Page images
PDF
EPUB

whose actions resulted in Dennis' death. To be more specific, we told them to do one on Norris, Harris, Miller, Barr, etc. and then we can talk about it, as Dennis' death sentence began on Friday, the 13th of October, 1995.

On March 5, 1996, we were informed by special agent Clements that a psychological autopsy was going to be performed in our son's case. She said, "The Navy, as a general policy right now, has decided that they are going to do what are called psychological autopsies on all cases." We could choose to participate or not participate. With or without our input, one was going to be done.

We passed this information on to our CACO liaison, CDR Skinner. After that, we received a phone call from CDR Skinner's superior stating that the psychological autopsy would not be done as she agreed with us that it would be insult to injury in our son's case. We believe that it was a CDR Van Buskirk who made the call. We can go back through our records and verify this if you so request.

Either Mr. Nedrow is unaware of the actions of NCIS agents, or NCIS agents are unaware of Navy policy. In either case, these facts can only support our observations, as well as those of other families, concerning dealings with the NCIS.

In our opinion, these contradictions, and the many other deficiencies previously identified, support our belief that investigations into military deaths should be conducted by an investigative agency that is truly independent of the Department of Defense.

Today, we received the attached letter from RADM Gunn. Although many of the questions were directed to the Navy as long ago as October 1995, it seems interesting that this letter was dated September 12, 1996, the date of the Senate hearings. At the Flag Officers Casualty Action Board (FOCAB) meeting on January 5, 1996, we asked verbal questions concerning many issues. In addition we submitted 62 typed questions and comments concerning the statement and notes of the U.S.S. Los Angeles Executive Officer, LCDR Harris. These questions are exhibit 25, enclosure 6 of our testimony. We had been told in January 1996 that we would receive a direct answer to each of our direct questions. In our March 7, 1995 letter to RADM Gunn we also asked questions. This letter, with attachments is exhibit 40 of our testimony. ADM Boorda instructed ADM Bowman to have BUPERS address our personnel issues and for ADM Johnson to task CINCPAC with answering the questions concerning the hazing investigation interviews, etc. It was rather confusing to be told that CINCPAC was tasked with obtaining this data and then receive the attached letter from CAPT Miller (COMSUBPAC) dated March 27, 1996 which stated that the information that we requested was in the JAGMAN report or the NCIS report. Our request originated because this information was not in the JAGMAN report up to and including ADM Zlatoper's endorsement. On April 2, 1996, we sent a letter to RADM Grant concerning CAPT Miller's response which is attached for your reference. On April 15, 1996, COMSUBPAC provided us with some of the documents that we pointed out were absent from the JAGMAN report. There was no explanation as to why they were missing from the JAGMAN report. These documents are also absent from the final NCIS report. (exh 2A, 3A & 4A).

Since many of the issues referred to in RADM Gunn's September 12, 1996 letter with attachments are issues relating to discussions at the hearing, we have quickly put together our comments below:

3. Bureau of Naval Personnel (BUPERS)

a. This response indicates that there has been no change in policy.
b. We requested that Dennis be dressed in his dress blues, not his dress
whites. This request was directed to Chief Braggs of the U.S.S. Los Angeles
and to a woman at the mortuary (her name was previously provided to
CDR Skinner and we will retrieve it from our records at your request).
c. One of our first questions upon learning of our son's death was if our son
received last rites. We always thought that the reason for noting religious
affiliation on the service member's "dog tag" was to notify a member of the
clergy that was of the service member's religious affiliation. In our son's
case it appears that no clergy was called to the hospital. Within days of our
son's death, we received a call from Chaplain Craft. He was very kind and
considerate. We were grateful to receive his call. However, he was unable
to tell us if anyone had been with or prayed over our son at the hospital
when he died. In the civilian world, it is common practice for a member of
the clergy to be on call. We asked if this was the case at Tripler and we
were told they didn't know. We suggested that they recommend it. It would
give some comfort to know that our loved ones didn't die alone without a
prayer whispered.

There are BUPERS issues that we addressed that are not mentioned in
RADM Gunn's letter. Some examples are: a package of Halloween food

items that we mailed to our son on October 16, 1995 was received by the U.S.S. Los Angeles Command on October 20, 1995. The regulations state that mail arriving after a service member's death is to be "returned to sender" unopened. Dennis' package was opened, correspondence inside was opened and we received a box of garbage 2 months later. When we received Dennis' service records via FOLA his accomplishments had not been entered since arriving on the U.S.S. Los Angeles on December 30, 1994, not even the Dolphins that he died for. CDR Skinner did have that part of Dennis' records brought up to date. The last medical entry recorded for Dennis by the U.S.S. Los Angeles was in January 1995.

