons involved with our children and who may have caused their deaths.

5. Make a suicide profile part of the recruiting process or eliminate it as a "guess" for cause of death after the fact. As I stated at the beginning, I believe any member of this committee vulnerable to suicide. How vulnerable would you be to homicide that then looks into all areas of your life, where the investigators get out their ouija boards and decide it must have been a suicide in the absence of real evidence? If extenuating circumstances make a definitive conclusion impossible, have the guts to say so, instead of demeaning person's character by guesswork. This is the "blame-the-victim" mentality that reflects the laziness and lack of training in the military investigative bodies.

6. Somehow, more freedom of speech must be encouraged in the military. I realize that a fine balance must be maintained in the interest of discipline, but for too long that scale has balanced in favor of an unhealthy silence and a pervasive attitude of fear that is hampering progress and indeed justice in the military. I have found a disgusting cowardice and buckpassing at the very highest echelons of our military, which filters down and makes the experience for those who serve faithfully and bravely unsafe from inside.

7. I call for Roy Nedrow and Robert Powers to fired for their inability to deal fairly and sensitively with the public which they serve and to administrate in this supposed area of their expertise.

It is not fair for the Government to leave me wondering and having to deal with the ambivalence of suicide vs. homicide for the rest of my life. I would like to spare other parents this agony. I believe, after over 3 years in this struggle, that is easy to get away with murder in the military, and I feel a moral responsibility to speak out on this topic, in my son's name, no matter how he died, for the benefit of those who are now serving.

I am writing this statement March 9, 1993. Under the House Defense Authorization Act, Section 1185, I requested a review of my son's case dated December 12,

1995. I blame Congress for the length of time I've had to wait for a final report. They passed an unfunded mandate that made them look sympathetic to our problems, but actually is an almost impossible task for the Inspector General's office as it is now funded. Talk is cheap, people.

I ask this committee to put it's money and efforts where many people's mouths are, to thoroughly review all aspects of this tragic situation and make the corrections necessary.

I am including only a few copies of the hundreds of letters I've written in my fight for justice and truth. Please include them as part of my testimony. Please note that Roy Nedrow declined my request for a meeting when I was in Washington, D.C. in May 1993. There was a time when I felt we could work together. That time is past. Please do the job you were elected to do.

Thank you.

[Additional information is retained in committee files.]

PREPARED STATEMENT BY BUSTER AND MELODY LAHEY, PARENTS OF A1C DAVID

TRAVIS HARPER, USAF

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee on Personnel: We are the parents of A1C David Travis Harper, who died as the result of an alleged self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head, December 19, 1993, while serving active duty in the 51st Supply Sq. at Osan Air Force Base in Korea.

Through our own extensive investigation, we are convinced our son did not die as reported by the Office of Special Investigation of the Air Force. The Air Force claims they can not and will not answer our questions or investigate the numerous discrepancies because our son's death was investigated only as a suicide.

Our son went out after an alert with friends to have a good time and was found dead in a weapons vault the following morning with civilian cloths on. There were two guns found at the scene, both had been fired. The GUA-5 had been fired ten times. The 9MM had been fired four times. There were no finger prints found on either weapon. There was no gun powder residue found on our son's hand or clothing. The bullet and shell casing were never found that killed our son. There are eight rounds of ammunition missing out of vault 824 to this day. All of this was suppose to have taken place in a locked from the inside vault.

Our son never showed any signs of depression. His friends that were with him on the night in question said he was very happy and having fun. David was having no problems in his life, loved the Air Force and had a brilliant career in the Air Force.

I am providing you with the following information and discrepancies and am requesting an indepth and follow-up investigation concerning our son's death. It seems very clear to us that our son was murdered.

Thank you for your attention.

[Additional information is retained in committee files.]

PREPARED STATEMENT BY SHIRLEY J. KUMPF-Knight and KENNETH W. KUMPF, D.D.S., PARENTS OF AARON KUMPF

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: The following is a list of inconsistencies concerning our son, Aaron M. Kumpf's death.

