Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, December 20, 1993 TAG: 9312200053
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Los Angeles Times
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Long
But now, as military attorneys wind down the prosecutions of those accused of attacking women in a Las Vegas hotel, no one has been court-martialed, only one airman stands accused of assault and the vast majority of the cases have resulted in only small fines or reprimands.
The cases have fallen apart for a number of reasons: faulty evidence, uncooperative witnesses, victims who declined to step forward and the military's own code of silence, which in many cases shuts out prosecutors and prevented them from determining who assaulted whom.
When prosecutors began investigating the Tailhook incident, they found that the servicemen closed ranks and refused to identify the assailants.
Further hampering prosecution efforts were the alleged victims themselves, many of whom were intoxicated at the time and did not want to become further involved in the case.
Indeed, it was only Lt. Paula A. Coughlin, the original whistle-blower in the case, who testified at any length in a pretrial hearing - and her testimony was damaged when it appeared that she had identified the wrong man as her assailant.
When military justice experts look back on the Tailhook scandal and the dearth of court-martials, they are likely to see a situation in which virtually none of the participants seemed particularly interested in having prosecutions go forward.
Mike Powell, a former Vietnam War pilot and Marine Corps military attorney who is now a defense attorney for a dozen Tailhook defendants, said, "This was not the normal sleuthing case."
Describing the faulty witness recollections and other problems confronted by prosecutors, he said, "There was not a lot of evidence. It was not like guys left their fingerprints behind."
But in April, when the Pentagon inspector general's office released its findings on the 35th Annual Tailhook Symposium at the Las Vegas Hilton, the cases seemed rock-solid.
At least 90 victims of indecent assault were identified. Investigative files on at least 140 officers were referred to the Navy and Marine Corps for "appropriate action."
The inspector general conducted almost 3,000 interviews and 34 polygraph tests, photographed hundreds of officers in an effort to help victims identify their assailants, issued 19 subpoenas, staged many undercover operations and obtained more than 800 photographs depicting a wide range of scenes from the Tailhook weekend.
They found that women were grabbed on the buttocks and groped, pinched and fondled. Some victims were bitten by their assailants; others were knocked to the ground, their clothes ripped off.
"There is no excuse for the misconduct and unbecoming behavior that occurred at Tailhook '91," the inspector general said.
The fact that the cases now are falling short is troubling to many.
Nancy Stagg, a San Diego attorney who represents Coughlin, has seen the case against her client's alleged assailant dropped because of the apparent mistake in identification. Now she is pursuing a civil lawsuit against the Hilton and the Tailhook Association. It is scheduled for trial in March.
She said that nothing hurt justice in the Tailhook case more than when hundreds of Navy and Marine airmen closed ranks and said they were unable to identify their comrades, particularly those who participated in a rowdy gantlet where women were assaulted in a third-floor hallway.
"I think there is a code of silence among the witnesses as to what went on," she said. "I think it's something that probably is deeply rooted, and something that is peculiar to military organizations."
It was perhaps the greatest stumbling block for prosecutors. Dozens of airmen told investigators that they saw and heard nothing. Even when they were later granted immunity, they still reported that nothing had been amiss during the three days of partying.
According to a high-ranking Navy source, any Tailhook member who conceded that he saw misconduct could have been prosecuted for failing to stop or report it.
That danger alone, the source said, was enough to keep most of the men quiet.
The source, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, also noted that many of the women were either striptease artists or visitors who were themselves intoxicated and were hesitant to come forward for that reason.
In the end, he said, officials found that, while the actions of some men might have been reprehensible, the crimes were not easy to prove.
"There was certainly significant inappropriate behavior," he said. "Absolutely inappropriate behavior for a Navy-sanctioned event and inappropriate behavior for our people to engage in. But that doesn't make it inappropriate behavior that reaches the level of actual criminal activity."
Most of the cases were handled by Navy officials, and early in the investigation Vice Adm. J. Paul Reason testified that of 120 cases he reviewed, half were dismissed because of lack of evidence.
Despite the fact that none of the cases have gone to public court-martial, Navy Secretary John H. Dalton said recently that he is satisfied that broader reforms are being put in place to assure protections for women in the service.
Predicting that sexual abuse and harassment will not be tolerated in the future, he added: "I think that that message has been delivered to the fleet."
by CNB