He's just a statistical number........

I received a telephone call at my office. On the other end was the voice of an attorney that I had previously provided my services. The case was two counts of child molestation and of course the Suspect denies the sexual assaults. The attorney asked that I come into his office for a conference and review the case for defense. I hate child molestation cases as I detest child molesters. So now I have to walk the talk of not being biased. To handle the case with integrity and honesty. The Suspect is of Hispanic origin which put up a flag concerning the case. Understand what I am now going to write. In the Hispanic culture if a married man has a mistress on the side he will not "normally" go after the daughters of the mistress. Of course there is the one exception to the rule but it does not follow the rule.

According to the police report the suspect had molested the two daughters of his mistress at two separate times. The assault on the youngest who was about five at the time at the mistresses residence. The youngest sat on the lap of the Suspect, when the small apartment was occupied by the mistress and the older daughter, while the Suspect was sitting on the living room couch and the older daughter also on the couch. The relationship background was, the mistress is a single mother of two who knows the Suspect was married. The girls were starved for male affection. Which under normal circumstances lends an opening for a pedophile to sexually assault the child. Under normal circumstances the pedophile would not be very sexually active with his spouse and/or a mistress at the same time. His focus would be heavy upon the children. The second alleged assault was upon the older daughter on a bed in a garage at a friends residence. The police report looked very solid. So now what I needed to do was check out the reported information in the report and either prove or disprove the assaults.

As I read the police report I took notes on what I should look into. The police felt that the Suspect was lying during the interrogation. One area where the police thought the Suspect was lying was the location of the assault on the oldest daughter. The suspects story was that while estranged from his wife he was staying in the garage at a friends house. Apparently the wife reported to the police a domestic violence matter with the Suspect. The police were searching for the Suspect to arrest him for domestic violence and serve a restraining order on him. The police went to the friends house looking for the Suspect. The Suspect hearing that the police were there he hid under the covers of the bottom bed of a bunk bed. He then had two girls look like they were in bed under the covers, taking a nap. He told the interrogators that he could see the police but they could not see him. They asked how that was possible. He told them the garage door was open to where he could see them but closed to where they could not see him. According to the police that was when he sexually assaulted the older girl. The police felt that was impossible so they felt he was guilty because he was lying and indicated such in the report.

I drove to the location of the assault to photograph the scene as there were no crime scene photo's by the police. Once I arrived I knew the Suspect was not lying, that further in-depth investigation was needed. How did I know he was telling the truth? The police did not do their job and investigate thoroughly the incidents. The garage door was not the typical lift garage door. It was a sliding garage door. The door needed to be slid to the left for it to be opened. So how can the door be opened and closed at the same time? The door was open (to ones perspective) and closed (to anothers perspective) by being slightly opened or partially closed. From the exterior it is difficult for a person to see inside a partially opened door especially if the outside is lighter in brightness compared to a dark interior for the human eye can not and has not adjusted to the interior environment while in the bright exterior environment. The door being only slightly opened prevented the exterior light from exposing the dark interior to the light therefor keeping the interior dark. I took photos of the location.

My next step was to interview the mistress. I interview her at her residence. Her children were placed in the care of social services at a government residence for those children not placed in foster care because of the alleged sexual assault. She told me that her sister was against her being involved with a married man. It was also mentioned that her daughter had been sexually assaulted before, by a friend. The daughter on her own reported the assault to the school. Charges were never brought against that person. I found out that the current case was developed by the sister going to the school of the older daughter and reporting the sexual assault. The school then approached the girl about the assault. The girl acknowledged the assault. The mother indicated that nothing indicated that this assault occurred. The daughter never mentioned anything or showed any change in personality.

This is what probably occurred: The sister was total mad that her sister was seeing a married man as she felt he was a real bad man. Which is not unusual for a Hispanic woman. In that rage she went to the school to make the sexual assault report to stop the Suspect from seeing her sister. Why did she do that? Because in the prior sexual assault reported by the older daughter, the aunt saw the system in action. Also notice that the daughter did not make the report, it was the aunt. Because the daughter had been through this before if there had been an actual assault the daughter new the steps to take as she had done it before. The reason the aunt did it was to get at the Suspect. Why not go directly to the police? Because this direction worked before so utilize it again.

I received a call from the attorney that under discovery he received a video tape copy of the social services interview with both girls, interviewed separately. Watching the video I noticed that the social service personnel were actually spoon feeding the older daughter the information that they wanted to hear. They asked questions such as "Did he touch you here?" pointing to a specific location and the girl would say yes. The questions that should have been asked was "what happened?" "where did he touch you?, touch the same place" etc. This would have drawn out specifics to indicate truth and knowledge. The interview with the other daughter was also very informative to the defense but the prosecution dismissed the interview because it did not go the way the prosecution wanted. The younger indicated that she was never touched inappropriately by the suspect and that her sister was also in the same room.

Now let's go back to the beginning when the police were looking for the Suspect. Remember that there were two girls on the bed under the covers? Well, I needed to find that second girl. And things went my way. There was a prelim where not only did I attend but also the mother of the girls and her sister. Outside the court room I asked if the police had re-approached them for more information. The sister/aunt was not happy with who she thought was the investigator for the defense not knowing he was the detective on the case. She thought I was the prosecution investigator. I never implied that I was the prosecutions investigator, in fact when I interviewed the mistress I identified my self as a Private Investigator for the defense and showed my State License/Identification. The sister/aunt actually gave me the name and address of the second girl and that I need to interview her. I needed to get an interview with her before the police.

