Saturday,
October 27, 2007
Incredible: 63 years Later, Army Exonerates
Blacks who Lynched Italian POWs !!!!!!!
The
ANNOTICO Report
In 1944,
The Blacks HIGHLY
resented the Italians POWs, NOT for anything the Italians did, BUT
because the Italians benefited from the US Army's SEGREGATION policies, and PRIVILEGES
that were granted to the POWs, because the Italians were willing to do
Labor, NOT required by the Geneva Convention.
The Italians were
permitted to "court" white local women in segregated bars, that were
"off limits" to Blacks.
The Blacks
feeling black women were not as desirable as the white women, and having to
work harder at gaining access to white women were angry. Also apparently,
the Blacks feelings were hurt, because they could not sleep in the same
barracks, or eat in the same mess hall with the white soldiers.
Therefore, the
Blacks felt these "slights" by the US authorities supposedly "entitled"
the Blacks to taunt Italians, start fights with them, lynch one of them, and hospitalize
26 Italians after the Black soldiers "stormed the Italian barracks
with rocks, sticks and knives".
28 Blacks were
court-martialed. Now 63 years later it seems
politically expedient, and convenient historical revisionism, to excuse the
Blacks conduct!!!!!! This is a gigantic Travesty!!!!!
It is like I am
not permitted entrance to a Private Club, because I can't Afford
the membership, or be "Approved", and all the great looking young
starlets are inside, out of my reach. So I break in with a baseball bat, and
start bashing in the heads of the employees, because I am a
"victim" of "class" discrimination. I am justified
Right??? And the Difference is?????
Are you going to
tell me that Discrimination against the "Untouchables" in
63 Years
Later, Army Exonerates Black Troops
By Jonathan Martin
Staff reporter
;
Saturday, October 27, 2007
For more than a
half-century, the convictions of 28 African-American soldiers for a riot that
ended in the lynching of an Italian prisoner of war at Seattle's Fort Lawton
during World War II has held an uneasy place in history.
It was the Army's
largest court-martial of the war, and it was one of the region's worst
conflicts between blacks and whites.
On Friday, the
incident gained a new place in history. In what is believed to be an
unprecedented ruling after a yearlong review, an Army review board tossed out
the convictions after finding the trial was "fundamentally unfair."
The ruling by the
Army's highest administrative-review board has granted honorable discharges and
back pay for four soldiers whose families petitioned for the review. And it
will likely apply to the other 24 soldiers if their families also petition,
according to attorneys involved in the case.
Only two of the
soldiers are still alive.
"It's a real
beautiful thing," said one of them, Samuel Snow, 84, of
The decision
reflects a willingness by the government to
"correct the record," said Col. Dan Baggio,
the Army's chief spokesman.
"We learn by
mistakes, when we do make mistakes, even when it takes a long time," he
said Friday. "We feel good about getting it right."
The unusual
review by the Army's Board for Correction of Military Records began more than a
year ago at the request of U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Seattle, who had read
about the August 1944 incident in "On American Soil," a book by
Seattle author Jack Hamann.
Tensions
with POWs
In 1944,
While they
waited, the men were barracked near a group of about 200 Italian prisoners of
war who worked as laborers at the fort.
Tensions between
the Italians and Americans both black and white rose for a number of reasons.
Italians got leave to drink in off-base bars that didn't serve blacks, and also
chased the same
"It was
racial, real racial," recalled Snow. "I never slept with white
soldiers, or ate in a white mess hall."
The night of the
riot, some of the black soldiers and some of the Italians exchanged drunken
insults and fought, Hamann said. Then a white
military policeman "fanned the tensions" of the black soldiers and
whipped their anger into a riot, probably because he resented the Italians for
courting local women.
The next morning,
an Italian private, Guglielmo Olivotto,
was found hanged in the woods. A Seattle Times story at the time said 26
Italians were hospitalized after the black soldiers "stormed the barracks
of the former Axis soldiers," reportedly with rocks, sticks and knives.
Defense
obstacles
Although only two
Italians could identify their attackers, 43 black soldiers were tried in a
combined trial. All of them were represented by two defense lawyers, including
Howard Noyd, who is now 92 and living in
Noyd recalled Friday that he
had about 10 days to prepare, not enough time to even interview all the
defendants.
Defense lawyers
were also denied access to an Army inspector general's investigation, which
included suggestions that the white military policeman might have been involved
in the lynching. Yet the prosecutors were able to draw from evidence in the
"confidential" report.
"It was a
very critical point," Noyd said. "We wanted
all the investigation that the government was using, and we were denied that
privilege."
In the end, 28 of
the soldiers, including Snow, were convicted of rioting. Two were convicted of
manslaughter in Olivotto's death.
Snow served a
year in the brig. Other soldiers served as many as 25 years.
"...
it was so egregious"
In its ruling
Friday, the Army board said the lack of preparation time afforded the defense,
along with the denial of access to the inspector general's report, meant the
soldiers didn't get a fair trail. The panel noted that the white military
policeman, who had testified against the black soldiers, was later convicted of
abandoning his post during the riot.
Left unstated in
Friday's report is mention of the racial inequities that permeated the
segregated wartime Army.
"You have to
remember, it comes out of an era when racial relations were awful," said
Rep. McDermott. "When you look at the facts, it was so egregious. I think
the Army, for its own pride, had to say, 'We made a horrible mistake here and
we have to make it right.' "
Experts in
military justice said Friday that they were aware of no larger case of military
convictions being overturned.
"I think it
is terrific sign that the military justice system is reckoning with its past
mistakes," said Elizabeth Hillman, a visiting law professor at the
How much
back pay?
It remained
uncertain Friday how much the surviving soldiers and the heirs of the deceased
might end up getting in back pay and benefits because of the ruling. Baggio, the Army spokesman, said those decisions had not
yet been made.
But at the very
least, the ruling will give families benefits such as a marble headstone and a
flag presented by the Army to veterans, Hamann said.
"I have to
be saddened that most went to their grave knowing this injustice was done and
not living to see it corrected," he said.
After the war,
Snow went back to his hometown of Leesburg to work as a church janitor and
raise two children. But because of his dishonorable discharge, he couldn't get
such benefits as the GI
Friday, Snow said
he could definitely use the money a settlement would bring. But he was more
concerned on Friday about finally getting an honorable discharge.
Years ago, in an
effort to hide the conviction from his children even though he considered it a racist
injustice he set fire to his Army
paperwork.
"I'm
rejoicing today," said Snow. "I'm not mad at nobody. I'm just as
satisfied as can be."
Jonathan
Martin: 206-464-2605 or jmartin@seattletimes.com
The
ANNOTICO Reports Can be Viewed (and are Archived) on:
Italia
Italia
Mia: http://www.ItaliaMia.com (3 years)
Annotico
Email: annotico@earthlink.net