4. Bureau of Medicine (BUMED)

b. We disagree. The military is attempting to pass the buck to the funeral director. It is the responsibility of the military to inform the family of any organs not accompanying the service member's remains.

e. We were advised that Dennis' body would be sent home on military flights on an "as available" basis. It was only our insistence that Dennis be sent home via a commercial flight, with our offer to pay the expense, that the prompt return of Dennis' body took place.

4. Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS)

b. The answer seems to be no. See exhibit 40 of our testimony identifying missing documentation. As mentioned in our testimony, the JAGMAN investigation was also lacking. Apparently the list of names that Harris claimed to have in his possession of individuals involved in the hazing incident has never been produced.

c. The answer is no. We had to request that the Navy obtain the separate interviews. See our exhibit 40.

d. The claim by NCIS that we were presented with and read 190 interviews, statements and results of interviews on November 10, 1995 is very misleading. Exhibit 46, is an NCIS screening interview which contains 60 crew members names. There are other screening interviews with multiple names listed. Seven documents contain the interviews of 119 crew members. In our testimony, we pointed out the deficiencies with these interview pages and the lack of individual documentation of some of the crew members listed. This fails to address the issue of poorly documented interviews, and that interviews conducted during our son's death investigation were removed and diverted elsewhere.

e. How many 18-20 year olds use words such as “culprits” as consistently appears in NCIS interview documentation? We mention the deficiencies of case notes in our exhibits 50-53.

f. Our comment did not relate to the NCIS destruction of evidence, but rather to the U.S.S. Los Angeles Command which was "losing" documents related to its hazing investigation. This fact was made clear to the FOCAB on January 5, 1996. As a result of our March 7, 1996 letter to RADM Gunn (exh 40), the command produced some documents, but which to this day remain incomplete. Why was it necessary for us to inform either NCIS or JAG that documents were missing?

g. We read MMI Vinson's statement on November 10, 1995. We believe that this should state that the family has been requesting to see Corpsman Drish's entries to our son's medical records. Again, this is something that was of extreme personal interest to us since our son's death. We don't know of a parent that wouldn't be interested in knowing if their child suffered, the care that was provided, etc. Attached is the response dated August 28, 1996, that we received from RADM Fisher. Apparently, the corpsman did not record his treatment of Dennis on the appropriate medical forms. His reasoning was that he gave a statement to NCIS and that Dennis' records were at the hospital. A medical person can always make a late entry, as long as he clearly indicates the date he is actually making the entry. RADM Fisher comments that NCIS informed him that we read the corpsman statement on November 10, 1995. We only read Corpsman Drish's statement concerning the events of October 13, 1995. In order to stay in chronological order, we were to come back to his statement concerning the night Dennis died. We never did. NCIS was well aware of this as we contacted them after our meeting and requested it to be read to us. We were told that it would be in the final report. We have waited a long time to read his medical documentation only to be told that there isn't any. It is hard to imagine that an HM1 did not document the medical care that he provided in a situation

such as our son's. The statements of the other crew members who went to the hospital with our son are also conspicuously absent.

5. Office of the Judge Advocate General (OJAG)

b. This answer indicates that there is no procedure for the protection of victims.

To date we have not been provided with the direct answers to the 62 direct questions and comments concerning LCDR Harris' statement and attachments that we presented to the FOCAB on January 5, 1996 (exh 25, encl 6). After Admiral Boorda's death, we observed a real decline in communication. We hadn't heard anything from RADM Gunn since April. We wrote to Admiral Johnson on July 3, 1996 to confirm that he would answer our questions. When we did not receive a response, we wrote a second letter to ADM Johnson on August 1, 1996. These are the only two letters that we have written to ADM Johnson. He has never responded. Again we thank you for allowing us to present our testimony.

[Additional information is retained in committee files.]

PREPARED STATEMENT by Kim GILBERT, SISTER OF SSG KEVIN PEYTON, USA Mr. Chairman and Members of the subcommittee: My brother, SSG Kevin Peyton, was found dead in his truck of a gunshot wound on January 12, 1994 while stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. The Army notified my mother that he had died of a "self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head". We were shocked but confident that there would be a thorough investigation and anxiously awaited the results. The Army was very sympathetic and helpful initially, but afterwards we were left completely out, as if Kevin belonged to the military and it was none of our concern. We never received any calls pertaining to the status of the investigation . . . not even a call to let us know whether they had found a note, a will, or to give us the results of the autopsy. After 2 months, I contacted the Army and began to ask questions. It was only alter talking to the Army and later to some of Kevin's friends, that I began to suspect that my brother may not have taken his own life.