My Spanish is not fluent so I brought an interpreter with me. I interviewed the second girl and her father. This is what I actually found out about that day of the alleged sexual assault. When the police came the Suspect climbed onto the bottom bunk bed and went under the covers. He then called over the girls and had one lay on top of the covers on his right and left side then had them cover themselves with another blanket to make it look like the girls were taking a nap. His full body was under the covers. So it looked like this in levels: Top blanket, two girls, blanket and sheets, Suspect. It would have been impossible for the Suspect to touch the girl. Also he was afraid of being caught, why would he do something that could draw attention to his location and expose him thereby causing him to go to jail for which he was trying to allude. Also the girls father was also in the garage and verified the incident. By the way, after receiving permission to interview the second girl I asked that the father would not be present as he was also a witness and I did not want his testimony to be influenced by her statement and her statement to be influenced by her father being there. Both then indicated that when the police left everybody got up. Nothing happened. I asked the father and daughter that if necessary would they come to court. The father looked scared. He and his daughter were illegals. He was afraid that if he went to court that the prosecution would have them arrested and deport them. I told them I would talk to the attorney. Well, I asked the attorney about their concern and he indicated that citizenship would not be part of the questioning. I went back to the residence and found that the father and daughter took off and went to ground. I wold never be able to find them in time for trial.

I told the attorney of the situation we were now in. He had a meeting with the DA and took my findings. The DA agreed to drop the sexual assault on the older girl but was going to proceed with the allegation made by the younger. Whats funny about this is, the girl was too young to testify that nothing happened to her sister but old enough to testify that something happened to her when she indicated nothing happened to her according to her. The attorney made a plea deal with the DA, rather than fight because we had no witnesses to produce in the case as they vanished. It was better to plea than get hung out to dry.

The lessons learned in this case was that even though there was evidence to prove innocence the police were only interested in statistical numbers than a thorough investigation and determining the truth. If the suspect looks good for the crime charge them and let the courts sort it out. Which is a travesty to the issue of trust in the judicial system.

I don't get this

We all know that military life is way different than civilian life. The same applies with military law compared to civilian law. The U.C.M.J. (Uniform Code of Military Justice) is very different than civilian law. Also procedures in the civilian judicial system is totally opposite of the military procedures. Some times it may take awhile for someone to get used to Military Law and the military way of doing things. Some never get used to either. Here are some of the differences.

There was a case where this E-7 (Sergeant First Class) had been molesting his step-daughters for several years. The case was a terrible case, though not uncommon in society. I was driving down one of the Post streets when, low and behold, I see this E-7 walking around unescorted. I thought, what in the world, (nicer version) is he doing walking free and unescorted? He should be locked up! I turned my vehicle around and headed back to the office. I found the C.I.D. Agent that was handling the case and told him what I saw. I could not believe the response! He said, So! I said, What? He's a child molester. How in the world is he allowed to walk free and unescorted? What makes you think he will not return to his residence and attack the girls again or even try and find another victim in post housing. How can they let him walk free for what he did?  He's not under escort or in lock up because he stated that he will not approach the step daughters or go anywhere he's not supposed to. I asked how can they be assured that he will comply? What I received as an answer made me wonder if I had entered the twilight zone. He told us that he would obey the order and he's an E-7. His rank attests to his word. My last statement before I left was, "His rank didn't prevent him from molesting his step kids!" In the real world he would have been sleeping in the grey bar hotel.

Each military installation has an Installation Detention Facility (I.D.F.). Basically it's the post jail. The jail is run by the Correctional Side of the Military Police. When we have identified a subject in a crime, have arrested the soldier and charged them with a crime he does not go straight to jail but an N.C.O. (Non-Commissioned Officer) E-7 (Sergeant First Class) or above in rank must sign for the subject. The N.C.O. then takes the soldier back to the unit and they are basically under house arrest at night. During the day the soldier is not under as close a watchful eye. There was one case where I charged a soldier with selling his military gear and possession of marijuana. He of course was sent back to his unit for them to watch him. Well during the day while he was not being watched he went into his units barracks and stole a necklace from another  soldier. Another Investigator received that case and he charged the soldier with theft. Now because this guy was continually getting into trouble his Commander wanted the Soldier placed into I.D.F.  Well, after about 16 hours in I.D.F., J.A.G.(the military attorneys) determined that the unit commander could not hold the soldier in I.D.F. because he was not a violent offender so there for could not stay in I.D.F.  I just don't get it!

