Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10021990 - S.3 €TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS �,( FROM: Supervisor Nancy Fanden Contra Costa - DATE: September 25, 1990 County SUBJECT: REFERRAL TO HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION - U.S. NAVY REFUSAL TO REOPEN INVESTIGATION OF 1944 PORT CHICAGO AMMUNITION EXPLOSION COURT MARTIAL SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMMMATION: Refer to the Human Relations Commission for recommendation the U.S. Navy"' s decision not to reopen the cases of the 258 black sailors who were court martialed after the 1944 Port Chicago ammunition explosion. Request that the Human Relations Commission advise the Board on possible recommendations to the County' s Congressional delegation as to the possibilities that should be made available to the sailors. BACKGROUND: Increasing attention has been focused on the legal and other treatment given the black sailors involved in the refusal to load more ammunition after the explosion which killed 320 men. The Navy has concluded that the statute of limitations for review has expired., A recent editorial in the Contra Costa Times set forth three alternatives which might be pursued on behalf of the sailors who were court martialed. The Human Relations Commission is the logical body to recommend to the Board what, if any, action should be requested by the Board from the County' s representatives in Congress. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) ACTION OF BOARD ON October 2, 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT III ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: Human Relations Comm ATTESTED 996 County Administrator Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator M382/7-e3 BY DEPUTY r M—The Times Monday, September 24, 1990 1 EDITORIALS Tort Chicago ease needs new review redictably, perhaps, the Navy has found sufficient fine print in the Uniform Code of Military Justice to refuse to review the cases of 258 black sailors court-martialed after the 1944 Port Chicago explosion. That leaves slim hope that the sailors who claim, with some evidence, they were victims of racism rather than muti- neers will win a second day in court, let alone be exonerated. " The sailors were court-martialed and con- victed after they refused to return to the docks and load munitions ships following the blast, Which killed 320 men in the worst home-front disaster of World War Il. Of the 258, 200 even- tually were given honorable discharges, but 58 have carried the stigma of a less-than-honor- able discharge for 46 years. The black sailors say they were forced by white officers to do extraordinarily dangerous work without proper training on impossible schedules. They say they were considered ex- , pendable because they were black. Wb purned by the Navy they once served, the ex-sailors now have three alternatives: M Petition for a presidential pardon. Few petitions are granted. A pardon implies the pe- titioner committed the crime, but it is in the na- tional interest,to forgive it..That may not be ac- ceptable to men who insist they are innocent. ®.Persuade Congress to conduct an investi- gation. That may be possible, since 24 con- gressmen, including. Rep. George Miller of Martinez,joined the sailors in asking the Navy to reopen the case. But it's not clear if the full _Congress would agree to the time and expense of investigating a 46-year-old incident or what such an investigation would accomplish`for the sailors. It's not likely that Congress could re- write miliary records. ®Persuade Congress to rewrite the section of the Uniform Code that the Navy used to deny the review, then press the Navy to reopen the case. The Navy in essence said the statute of limitations on review is a year after,the final disposition of the'court-martial. Again, there's no guarantee that Congress would act promptly, extend the deadline or in the wake of such action that the Navy would agree to reopen the investigation. 0 f the three alternatives, the one most like- Iy to benefit the public — as well as the sailors= by getting at the truth is a congressio :nal investigation. If the"Navy won't investigate its own questionable conduct, then Miller and other members of California's congressional 'delegation should do it for them. Even 46 years after the fact, the public has a ,right to know if the Navy engaged in uncon- scionable racism, or if scared sailors simply seized on that argument to justify their derelic tion of duty.