We were informed that Aaron died the morning of November 16, 1985. The last Letterman Hospital nursing notes were recorded on November 15, 1985 at 1140 hours.

Aaron was authorized to leave the ward only if accompanied by another patient of a designated status, or staff. When Aaron's body was found, he was wearing a heavy fleece lined jacket. November 16, 1985 was a warm, sunny day. During our visits with Aaron at Letterman, we never saw Aaron wear a jacket during the day. In addition, if he were going to leave this "closed" ward, he would not draw attention to himself by wearing a jacket.

Aaron's body was photographed by M.P.'s prior to its being moved.

a. Livrous mortis, the pooling of blood at the lowest points in the body after death, was concentrated in the neck, head and shoulders. Yet, the body was photographed lying on a flat, even surface.

b. Photographs showed tire tracts leading away from Aaron's body. The movement of the tires pushed dirt over Aaron's feet and trousers. c. This evidence strongly indicates the body had been moved.

Inconsistencies or omissions in the autopsy:

a. The San Francisco Coroner performed all autopsies prior to and after Aaron's autopsy during General Bussey's tenure as Commander of Letterman Hospital. The Pathology department of Letterman, however, performed Aaron's autopsy. The autopsy was unauthorized by the family.

b. Photographs of injury on the anal area exist. These injuries were listed in the provisional anatomic results, but deleted in the final autopsy.

c. Results from an anal swab, taken during the autopsy were omitted in the autopsy findings. The Army and the San Francisco Coroner have refused numerous requests for these findings.

d. A 23 centimeter chest injury, which had been sutured shut, exists with no description or photographs of the damage of underlying tissue, heart or major blood vessels.

e. There was a fabric burn on his jawline and cheek. A deep circular abrasion existed on his neck below the fabric burn. These injuries were not mentioned in the autopsy.

Condition of Aaron's clothes:

a. There was a large area of blood on the left side of Aaron's shorts, but no blood inside the trousers. The individual who discovered Aaron's body indicated that the pants were torn, but not at the zipper, and partially pulled down.

b. There were both droplets and smudges of blood on the socks, but no blood inside the shoes.

The "suicide note":

a. The alleged "suicide note" had fingerprints on it from a left hand. These fingerprints were never identified. The placement of the fingerprints indicated that the note was written by a right-handed individual. Aaron was left handed.

b. Hand writing analysis was inconclusive.

C.I.D.:

a. The C.I.D. officer indicated on the eve of Aaron's death that there would be no coverup of this case. Subsequently, we have not been able to obtain casualty reports concerning his death.

b. The Officer of the Day was informed by the C.I.D. to have a photographer available during the autopsy, as this was a possible sexual molesta

tion case.

PREPARED STATEMENT BY ROBYN HALL, MOTHER OF MR2 MICHAEL J. LESLIE, JR., USN

My son's death took away part of my future, a great deal of my past and made my present a place of grief and longing a good portion of the time. I pass the funeral home that handled his funeral several times a week. I pass through the neighborhood where he grew up or the recruiting station where he joined the Navy and all of this reminds me of my loss, although nothing needs to remind me because Michael is in my thoughts so much of the time. Unless you have lost a child and I sincerely hope you have not, you have no idea how very, very painful it is. If there is anything more painful I pray I never experience it. My son died a violent death, a gunshot wound to the head. Adding to the pain of losing him is knowing that after he served his country loyally and proudly for 62 years he did not get a properly conducted investigation into his death. My son deserved more than the unbelievably sloppy investigation that was conducted by the NIS. Michael's death was ruled suicide within 24 hours of his death, before any investigation had been done. He was handcuffed to the steering wheel of his marked security vehicle and was on duty at the time of his death. That, added to the “interviews" with the two Saipan policemen who were nearby, surely indicated a proper investigation should be conducted. But a proper investigation was not conducted and I strongly feel that American service members and their families deserve more than this. My son was proud of what he had accomplished in the Navy and I am very proud to have had a son like him. I am not proud however of how the Navy has treated his tragic death. All of the parents who have suffered so much because of the poor quality of the investigations into our loved one's deaths do not want this to continue to happen to other families. I have enclosed the list of questions I sent to the Secretary of the Navy when I requested the review of Michael's case. Please seriously consider the plight of the families who may never know what caused their loved one's deaths due to the poor quality of the investigations conducted by the military investigative services.