There was a period of time that the post had a severe run of night time burglaries. The break-ins had been going on for about a week and was moving into the second week when one of the investigators got a lead on who was doing the burglaries. In fact I had a couple of cases during that time of beak-ins at a couple of unused buildings. Each day there were more buildings reported as being hit. Going into the 3rd week we finally decided to have a man hunt for this soldier that was committing the break-ins. We did not know what this soldier look like so we involved his unit into the man hunt. Each unit had a member of the unit with them so that the individual could be identified. Around 1800hrs we all hit the road to look for the suspect. About 2200hrs we received a report from a member of the unit indicating that the suspect was at a recreation room. The car that I was in responded to the location. We were greeted by the unit member who showed us where the suspect was.  The suspect was asleep on a couch. The other investigator with me and I sneaked up on the suspect, I headed for the shoulders and the other Investigator headed for the waist. As if it was a choreographed dance move, we picked up the suspect at our respective locations and dropped him on the floor and pinning him. All of this while the other investigator was reading him his rights and another was handcuffing him. He did not know what hit him. One moment he was peacefully dreaming, probably about his next break in, and the next he was dreaming he was getting busted. No, that was a reality wake up. Since there were several, more than 50, break-ins, C.I.D. also became involved. As soon as he was taken into custody, C.I.D. took him from our custody and took him back to the office. They would not let us interrogate the suspect. They just took over, even after our loud protests. The C.I.D. Agents took the suspect into an interrogation room. After about two hours they came out and told us he confessed to all of the break-ins. We asked for his Miranda waiver and a copy of his confession for our cases. They told us that they did not Mirandize him. They made a deal with him that if he were to confess to all the break-ins that they would have him discharged within 16 hours and have him on a bus anywhere he wants to go in the U.S. He agreed and spilled his guts. I asked the Agent why no Miranda and no written confession? He told me that they just wanted the confession and to get him discharged and off post. I told him that we can't get a conviction on this case. He said we don't need a conviction, that our putting the Soldier as the Subject of the crimes is good enough. I said, "No way, that's crazy." The Agent was getting mad at me because I was not accepting what they did and he basically told me that that is the way it's going to be. Within 8 hour the suspect had been run through the discharge process and put on a bus to Illinois. I commented to my team leader that all we are doing is throwing these criminals in the laps of the civilian authorities. He basically told me that he is their problem now. I just don't get this.

One evening as the duty Investigator I was patrolling the post. Just driving aimlessly. Over the radio came a radio call from the on duty C.I.D. Agent that there was a rape that had occurred in the barracks of a certain unit. I went by the Emergency room where the Agent and the victim where. I received a brief briefing by the Agent as to which unit was involved. The information I received was that this female dependent had been raped by multiple individuals. The unit was located and the suspects were brought to the office. There were about eight Soldiers involved.  The C.I.D. Agents started to interview the suspects concerning the incident. After the evaluation at the E.R. was completed the victim was also brought to the office. I was tasked with keeping an eye on the witnesses and the victim after she was interviewed. After a couple of hours the victim and her friend were allowed to leave. I then talked to the Agent in charge of the investigation.  She indicated that the case turned out to not be a rape. What happened was the dependent was a a club and met another soldier. Her husband was stationed in Korea. The soldier that she met in the enlisted club took her to his barracks and had sex with her. She then stated that she wanted to do group sex and the soldier got his roommates to participate and take their turn. Then the word went out to the floor that if anyone wanted to participate she was willing. Afterward she left the barracks and went to a girl friends house. She told the girl friend what she did. The girl friend stated that she was raped. The victim indicated that it was not rape. The girl friend insisted it was and took the victim to the hospital and then called the Military Police the victim did not want the Military Police called. The suspects confirmed the events that transpired in the victims statement. Oh! The victim did not let the soldiers know she was married. So I asked the Agent if they were letting the soldiers go. The Agent said No they weren't and they were charging the soldiers with adultery. I was shocked that they were going to be charged. I told the Agents that the soldiers did not know she was married. They said, SO! I was told that since it wasn't a rape that they were not going to close a case without subjects and eight was a good case solve when there would only have been one. I was mortified. I couldn't believe it. A little used article (criminal section) in the U.C.M.J, like spitting on the sidewalk, was going to make C.I.D. look good and ruin the lives of eight soldiers, all because there was no rape. I don't get this.

There are two branches of Military Police, there is the Law Enforcement  Branch and the Correctional Branch. The Correctional Branch takes care of sites of incarceration like the Military Section of Fort Leavenworth, KS and Instillation Detention Facilities on Army Posts. During my time in the Army there was an extreme amount of crime in comparison to the amount of personnel on Post. A majority of the crime was by the soldiers themselves against the military, other soldiers and military dependents. The next area committing crime was military civilian employees and military dependents. The last category were civilians not affiliated with the military. This last category were mostly involved in the drug trade, mainly as suppliers to the military dealers on post. The category that was of surprise was that of military personnel being criminals. I truly can understand those who feel that they cannot cope with the stress of military life either in peace or war to escape that stress through drugs. I do not condone the use of drugs, I just understand why some may turn to the usage. What I don't get is the criminal activity by members of the military against other members of the military. Yes, the military may not pay the lower enlisted a full livable wage, yet that does not give a soldier the right to prey upon other members of the military, the military itself or even members of the society that they have sworn to protect. I understand that no one and no place is exempt from experiencing criminal activity. Yet there is a larger criminal activity on a military instillation. Members of the military are very dependent upon each other for their survival. They are trained in team work and to look out for each other. This idea flows so deep into the military DNA that there are sayings like, "All in, all out", "no one gets left behind", "everybody comes home", and training includes carrying out wounded and the dead. If the dead are too numerous to be carried out the survivors the grid coordinates would be recorded for future recovery and a dog tag would be taken for proof of death. Why in the world would a person steal or commit another crime against the person who could possibly save their life? Why do something to the person who is to remember where you may have fallen or have the ability to call for help in the behalf of the criminal? I just don't get it! Also at all of these Army Posts, the reason I don't say this for the other branches is I don't know what their practice is and only know of the Army's practice, all of these I.D.F. sites practically lay empty. The Military Police Correctional personnel are basically there without the joy of a busy place. The Army, percentage wise, does not incarcerate a lot of soldiers who commit crimes. An extremely small amount get sent to the I.D.F.  Most are either kept in the company area with loss of privileges or discharged from the military. The M.P.C. soldiers are trained in maintaining a detention facility and yet these facilities lay empty for the most part. Those who are discharged are sent anywhere they want to go in the U.S. on their own dime. The local authorities don't ever know that the military has sent a convicted soldier into their midst. If the procedure hasn't changed, which I don't think it has, the civilian law enforcement authorities cannot access the criminal background of a former member of the military. If the criminal soldier has a method of operation to their criminal activity or have a propensity to a certain criminal activity the civilian authorities will never know unless they come into contact with someone who served with the soldier and knows of the criminal activity, the soldier was convicted in federal civilian court or a local civilian court, or someone they know is aware of the criminal activity in the past. Other wise no one will know. Also if the soldier never declares that they were in the military they will never have to produce a DD-214, proof of military service, and the employer would never know the type of discharge. I don't get this.