Kevin had served in the Army for 9 years and had a spotless record. He was a graduate of Ranger School and SERE School which are the two most difficult training courses offered by the military. He was a member of the Golden Knights Army Parachute Team for 6 years during which time the team excelled in competition, winning three World Cups. Kevin also won numerous awards personally, too many to mention. He was according to their own words, one of the Army's elite. Kevin loved the Army and planned on making it his career.

To help further his career, Kevin elected to attend SERE school, which he did in April 1993. He was very gung-ho when he went into the school; however, he was a changed person when he came out. After SERE, he was very disillusioned with the Army. He told a friend that he tried to report something which was not right that had happened in there but he was told to keep quiet about it. He was very disturbed and couldn't sleep. Around this same time, someone in the military approached him on post and talked to him about the New World order, apparently trying to recruit him. It was alter this that he first noticed someone following him. He lived in fear and began to carry a gun at all times.

After Kevin had arrived at Camp McCall for SERE, an instructor disappeared and was later found dead of a gunshot wound to the head. Alter Kevin's death, I contacted CID to tell them of my concerns about someone following him, that there might be a connection to the death of the SERE instructor, or some involvement by one of the survivalist groups in the area. Rather than just taking down the information that I had for him, Special Agent Robert Catron kept me on the phone for 2 hours while he maligned my brother's name, dismissed everything I had to say, and even went so far as to tell me that they could find no record anywhere that Kevin had ever attended SERE school. Reports that he had been followed were ignored, because as Catron put it, "no one really believed him". Kevin's girlfriend told CID that Kevin had pointed out one of the guys who was following him but they did not even question her as to what he looked like.

The Army's investigation was just a charade and nothing more. Their interviews were conducted only after word had already spread that Kevin had committed suicide (which I believe to have been deliberate on their part), thus influencing people's perspective of Kevin and his behavior. Not only that, but CID only interviewed a few people outside of the two military parachute teams he had been on, months afterwards, and only at my insistence. The focus of all of the interviews was on Kevin's mental condition and anything other than that was disregarded. The interviews were then edited for the report to better reflect the ruling of suicide . .

statements were either twisted, taken out of context or omitted altogether. The report contains many inaccuracies some of which I had tried to clarify with Special Agent Robert Catron but to no avail.

The CID report states that there was residue on Kevin's left hand but in an insufficient quantity to determine conclusively that he had shot the weapon; however, the gun was found in his right hand and there was no mention of any residue on that hand. According to the report there were no latent fingerprints found on the weapon. Also, they were unable to find any fingerprints inside the vehicle which we find very odd since he had owned the truck for a couple of years.

Kevin kept meticulous records... a detailed daily diary, letters and cards from friends, notes he made to himself. Mysteriously there was next to nothing of a personal nature for 1993 in the belongings which were returned, 22 months alter he had died, even though several people told us that he kept a notebook during that year in which he wrote down his thoughts.

There are indications of a possible connection to the CIA, FBI and/or DEA but we have not received any information on this nor do I think we ever will. Just to receive Kevin's military personnel file took approximately 1 year of repeated requests.

You have to wonder what kind of investigation it is when someone who feels he is being followed and is carrying a weapon for protection, dies just months later but CID does not feel it important enough to follow up on those leads. CID told us Kevin died in his vehicle in the barracks parking lot between 7:30 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. . . . a busy parking lot, yet no one heard a .45 being fired? To my knowledge CID made no attempt to determine if his truck was actually in the parking lot during that period of time. It is possible that he could have been shot elsewhere and then brought back to the parking lot. It is very obvious that the Army conducted this investigation with a predetermined ruling of suicide... looking only for information to support that ruling and everything else was either dismissed or ignored. It is much easier to portray Kevin as a person who cracked under the pressure and was mentally unstable, particularly since he cannot defend himself.

Due to some strange incidents since Kevin died, we have been very fearful. We have good reason to believe that our phones were tapped. We did not know who could possibly be behind this but began to actually suspect the Army since they seemed to be anticipating our every question. I have another brother who was also stationed at Fort Bragg for a period of time and even shared a home with Kevin while there. On several occasions since Kevin's death, Phil has felt he was being followed... why, we don't know. A mysterious visitor showed up at my mother's pretending to be new to the town. He managed to gain access to her home and after being left alone inside for a short while he cut his visit short. He has not been seen in the town since and no one has ever heard of him. There have been other incidents, such as the person working on my sister's phone line, a strange car parked in front of my house during the night, etc. All of these incidents may not amount to much individually, but looked at as a whole I believe there is some significance. Kevin was a very special person, not only to his family, but to many others. He was the light, joy and laughter in our lives and in the lives of those who knew him. Our family will never be the same without him and our hearts will forever have an emptiness. We have lost something that can never be replaced. When Kevin joined the Army, he did so with the desire to serve his country and the willingness to give his life if necessary and I am outraged to see how he has been treated in return. It is as if his life held no value and his death is not even worthy of a proper investigation. I can only conclude that the military is either not interested in finding out what actually happened or is trying to cover it up. We deserve more from our government and I refuse to sit idly by while he is treated this way. We want to know what happened and we will not rest until we have answers.

