Fair enough, Airman.
Although I haven’t figured out my feelings on the case at hand, I would like to point out that I don’t think desertion is a victimless crime. The link doesn’t tell us the where he deserted from, but if it was on some sort of a patrol, or even guard duty, he could have left an opening that may have had lead to the death of one or many of his fellow soldiers. I think this needs to be taken into consideration in deciding his fate.
Just to add to the story:
this article states that the family claims that he was kidnapped.
It includes this little tidbit:
I say let him go. At this point we all are aware that Vietnam was fucked up. The fact is that some people went to Canada, others went into the Guard, others protested, and others deserted. I’m not saying that it was the right thing to do, but…well…who cares? I mean really…who cares?
So this guy gets away with deserting, all he has to do was hide in North Korea for thirty years. I think it’s pretty safe to say that he isn’t going to start a trend.
Is it even firmly established that he was a deserter? Several American servicemen were captured during the Korean War and may still be there. If The North Koreans can kidnap Japanese civilians and lie about it for decades, what is to say this man was not kidnapped, captured, or decieved in some way - and not a true defector.
Does anyone know exactly how he “defected” or ended up in North Korea. I cannot imagine an American soldier making a run for it across the DMZ without getting shot, or just showing up at a border checkpoint and saying “here I am!”.
If he was a volunteer, tough sh*t, he needs to serve out his time (in prison, if need be).
If he was drafted, that’s a different story for me. 
However, I don’t think he should just be forgiven because “it was a long time ago.” I mean, good god, if you’re going to dodge the draft (if that is what he did), go to, like, Australia (can’t go to Canada anymore, we have a “smart border”), not f*ing North Korea.
Firstly, is there no statute of limitations on a desertion charge?
I know there are certain crimes that if you don’t get brought to task for them within X amount of years then the government can no longer prosecute you on it (murder is not one of them for example.)
Secondly, it isn’t well proven that Bush was AWOL for any grossly long period of time. For every cite you offer up I can offer one up from an equally biased source telling how Bush has “x and x” record of being here.
The chain of evidence in the Bush case is enough to make the news but not enough for any legal purpose.
I don’t know any of the legal specifics of this case, but no, we should never just offer blanket exemptions for crimes committed just because a friend asks, that isn’t what the law is about.
Personally, I don’t even think desertion should be illegal. Anyone should be able to quit the military anytime they feel like it just like any other job. I’m not big on indentured servitude. People have no obligation to give their lives for their country even if they’re in the military. Committment to military service should last exactly as long as any individual feels like it and no longer. I suppose you could offer people bonuses for sticking with a tour but I see no inherent governmental right to keep people in military service- especially under combat conditions- against their will.
As much as that sounds spiffy (a military worker’s union! Yeah!), I don’t think that is likely to ever happen. You simply can’t run a military that way. Additionally, once you ship people overseas, you eventually cross a point where they are indentured servants anyway, because one side of the fence wants to shoot them in the face, and the other side doesn’t want anything to do with them. It would be impossible to conduct massive attacks. It would be impossible to defend positions. It would be absolutely impossible to distribute intelligence, knowing that any soldier could up and leave at any point and no longer be subject to your law.
So as much as I’m for freedom of the individual, I think this is a choice that, once made, you have to stick with.
Diogenes seems to be a borderline anarchist. I’m glad I caught that just now, I won’t have to bother reading anymore of his posts.
This seems reasonable…only if you don’t want to HAVE a military at all (which, at a guess, is exactly as DtC would want it). However, if you can’t live in utopia and you actually need to have a military, then desertion will always be looked upon harshly…epecially desertion in the face of an enemy. Sorry, DtC…thats just reality. Otherwise you’ll find yourself with no military force at all when it comes to fighting (which IS ultimately what its for…why have one otherwise?). Doing things your way, soldiers will refuse their orders or decide that NOW ('hey, those bullets are REAL. That guys is trying to kill me!!! :eek: ) is a great time to up and quit. Not…gona…happen.
That said, as far as the OP goes, I think this seems reasonable to me:
I’d say try him and convict him in absentia, but commute his sentence to exile instead, with the proviso that he will never again set foot on US soil. If the Japanese want him, they are welcome to him. If he ever sets foot on US soil again, he will be arrested and the sentence (whatever it is) will be carried out. Seems the best of both worlds. It keeps disipline in the ranks, shows that justice will be done, but also keeps up friendly with Japan.