Don't look at what I'm doing

I received a call form the local Police Department asking for assistance concerning an incident that took place at a bar in town the night before. I drove into town to the Police Station wondering what happened. When I was escorted into the "sanctuary" of the Detective's section, the room looked like a scene from a COP show on T.V. The room was an open room with desks placed like little islands in the ocean. At some of the desks sat Detectives on the telephone or doing paperwork. Their desks looked like mine back at the office. I call it "Controlled Chaos." The desk looks like a disaster area, but I know were everything is. Kinda like my side of the bedroom. The Detective who called me motioned me to a conference room. There he explained what was going on. He opened a file that looked very familiar. The file was set up the way We set up our files back at the office. That took me by surprise for I was expecting each agency to do their thing differently. It just amazed me how similar two separate agencies were. He told me that the other night at the "Meat Market Bar" some one had thrown in a couple of CS (tear gas) grenades (military stock) through the back door. Unfortunately it cleared out the bar. Fortunately one did not explode and here it is. Yes it was a military bouncy CS grenade. I took possession of it. The Detective asked if I would help him find the "Party or Parties" responsible for this incident. I told him I would be more that happy to. I then returned to the office with the grenade in hand.

When I arrived at my desk I started to examine the grenade. On the grenade was a serial number. I then called E.O.D., Explosive and Ordinance Disposal, to relieve me of this grenade. I then put the grenade in my to left hand drawer. I then called the Post Ordinance Supply Depot to find out to what unit the ordinance was issued to. They gave me the Battalion that signed it out. I contacted the person in the Battalion who signed it out and found out which Company he signed out the ordinance. I contacted the Company who received the ordinance and determined what platoon received the ordinance. From there who laid out the ordinance and who retrieved it. The CS grenades were to be used as gas booby traps for the Opposing Forces (OpFor).

Low and behold I find the culprit who tossed the grenade into the Bar. During the interrogation I asked him why he and some buddies of his did it. He told me he was mad at the Bar and wanted to get back at them. I told him that the Town's Police Detective wanted to discuss the matter with him. I asked him if he wanted to discuss the matter with him. There is this little thing called The Posse Comitatus  Act of 1878. I could not really help the locale law enforcement in their investigation. So I had to be very discrete on how I handle this. Really, the civilian law enforcement was not supposed to ask me for help and if asked, I wasn't supposed to give it. So I was like Peter, walking on water and could sink instantly at any moment.  That is why I asked him if he would like to go into town and discuss the incident with the local authorities. He said yes that he would discuss the matter with the locals, so I drove him into town. I never read him his rights or hand cuffed him because if I did then I would have assertively violated Federal Law. By the way, my superiors did not know what I was doing. Nor would I let them know. I just kept busy, like I was handling one of the cases I received that day or prior to that day. We were never under pressure from micro-management.

I introduced the Soldier to the Detective and bid my farewell to them both and took my leave. I don't know what happened after that, nor do I want to know. My reasoning for doing what I did was, I don't like the idea of Soldiers committing crimes then hiding under the skirt of the military to avoid prosecution. As military Police at the time our jurisdiction ended at the front gate. If a Soldier committed an offense off post, the local authorities had to come to the post and request the soldier. If the Commander refused then the locals could not even talk to the Soldier. Another case on point. 

One of our Investigators became involved in a high speed chase with a female dependent, this is a spouse or child of a Soldier, all over post. The chase then took it self to the main drag that leads to the front gate. By this time the adrenalin rush caused by the chase and the desire not to let this one get away he followed that vehicle everywhere it went. Even when the evader went off post. So he follows the vehicle off post and all over the main highway in front of the installation. To make the longest story short, the next day at the morning briefing he told us the story. After we all had a good laugh, which also woke us up, he got a little talking to about going hot pursuit off post. A year after this occurrence, the U.S Congress passed a law allowing Military Police Investigators to investigate any crime or incident that involves any military member or dependent of a military member off post.

Yet for the sake of justice, which is what law enforcement stands for, I was willing to find a loop hole in the law by being innovative in how I handle helping my civilian brothers fight crime. My superiors could not see what I was doing. ...... and justice for all.

My Second, First

I had my California State Private Investigators license for maybe a month when my dad called me. I was marketing my business and did not have any clients as of yet. Dad told me that his check book had been stolen and a check for about $800 had been cashed, over-drafting his account. I asked what happened and he told me that while he was at a service call in a certain community he had parked his van in a parking lot. After the service call he returned to the van and found that the vehicle had been broken into. He took inventory of the valuables that was in the van and found that the check-book had been taken. He of course called the Sheriff's Department of that area and he made a report. Later he received notice from the bank that his account was over drawn. I asked him what the Sheriff's Department was doing and he told me that there has not been any investigative activity. He also mentioned that the bank gave him the original check that caused the over draft. He told the bank that the check was forged. I told my dad to send me the check.

