Monday, October 28, 2013

Sexual Assault At Coast Guard Academy, The Webster Smith Case Appendix 1


Appendix 1

A Letter To The Convening Authority

RADM James C. Van Sice
Superintendent, U. S. Coast Guard Academy
31 Mohegan Avenue
New London, CT. 06320-81003

RE: U. S. v Webster Smith

Dear RADM Van Sice:

I believe a terrible miscarriage of justice occurred upon the conviction of Web Smith, the first in the history of the Coast Guard.

While it’s apparent a conviction occurred, what’s not apparent is the silence that has occurred among the prosecution and yourself in response to this terrible turn of events.

Having a father in the Merchant Marine for the last Sixty years, my admiration of the Coast Guard has been nothing but respect up until this point.

Please rest assured that more publicity will occur as the public sees exactly what transpired. Please understand that I am upset that you and your staff would be so quick to convict an innocent man. The jury had its hands tied due to the rules that were placed upon them.

While I am not a lawyer, as a Black Disease Intervention Specialist working for a local government, I have seen criminals up close and personal. I know how they think. Mr. Webb is not a criminal. What happened here was jealously, and vengeance by a bunch of old Coast Guard “good old boys” for Mr. Smith dating a bunch of white females.

The entire process from the selection of prosecution to the jury selection was flawed. The only evidence was the word of a couple of incredible females. No physical evidence whatsoever. In essence, a white word against a black word. We know how history reflects the word of a black man, much less in a court martial case with no physical evidence.

The failure of having the females testify before the defense amounts to a military lynching. Not only was Mr. Smith lynched once by having these ridiculous accusations brought against him, but twice by not having the females testify under oath.

Mr. Sice, it takes two to tango. Sodomy, more specifically oral sex has to be a willing give and receive. In my clinic, we see patients receive many sexually transmitted diseases as a consequence of unprotected oral sex. Once again, it takes two to tango. Both are willing participants. It doesn’t seem reasonable that Mr. Smith gave oral sex to an unwilling female cadet unless she verbally said no, or physically denied Mr. Smith from going down on her. It appeared that this did not happen.

So, why proceed to convict Mr. Smith without convicting the rest of the female cadets? What’s good for goose is not good for the gander? Mr. Sice, please reverse the conviction of this young man, and restore the integrity of the Coast Guard. Go after the real rapists in the academy, not after a bunch of horny cadets.

S           S
Disease Intervention Specialist
SKC Public Health



Post a Comment

<< Home