PREPARED STATEMENT BY KENNETH AND KATHLEEN PLUNKETT, PARENTS OF SHAWN A. PLUNKETT, USA

The action/lack of action on behalf of the U.S. Army and personnel resulted in some crucial evidence being destroyed. The death was classified as accidental self inflicted. The following actions will support the elements that it was not self inflicted, but possibly murder, and that the U.S. Army and its personnel were responsible for justice be obstructed. The following items show the page number of the investigation report they were on.

1. The gun is stated as being found: A. In the crook of the left arm. (page 6) B. On the floor cocked (page 7) C. on the table (page 7) D. One foot from the left shoul

der (page 11) E. Under left arm (page 11) F. Above and to left of the head (page 18)

2. There were no powder burns on his hands. (page 21)

3. Spent casing was not found, but he was shot inside armory. (page 9, 19 and

20)

4. CID laboratory report states Shawn's fingerprints were not on the gun or magazines. (page 4)

5. Barium antimony exam not even attempted as victim and armorer both handled weapons prior to the shooting and exam would not have proved or disproved any fact in question. (page 9)

6. Unit was locked into place, it appeared necessary as indications were that other persons might be involved and that a magazine may have been placed in the gun without his knowledge, with the intent to do him harm. Then later discounted through interviews of witnesses. (page 10) Witnesses could have lied.

7. Sgt. Raymond P. Manifase said he had searched the arms room, the dumpster, and the gauze used on Shawn, on two separate occasions, and was unable to find the spent casing. He also removed every weapon in the arms room to see if the casing may have ejected into the barrels or other cavities of them, did not find. It was also mentioned that several other Sgts. searched rooms and areas for the casing. It was never found. It was not found because Shawn did not shoot himself and someone picked up the casing and got rid of it. (page 9, 19 and 20)

8. Gun exam did not reveal any latent prints suitable for ID (page 33)

9. Some items in the room were not triangulated as it was deemed not necessary due to the incident being an accident rather than a criminal act. (page 9)

10. Report states he shot himself with his left hand, he was right handed, and couldn't do anything left handed, especially get the gun behind left ear and shoot himself. (page 19)

11. Autopsy was conducted after the body had been cleaned by the doctor doing the autopsy. By doing this the doctor contaminated any evidence. (page 21)

12. The forensic chemist states further exams were precluded due to insufficient sample. (page 33)

13. If weapons were never to be loaded and passed out loaded from the arms room, why didn't Kibler get into trouble for loading the weapons? His negligence caused a death, if what he said is true, this should have resulted in a severe reprimand. (page 22 and 24)

14. Part of Kibler's statement: Some of the guns had clips put in the by the armorer (Kibler) when they were not supposed to be loaded. Ammo was to be handed out separately. It appears there were 3 weapons involved. Kibler stacked the guns in holsters on top of each other. The two on the bottom were loaded. He said Plunkett knew the weapon on top was unloaded, because Plunkett was preparing a clip with rounds for it. Kibler stated that when Plunkett turned around, apparently to count more ammo, Kibler rearranged the stacking order of the weapons, by placing the two loaded 45's on the top, and the empty weapon on the bottom. Kibler stated shortly thereafter, Plunkett turned around, grabbed the top weapon from the holster using his left hand (a check of records revealed that Plunkett was right handed) pulled the slide back and placed the barrel against his head and pulled the trigger. Kibler said he believed that Plunkett thought the weapon was unloaded and was unaware the stacking order had been changed. Therefore accidentally shooting himself. (page 19)

15. Wound was described as being in two different places on his head. (page 11 and 21)

16. Someone came down the stairs when he heard the shot, he said as he was running down the stairs, he saw a flash as someone ran into the ??? (cannot read) room. He thought the flash was his roommate. (page 18)

17. One witness states Plunkett was standing when he was shot, another states he was sitting at a table. (page 12 and 17).

18. In the diagrams it shows two separate pools of blood on the table another shows a body across the room from the table with another pool of blood. How could there be so many pools of blood. These are indicating he was shot in two different places. (page 7 and 8)

19. There were stomach contents in the pool of blood on the floor, but nothing states whose it was. (page 7)

20. No one from the CID personally contacted us to explain the investigation when it was finished. About 6-8 months later I got about 6 papers in regards to the investigation, this was only after I kept after them.

21. Page 1 and 3 of report are missing, list of exhibits 1-4 are missing, we did not get a copy of the Womack autopsy report.

« PreviousContinue »