When I received the check I looked it over for anything that would lead to the identity of the perpetrator of the forgery of the check. I noticed on the back of the check a military i.d. card number. Also on the back of the check, the teller had written down that the person cashing the check was in the U.S. Navy. There were several Naval Bases in the Bay Area. With my vast knowledge of military procedures concerning personnel deployment and utilizing investigative techniques I determined where the Sailor that cashed the check was stationed. I then called the base and determined to what unit he was assigned. Now I had a dilemma. Was I going to drive to this Naval base and talk to this individual or what? Believe you me, I desperately wanted to go to the base and "interview" this individual. The problem I felt was, 1- Would I be able to get on base and 2- Will the unit give me the opportunity to interview this Sailor?  3- Was there available time for me to travel to the base? I finally decided to let the Sheriff's Department Detectives handle the matter. That was a humongous mistake! I should have never called the Sheriff's Detectives.

I informed the "Detective" that I located the suspect. I first mentioned that on the rear of the check was written the unique military I.D. card number and that the suspect should be asked for his military I.D. to compare the numbers. Anticipating that the suspect would indicate that his military I.D. was either lost or stolen and someone else used it, I advised the "Detective" of the particulars of the military when it comes to an either lost or stolen military I.D. If the suspect indicated that his military I.D. was either lost or stolen ask for a Military Police Report concerning the lost or stolen military I.D. The military I.D. is a controlled item, meaning that the I.D. card is a sensitive item and has to be reported before a new one may be issued. The Sailor would then need to carry the Police Report on his person until the I.D. was replaced to show why the card was not in being carried. The report would be filed at the Military Police Station and in the Military Personnel Office, so if the suspect says he threw out the report, the report can still be obtained. Then the interrogation can move forward from there.

A couple of days later I received a telephone call from the "Detectives" who stated that they did not feel that the suspect committed the forgery. I asked if his I.D was checked. The answer was no. They just interviewed him and he seemed to not be involved in the matter. They talked with him for about 15 minutes. Man, was I mad. The pride and arrogance of the "Detectives" prevented them from using the information that I provided to them. Why? I was just a "civilian", they are the cops. They know all. They knew of my Military Police background, they knew I was a Private Investigator because when I provided them with the information they asked how did I know about this information and I told them about my background and current status.

So this was really my first case as a P.I. and my first taste of the response and type of co-operation I would receive from Law Enforcement.

No, I won't, I say ...

No, I won't , I say ...

I did not realize the extent of the drug abuse in the Military until I went into investigations. According to the U.C.M.J., possession of a marijuana seed was a criminal offense. There were four basic types of cases we had. There was theft, domestic violence, drugs and all others. The reason why I labeled the crimes this way is because the first three were the most popular incidents on post. As to which one we had the most cases on, I have no collected data but, it seemed that the toss up is between domestic violence and drugs. Actually marijuana was the illegal substance of choice for the American Soldier. We used the N.I.K. drug tests and the test we were always running out of was the marijuana tests.

Drug cases were usually obtained as result of a unit health and welfare inspection. A "health and welfare inspection" is a legal inspection of the unit Commanders area of responsibility, namely the barracks. When a new unit commander has been assigned, the new commander signs for the "ownership" of all the property and equipment assigned to his unit. What he signs for now comes under his control and he is responsible for maintaining the property. This allows him to conduct what I mentioned as a health and welfare inspection. What he is authorized to do on a regular basis is to search the areas under his control for items that could harm his troops and or be illegal items in the possession of his troops. In the barracks, a typical room has three living areas for three soldiers. The room is designed as a "T" where the intersection of the "T" is the common area. There are no doors separating the roommates in the barrack room. The room furniture consists of three basic items. A twin bed, desk and stand up closet locker for each soldier. The only thing that can be locked is the locker.

So this one drug case was a result of a health and welfare inspection. During the inspection approximately one ounce of Marijuana was found in “Soldier A's" desk. When illegal items are found the Military Police are notified and then the Desk Sergeant calls the “On Duty” MP Investigator and on this day I responded to the unit. At the barracks I gather all the information and evidence from the unit and took the soldier into custody. We went back to my office and took up temporary residence in an interrogation room.

The interrogation rooms we had were of three different configurations. The first we used was a square room. About 12’ x 12’.  As you walked into this room one immediately saw a grey metal desk with the front of the desk facing the door. The desk was centered in the room but up against the right wall was as you were facing the desk. There was an armless grey metal chair, the same grey as the desk, for our important guests. On the opposite side of the desk was an identical twin to the first chair for the investigator. has a The desk had the typical 3 drawers, the top catch all drawer, the top right catch all drawer and the bottom huge catch all drawer. The desks were typically stocked with nothing. You brought in everything you needed for this interview in your case folder. On the left wall was a two way mirror where we could watch the interrogation. This mirror went the whole width of the room and about half the height. The next two interrogation rooms had the same thing except for the two way mirror. The third interrogation room type was a large room that had two separate doors. The room was divided by a wall that was a two way mirror. One door allowed access into the interrogation room itself. In the center of the room was a table and two chairs. This is where the Polygraph was conducted. The second door was on the opposite side of the two way mirror. This was accessible only to observers to the polygraph.