I was in the military. Desertion in the face of the enemy (or really desertion any time) is VERY serious. However, it HAS been 40 years, and we aren’t likely to get a hold of him in any case…and it would be good for our relations with Japan, without damaging disipline (IMO) in the armed forces (as would be the case if he was just let off scott free).
-XT
I think that desertion rules should only apply when you’re actually in combat. Otherwise, you should be able to quit at any time.
No, but neither should we prosecute people for jaywalking 40 years ago. That’s why most crimes have statutes of limitations.
Sometimes a person has suffered for their mistakes enough or has changed their outlook on life so much that it does not serve the interests of justice to prosecute them. That’s why Executive Clemency exists, to recognize such exeptional cases and deal with them appropriately.
Yes, desertion is a bad thing. But this happened 40 years ago and this man has learned his lesson. I doubt it will send a message to potential deserters that they can get off scot free (yeah, so long as they abandon their friends and family and lay low for 40 years!) What does it accomplish to send him to prison? I’m sure North Korea has been prison enough for him for the past four decades.
Interestingly, that’s precisely what Japanese law says. The statute of limitations for all crimes (including murder) is 15 years. The only catch is mentioned below.
That’s a question I asked last year, specifically with regard to this case. There may be a SoL in this case, but the problem is that it goes on hold if the suspect leaves the country (this is also the case for SoL in Japan). Since Jenkins has spent the last 40 years in NK, from the law’s PoV it’s the same as if he deserted yesterday.
I agree. If it wasn’t too much of a waste of money it would be great to try him for desertion just so the Judge could convict him and sentence him to time served. It would be a great political insult.
Well, Diogenes, I have read your stuff on the boards for a while now, and have even commented on another thread how it is amazing to me that you and I have never disagreed on a social/ political question. That said, I disagree with this statement in the strongest terms.
Aside from the ‘victimless’ nature of this crime (a claim that I doubt most soldiers would agree with), I do not see how your plan would enable any country to field an army, especially in the modern age., I am totally against the draft or any other form of conscription, but given the expense in training and outfitting a soldier, it is ludicrous for the state to not have some guarantee of service.
Frequently enlistees are given advance compensation- education, training, money, food and lodging, etc.- their military service is their end of a contract they make with the military. I don’t see anything wrong with enforcing that contract on the part of the government.
Look , if you don’t want to fight, no one is forcing you to. But if you join the army, don’t be surprised if you are actually called to fight one day.
As for this case, like I said- it’s a matter of principle. Sentence him to time served if you must, but I think that he should answer for his crimes in open court.
I’m not sure this a sound argument as airlines train pilots, for instance, at great expense with no guarantee of service.
One argument you could use, however, is that, since soldiers will be employed and not have to do the job they signed-on for (fighting) all that often, the least they can be expected to agree to is to go into battle when necessary.
True. while the recruitment ads make it all about bridge-building and war games, the reason you’re provided with 3 square meals a day, a roof over your head, money for college, etc. is so that you’ll fight (and maybe die) when the time comes. When you accept the gains, you accept the risk of war. Don’t like it? Don’t sign up.
As far as combat desertion- once you’re in combat, your actions can determine the fate of your entire company. Skinning out when you might be needed puts your fellow soldiers at risk.
Look, if you’re in the military you can quit. You just can’t quit “at any time”. And there are many jobs where you can’t quit at any time without paying some sort of penalty…professional sports, media jobs, etc. If you sign a contract with a company to provide such-and-such services in return for good and valuable considerations, and you fail to provide those services, then haven’t you violated your contract?
Just like many companies are contractually prevented from firing their employees at will, some employees are contractually obligated not to quit at will.
But of course, the reality is that you can “quit” the military at any time. Just announce that you won’t follow orders anymore, that you are opposed to war, and refuse to cooperate. You might face a little jail time, but the most that will usually happen is that they’ll kick you out (with or without an honorable discharge) and maybe make you pay back some of the money you got from them. That’s how you quit. But you can’t just walk away one day and secretly go live in North Korea.
If Lietenant William Calley can murder 33 unarmed civilians and then get a pardon for it, why can’t we let this guy get off the hook? Come on, we all make mistakes.