WELCOME!

This page on our website is for the benefit of the men and women—and their families—who played a role in the 1944 Fort Lawton court-martial.

On this site, we post information which might be helpful to those with a personal stake in the aftermath of the October 26, 2007 decision of the Army Board of Review to overturn the Fort Lawton convictions. IF YOU ARE RELATED TO A FORT LAWTON DEFENDANT, IT IS NOT TOO LATE TO INCLUDE YOUR FAMILY IN THE RULING! It is, in fact, easier than ever.

Please feel free to suggest additional content you’d like us to include on this page.

THE LATEST NEWS

On October 26, 2007, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) released its decision in a Congressionally-mandated review of the 1944 court-martial of 43 U.S. soldiers at Fort Lawton. The Board ruled that Army prosecutor Leon Jaworski committed “egregious error” in his prosecution of the case by intentionally withholding crucial exculpatory information from the defendants and their lawyers. The Board concluded that the defendants were denied their fundamental right to adequately prepare for trial and that defendants were deprived of due process to an extent that resulted in “fundamental unfairness.”

THE RULING’S IMPORTANCE

By any measure, this was an exceptionally unusual and important ruling. The Army Board receives more than ten thousand requests a year for review of military records. Relatively few who apply are granted a remedy; those remedies are almost never as sweeping and unequivocal as this one. In effect, the Army has admitted that its longest and largest court-martial of World War II was fatally flawed, a rather astonishing concession of historic proportions.

THE REMEDY

The Board declared that the conviction should be set aside, and that “all rights, privileges and property lost as a result of that conviction” should be restored. The Board directed that honorable discharges be issued, and that “all back pay and allowances due as a result” of the corrections be paid to surviving defendants or the estates of those who have died. [Just as the result of this appeal is almost without precedent, so are the elements of this remedy.]

THE REMEDY’S SCOPE

Army spokespersons have not yet been able to interpret the breadth of the decision’s remedies. Several questions are still being asked: How much back pay? Will it include interest? What about benefits from the VA or under the GI Bill? Burial expenses and honors?

THE RULING’S BENEFICIARIES

Of the 43 original defendants, charges were dropped against two (Milton Bratton and John R. Brown) during the trial. Thirteen others (Nelson L. Alston, Willie C. Basden, Sylvester Campbell, James Coverson, Lee A. Dixon, Emanuel W. Ford, Ernest Graham, Walter Jackson, Herman Johnson, Henry Jupiter, C. W. Spencer, Freddie Umblance, and Arthur Williams) were acquitted at the end of the court-martial. 28 men were found guilty; they are the men primarily affected by the Board’s ruling.

NNote: The Army Board concluded that “The Army failed to provide [all] 43 Fort Lawton accused with due process by the standards in place at the time of their trial.” Back in 1944, the Army’s chief criminal investigator, Robert Manchester, admitted under oath that “no part of (the criminal investigation) was handled correctly.” It would be fair to conclude, then, that even those not ultimately convicted were harmed by these proceedings.

Of the 28 men found guilty, the families of four—Samuel Snow, Luther Larkin, William Jones and Booker Townsell—have filed the necessary paperwork and were specifically covered by the October 26 ruling (Mr. Snow is the only one of those four still living.) We have been in contact over the years with the families of five other defendants: John Hamilton, Arthur Hurks, Elva Shelton, Les Stewart and Roy Montgomery (Mr. Montgomery is still living.)

We still await the day we can hear from the families of the remaining nineteen defendants:

• Richard H. Barber, Chicago (1922-1997)
  
• John S. Brown, Sr., Lancaster, SC (1922-1954)
  
• Riley L. Buckner, Houston (1919-1981)
  
• Johnnie Ceaser, Chicago (1922-1950)
  
• James C. Chandler, Jr., Kansas City (1923-1990)
  
• Willie S. Curry, Houston (1924-1968)
  
• Russell L. Ellis, Los Angeles (1912-1977)
  
• Jefferson D. Green, San Antonio (1916-1994)
  
• Frank R. Hughes, Hearne, TX (1913-1983)
  
• Loary M. Moore, Houston (1920-1994)
  
• Willie Prevost, Sr., Houston (1917-1998)
  
• Robert Sanders, Chicago (1923-1992)
  
• Freddie L. Simmons, Macon, GA (1907-1973)
  
• Nathaniel T. Spencer, Detroit (1911-1973)
  
• Arthur L. Stone, Detroit (1920-1985)
  
• Richard L. Sutliff, Houston (1920- ?)
  
• Booker W. Thornton, Chicago (1908-1981)
  
• David Walton, Chicago (1910-1969)
  
• Wallace A. Wooden, Chicago (1908- ?)
  
  

HOW FAMILIES CAN ADD THEIR NAMES TO THE RULING

Although the October 26, 2007 decision is in the name of the first four families to file paperwork with the Review Board, Army lawyers assure us that the same remedies granted to the first four will be extended to the remaining twenty-four.

If you wish to add your loved one and your family to the ruling, please:

1. CONTACT:

John P Taitt, staff attorney, Army Review Boards Agency, Alexandria, VA:
(703) 607-1878; john.taitt@hqda.army.mil

2. VISIT:

Official website of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records:
http://arba.army.pentagon.mil/abcmr-overview.cfm

Mr. Taitt will likely suggest you fill out a simple one-page online form, called DD Form 149:
http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/infomgt/forms/eforms/dd0149.pdf

Although you may see several references to the need for supplemental records and information, Mr. Taitt will likely tell you that those are not necessary in this case

3. READ:

The official Board of Review decision in the case of Fort Lawton defendant Booker Townsell:
http://www.jackhamann.com/pdf/Fort_Lawton_decision.pdf

The language used by the Board in this ruling will likely be identical to the language you can expect in your family’s ruling