After securing a waving of his constitutional rights I asked him his side of the story. The first thing he said was that the marijuana was not his. I asked, then whose is it. He indicated his roommate “Soldier B".  He also told me that “Soldier B" smokes the herb and that when he heard that there was a Heath and Welfare he probably wanted to quickly dispose of the marijuana and put it into “Soldier A's" desk.

I left the room and went to my desk to reflect on the information. My team leader asked how the interrogation was going. I indicated what I was told and that I felt that the marijuana was not “Soldier A's" but another soldiers. My team leader told me basically, to not waste my time investigating this further and just charge Soldier "A" and let the judicial system sort it out.  That is the general mentality of Investigators. If he looks good for it. Charge him and let the courts sort it out.  We don’t need to put much effort into it.  I told him that, that's not right and that I should get to the bottom of the matter. He again told me no and to wrap up the case with “Soldier A" as the suspect and move on. I walked out of the office a "little" upset. I didn't want to charge an innocent person. I don't believe in letting the courts sort it out. It's my job to identify the true culprit and have that person charged. That's what justice is all about. So is it about truth and justice or is it about statistical numbers. Numbers that make you look good no matter the cost, no matter who’s life is destroyed. Most guys want the numbers of “persons identified”. A name to put in the suspect box on the report. Me I want the conviction rate. I don’t want the number if there is no conviction. And if I want a conviction I am going to get that conviction through a thorough investigation.  I want the win rate not who is named in the suspect box only. I want to say, do to my investigations not one of my suspects were let loose because they were not the right person or the case was flawed.

I informed the unit of what I felt concerning this matter. That even though the marijuana was found in “Soldier A's" desk I truly believed it belonged to “Soldier B”.  I advised the unit that if they really want to find the owner of the marijuana that the Commander should "piss test" the room occupants. What a "piss test" is, it is a drug urinalysis. To test the occupants of the room would exclude the innocent and identify the users. The reason to test the whole room is so that evidence wise the Commander is not focusing his attention to one person but being a blanket test where no one is being singled as a suspect. This would eliminate a legal tangled web. The unit took my advise and they came back to me that Soldier "B" did not pass the test, he came up positive for marijuana use.

After being informed of the test results I contacted J.A.G. (Judge Advocate General or the lawyers). I explained to J.A.G. that the marijuana was found in an unlocked desk drawer. The desk drawers cannot be locked or secured in any other manner. My intention was to have J.A.G. make the determination that the marijuana was found in a "common area." A "common area" is all unsecured or unsecureable areas in a building that more than one person has access to. Once that determination has been made, the unit cannot prosecute “Soldier A" for possession and I would be free from having to charge him with possession of a controlled substance. Advising the unit to conduct the urinalysis would then determine the user(s) in the room and the case would then have a subject for the report but no owner to the marijuana. At that point it really doesn't matter who placed the marijuana in the drawer because the urinalysis identified the innocent and the guilty. I did all of this without my team leader knowing what I was doing. Sometimes it is best to keep some things in the dark.

When I closed out the case, I reported the facts of the matter. The Marijuana was located in a common area and the unit through urinalysis determined a controlled substance user in the room. I then turned in the case to my team leader for review and sign off for permanent closure. I then left the office to respond to other cases that dispatch was holding for me. I returned to the office a couple of hours later and my team leader and the other team leader called me over. Both were extremely mad. They told me that I was very close to getting a Court Martial for 1-Failure to obey a lawful order because I did not do as ordered, charge “Soldier A" with possession, 2-Dereliction of duty for not doing what I was told to do in closing the case but continuing the investigation, 3-Disrespect to a Non-Commissioned Officer by arguing about the case and basically saying "No, I won't." My saving grace is how the case turned out, and I better not do what I did again. As you can see from my actions in this matter, I would have preferred to be charged with the aforementioned than charge an innocent. Is that not what a person who pursues truth and justice not do?

Law Enforcement and Investigations have to justify positions and budget by statistics. It's all in the numbers. The more cases solved, no matter the innocence or guilt, the higher the solve stats, the more the justification of the positions. The typical statement was, it doesn't matter, let the courts sort it out just charge that person and go onto the next case. I never liked that view to solving cases and still don't. That is why I got into trouble. The thing is I would still have done it again if the case called for it. I don't want the innocent to go through the judicial system as a defendant only those who actually committed the crime.

I almost shot you stupid!

It was about 0100hrs when I was awakened from my peaceful sleep. The familiar voice of the dispatcher was on the other end. "There have been several calls into the station by an unknown woman. Every time she has called she sounded really upset and crying. She gives out partial information and you can hear the telephone ripped out of her hand and hung up. I have a partial address. Do you want it?" After receiving the address I jumped into my vehicle and headed to the post housing address dispatch gave me, "code 3". The pavement was wet as it had been raining. It was a little drizzly now. I thought that this was a great time for this weather as I would not be able to see the addresses. While en-route the dispatcher came on the radio and said she had called again and screamed, "He's got a knife and going to kill me." I went a little faster. When I hit the front gate I realized that I would have to turn right. So I banked left to take the right turn as straight as I could. The pavement was too wet for me to maintain traction so I did a 360 at the front gate. Of course I maintained control of the vehicle during the spin out and when I was headed in the correct direction I gunned the engine and proceeded on. I looked at the MP's at the gate in my rear view mirror. They were standing out of the gate shack, looking in my direction. I could see their mouths hanging open and the shocked look on there faces on seeing what just had occurred. I continued to the address.

