SwiftVets.com

[jwbarden]

[Hondo]

jwbarden:

Not exactly correct, but close enough. Members of reserve components are also subject to the UCMJ when performing inactive duty training (e.g., drills or other unpaid work for which retirement points are granted) as well as when performing active duty. See Article 2 of the UCMJ, available at

http://www.army.mil/references/UCMJ/

There is a further distinction that comes into play for National Guard types vice Federal reservists (this distinction doesn't apply to Navy/USMC reservists, as all Navy/USMC reservists are federal). For National Guard (ARNG and ANG) types, the UCMJ only applies if they are on inactive duty for Federal vice state purposes. In practice, this means when performing drills or other training outside the US. (It does happen; we sent a lot of ANG and ARNG folks to Honduras in the 1980s and 1990s for Annual Training). Theoretically, National Guardsmen are subject to a state code of military justice at other times.

Ran across this distinction firsthand many years ago when supporting some ARNG annual training and observed some real "winners" in action. Per JAG, not much we could do but refer them back to their own ARNG chain of command for action under their state military code vice preferring charges under the UCMJ. Training we supported was in CONUS; had training been outside of the US, JAG advised that they'd have been under Federal orders and therefore subject to the UCMJ. Since training was in CONUS, training was under state orders and was therefore technically not in a Federal capacity.

Bottom line, however, is that unless the UCMJ read very differently during the early 1970s (and I think the part defining who is subject to the UCMJ remains virtually unchanged since that time frame), you are correct. Kerry is off the hook for meeting with his "friends" in Paris.

Bummer.

[jwbarden]

Hondo:

As a NAVMARCORRESCEN CO from 1984-86, I am aware that reservists may be subject to UCMJ during drill periods, but advice from JAG types and common sense always steered me away from this. The minute you write a man up, you lose him for good. It had better be for an offense that common sense tells you is both a common law crime and an offense against the Ten Commandments and you don't want the servicemember around in any event.

I brought this topic up to bring everyone's attention to the manner in which Kerry slicked his way out of 2 years of NAVRES drills. Look back about 4 posts.

[cccalligan]

[jwbarden]

CAPT Calligan:

Presumably you majored in Mechanical Engineering and were plausably of some use to the submarine community. Kerry majored in PoliSci, never qualified as an OOD(F), and was a sorehead. I make no claims for the justice of Kerry's orders. His orders out of Viet Nam and into an admiral's aide billet are an example of fast and fancy detailing motivated by the threat of political influence. He got hiz rice grains in the ass on 13MAR69. He requested hiz thrice wounded reassignment on 17MAR69. He received hiz thrice wounded reassignment to hiz dream billet requiring extention on ACDU to APR71 on 20MAR69. He executes these orders modified to extend ACDU to 31AUG70 on or about 26MAR69. This sequence screams political influence.

The CHNAVPERS msg jetting him out of Viet Nam was the authority superceding his original contract, since it extended his time on active duty.

[cccalligan]

Thanx for the knowlegable reply (and you've got the right bubblehead).

That is an incredible timeline! Kerry got action from BUPERS in two weeks that would have taken a "non-privileged" grunt two years to accomplish. It's surprising how little is said about this in the book.

Is BUPERS msg dtg 202117ZMAR69 posted on his site (or anywhere else)? I need it to complete my colletion of "Kerry Krap."

C3
_________________
Chris Calligan
CAPT, USNR (Ret)

[jwbarden]

Pages 3 of 4 and 4 of 4:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Naval_Messages.pdf

The orders and ordmod flew in less time than it takes us mere mortals to get an open AUTOVON line to talk to our detailers.

[lrb111]

[air_vet]

[Boundless]

>> Someone tell me this applies...

> ... not to candidate Kerry

There might not be a UCMJ or USC issue here, but I see
no reason to avoid asking candidate Kerry to explain
exactly how he discharged his Reserve obligations, and
managed to avoid 2 years of drills.

The court of public opinion operates under different
rules than real courts, and Kerry has shown no
reluctance to attack his opponent on precisely this
issue.

We have some credible theorizing here that Kerry
was not AWOL, but there is also disagreement on
that. The person who can lay this to rest is Kerry,
if, of course, he ever again allows the press to ask
him random questions.

[air_vet]

[cccalligan]