[Additional information is retained in committee files.]

PREPARED STATEMENT BY W.E. AND L.T. MACCHIONI, PARENTS OF LT. RODNEY ERNEST MACCHIONI, USN

The Senate Armed Services Committee has received the information concerning the flawed investigation into the death of our son, Lt. Rodney Ernest Macchioni, and the Inspector General, DOD's office has received our request to re-open this case with the purpose of obtaining the truth as to what actually happened to cost our son his life while serving his second tour as a Naval Officer.

In that we are your constituents, we are writing to you today to make the following specific requests:

1. That you act on our and our son's behalf as our ombudsman in assuring that we receive full details as to the date of these hearings and that we receive information as to what steps to follow to be allowed to submit written testimony for the record, and that said testimony be reviewed during these proceedings.

2. That you represent us by your presence at the press conference, which will be scheduled early on the morning on the day of the hearing.

3. That you provide us with a copy of your letter to the Senate Armed Services Committee and advise us of the response that you receive.

4. Did not take any fingerprints.

5. Took the scene of the crime for face value and did not treat it as a homicide. 6. Did not check to see who might have access to the many keys around because of it being Navy property.

7. Did not look at all of the contracts that he was working on at the time of his death.

8. Didn't provide a list of personal items taken from the home.

This information and the enclosed photo are for your Washington files, in the event that the case information on our son is in your district office.

[John and Joanne MacCaskill's testimony is retained in committee files, as per family request.]

PREPARED STATEMENT BY Cassandra M. ALLEYNE, MOTHER OF DT3 PAUL R.

MAMBY, USN

Mr. Chairman and Members of the subcommittee, on March 16, 1990 my son, DT3 Paul R. Mamby, was found hanging from a telephone pole in back of the trailer in which he resided, off base in Burton, South Carolina, with two roommates. He had been stationed at Paris Island Naval base.

My experience of both the military and local police investigative procedures has been nothing less than frustrating, heart breaking and disenchanting. The military portrays itself to be a self governing entity with the motto "We take care of our own". My question is how do they “take care” of their own and to whom must they answer?

My first contact with a military representative after my son's death, was Lt. Sylvia Wasylyk of CACO services. I must state here that Lt. Wasylyk's conduct was exemplary and far exceeded the call of duty! Her compassion, sensitivity, support, professionalism, and thoroughness were my most and regrettably my only positive experience of military conduct. Her execution of duties regarding final disposition of my son's remains, provided a buffer for me during the most devastating experi ence of my life. I remain eternally grateful to Lt. Sylvia Wasylyk and in no way do I consider her instrumental in the blocking of information that I requested from the military or civilian law enforcement agencies. On the contrary, Lt. Wasylyk informed me of my right as a parent to request information when I expressed my concerns regarding unanswered questions that surfaced, as outlined in the following. My first contact with a military investigative representative was by telephone after the case was closed, less than 10 days after my son's death. I have record of this investigator repeatedly saying "I don't know", "I'm not sure", "I can't answer that", "I'm sorry, but it's hard to explain how he hung himself". These were the primary responses to my questions regarding circumstances, witnesses, investigative procedures, the cause and manner of my son's death. I now understand that he was not calling to give me information, rather to extract only negative information that could help him develop a report that would concur with a suicide determination. If it's hard to explain what happened then, should the case be closed? This first phone