When I arrived at the address there were several MP's standing around defining, "a state of confusion." I walked up to the gaggle. I noticed that the MP duty officer, a Lieutenant, was also there. I asked what's going on and was hit with multiple mouths chattering. I was thinking to my self, Great I have a "Charlie Foxtrot" here! Man what did I walk into? I then started to scan the area and noticed to my right light coming from a door way and a door leaning up against a stair well wall opposite the door way. I mentioned, "Check this out, why is this door leaning up against the wall?" With my hand on my .45 I walked up to the house and started to hug the wall approaching the doorway. I hailed the house twice and a head of a male popped out of the open doorway. I ordered him out of the house and he demanded that I have sexual intercourse with him, I guess. Thinking to my self, that would be the typical reaction of a man beating a woman and in possession of a knife. Hugging the wall, I continued to the door way. I quickly looked around the door jam into the residence and noticed a red blotch on the far wall and the red looked like it was running down the wall. At the same time an MP stated, "there is blood on the floor." I drew my .45 and locked and loaded. I then heard about 20 slides also going forward behind me. My blood pressure shot up. Here I am in "Civys", in front of a bunch of nervous trigger happy MP's. I'm in the wrong spot, they should be in front of me. To top it all off, the K-9 unit was directly behind me and the dogs snout was poking out under my crouch. My mine went to envision instant sterilization. The K-9 handler told me he would hail the house and then let the dog loose. I asked him, "Won't I be first bite?" He tried to assure me that the dog would go through me and not injure me. I thought, "Yah, my luck." K-9 hailed the house and the male re-appeared. I ordered him out of the house, all the time having my .45 on him. The male then realized, this is not a game and he looked like he was going to have a bowel movement. I ordered him on the opposite wall and patted him down for weapons. In the mean time a female came to the door and she looked shocked but not harmed and I didn't notice any visible injuries. I asked her if she called the MP station and she said, no. I then asked if she was injured and again she said, no. I then told an MP to explain what happened, why we were there, while I grouped all the MP's to check out the rest of the apartment building. Thinking that there was a female in distress and we were possibly given the wrong apartment number, I decided to wake up the whole apartment building and confirm that all female occupants were not in distress. I regrouped all the MP's again and found that other than being awakened everyone in the building were fine. I then went up to the Lieutenant and told him that I could not find a victim and I also checked with dispatch and there were no further calls. This is all before caller ID into Military Police dispatch. I chalked it up to a crank call.

The next day I was called into the P.M.O. (Provost Marshall's Office, basically the Chief of Police on post). I reported to the Operations Officer, a Captain. He asked what happened that morning. I told him the whole story. He then asked me if I drew my weapon. I told his, "Yes I did." He then asked me, why. I told him, "From the training I received through a Police Academy and three years of Administration of Justice Classes, I was taught that in situations like this where there is a possible stabbing victim and the response I received by the male when I approached the door, the situation called for the drawing of my weapon for defensive purposes for me and or the possible victim." He said I did a good job and that was it. The sad thing about the whole thing, an innocent person could have been killed because of a crank call.

Is it mine ....... I guess it is

As Military Police Investigators, we have to rotate 24 hour shifts as the "On Duty Investigator." So during that 24 hour period we receive calls from dispatch to every criminal case they receive. The duty investigator has to be near a phone and available. Most of us slept or tried to sleep on the couch at the office with the phone and radio near our heads. Majority of the time we were unsuccessful. A lot of the time we never saw the office for 24 hours. From the time we started our shift to the end of our shift, 0800hrs-0800hrs, we would be going from case to case. The rough part was that about 90% of the cases we had to accept. It was not very often we lateraled the case back to the M.P.'s or passed it off to C.I.D. (Criminal Investigations Command).

One night while trying  to catch some  needed Zzzzzzzzzz's, I received a telephone call that there was a soldier in the E.R with a bullet hole in his leg. First question out of my mouth was, "Where did it happen?"  The dispatcher told be, "Off post." To my joy I cried, "Give it to the locals" (the local law enforcement) and hung up. About ten minutes later the phone rings again. "M.P.I., Investigator Menzies." with annoyance in my voice. "Hey", the familiar voice of the dispatcher said. "It's on post, the locals through it back to you." "Ok" was my disgruntled reply, sleep was not going to happen tonight, "I'm going to the E.R." When I arrived at the E.R. I confirmed with the attending Doctor that the soldier had a small caliber entry and exit wound in his right calf area. The doctor also indicated that the soldier was under anesthesia and not really coherent. I tried to talk to the victim and even though he was groggy, he was not cooperative. I asked to see his cloths and was taken up to the room where they stored his cloths. I looked at his pants. They were Jeans and definitely showed an entry and exit hole on the lower right leg. The entry hole was higher than the exit hole. On the interior of the pants at the exit hole location there was a blood trail that was not vertical with the hole and pant leg to indicate that the victim was standing up. The blood run was more horizontal to the right pant leg indicating that the leg was at an angle to the ground and the shooter. The shooter was pointing down at an angle. I called the on duty C.I.D. Agent and explained the scenario. Because the victim was not cooperative the agent told me they were nor going to take the case. Needless to say I was mad. Why? Because the Army was going to want to know why a soldier was in the E.R. with a bullet hole in his leg and why were we not going to take the case, and "he was not cooperative" was not going to be a satisfactory answer. So I took the case. I called my team leader to explain what happened. He came to the E.R. where we furthered our discussion on the matter. He felt it was a drug deal gone bad. I felt that it wasn't. There was more to the story and the pants seemed to tell of something different. I showed my team leader the pants and what the signs showed. I was going to take the pants as evidence and was told flat out "NO" by my team leader. We argued and argued, but in the military Rank has the final word. Latter he would regret his decision. It was truly an "I told you so" moment. So until then I continued to investigate the incident. In the morning I went back to the hospital to re-interview the victim. He was still uncooperative yet he gave me some information, like he heard a car that sounded like his friends around the time he was shot. He didn't hear the shot. The next story he told me was that he was shooting cans and placed the 22 rifle he had against a tree. The rifle fell over, went off and shot him. The evidence in the pants did not show that but I purposely did not call him on that at the time.

I felt he knew who shot him. So I called his unit and had his whole platoon marched to my office. That was about 45 to 50 soldiers. With the help of my team we started interviewing the platoon members. My strategy was to make everyone so uncomfortable and mad at the victim that just to get relief they would cough up information About a third of the way through the interviews I received a telephone call with a tip. The information I received was interesting. The caller told me that around the last December a soldier arrived at the company area looking for the victim. The soldier was highly intoxicated and in his Class "A"'s (dress greens) that were really disheveled.  The called stated that the soldier was from Ft. Gordon Georgia. He thinks the soldier was A.W.O.L.(Absent With Out Leave for less than 30 days) at the time but didn't know for sure. He also gave me a probable name, but he knew the friends unit. I called the unit at Ft. Gordon and after talking with the Platoon Sergeant I found out the soldiers name and that he is currently a deserter (absent for more than 30 days). This was the break that I needed. I then went back to the hospital and talked to the victim. I obtained a little more information than before, but nothing very significant. I went back to the office and let everyone know that I'm looking for this friend. Every morning at 0800hrs we had an Investigators meeting with all of the CID Agents, M.P. Investigators and the Investigative Command, where we would discuss the cases for the last 24 hours. That meeting was always beneficial for leads and solving cases. At this particular meeting, CID told me to drop the case as I was beating a dead horse. Those who know me know I am stubborn and do not like taking no for an answer.

A couple of hours later an Investigator come running down the hall screaming, "Hey, Menzies, you looking for So-n-so?". I looked up surprised and said "Yah?" "Well, he was arrested by a State Trooper on a stolen vehicle charge and they are bringing him to AWOL App" (AWOL Apprehension, they hunt AWOL and Deserters). I was also told he was wanted by CID for car theft from Ft. Gordon, Georgia and the case was referred to an agent in our office in that matter. I went to AWOL App and talked with the MP there who told me he would call me when the soldier arrived. Late in the afternoon the call came in. I went to AWOL App and talked to the soldier and found that he did know our victim. I drove back to the office and went to the CID Agent who was referred the car theft. I asked him that I get first crack at the soldier. He said, NO! I asked if I could sit in and again he said, NO! I was livid. I felt like screaming at the Agent but had to control myself because the Agent out ranked me, number wise I was an E-4(Specialist) and he was an E-7(Sergeant First Class). So I asked him, "When you read him his rights, read him the charge of "Attempted Murder" with the Desertion and Car Theft (actually the charge is "wrongful appropriation of personal property") and see what he does and says. Well he agreed to do this. The next thing you heard was the coir. And boy did he sing. The agent told me that when he heard "Attempted Murder", he jumped out of his seat and said, "Whowh!, whowh!, wait a minute!, wait-a-minute!, Hold on! Then he goes into the story as to how his friend ended up in the hospital with a bullet hole in his leg.

The friend, now a suspect in the shooting, deserted from his unit and stole a car the get here (Ft. Polk, LA). While here he was staying with the victim and his wife. While sitting around drinking beer, they were talking about how they could take "leave", vacation, from the Army and not get charged their accumulated leave. Then the idea came to them, Convalescent Leave. What Convalescent Leave is, when a soldier is significantly hurt, the military will allow the soldier to recuperate at home rather than in the post hospital. When they are allowed to do this they are not charged leave while getting well. That was the answer to their wanting to take time off and not lose leave. What they would do is shoot each other and grabbed the Suspect-victims 22 rifle. So they went to a wooded area that so happened to be on post. Both suspects decided to flip a coin as to who would shoot who first. The Suspect-victim won the toss and was going to get shot first. He sat on a log and stretched out his right leg. Suspect-deserter then stood near the winners out stretched right leg and shot at it. The Suspect-victim was in so much pain he could not return the favor. By the way he was severely bleeding. This scared Suspect-deserter where he drove his buddy home and dumped him on his wife and took off. While speeding down the road was when the State Trooper stopped him for speeding, then found out about the car theft.  The wife rushes her now crying in pain husband to the E.R. Well, now you know where I came in.

The next morning after this case closure I attended the usual morning meeting. The question came out of any solved cases. I took my huge case file and slid it hard down the conference table to the CID commander, stood up and said, "Here is your "Dead Horse", it's solved with two Subjects on the charge of Malingering. It was a precious moment. My team leader came to me after the meeting and said that CID would get the solve stat. I told him, "So what, at least we can solve cases they can't. That in it self is satisfaction enough." I later talked with Suspect-victims Commander, explained the case to him and the Commander was going to try and get the Suspect-victim stationed for a long time to Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas. I never heard what actually what happened as I was shortly there after transferred to the 2nd Division on the ROK