Obviously, we shouldn’t look to action movies for history lessons.
That said, a few weeks back, I was watching a piece of yet another re-run of “The Dirty Dozen” alongside an elderly relation who’d served in WW2. He scoffed at the plot of the movie, and said he’d heard that the Army had, in fact, tried turning condemned prisoners into elite fighting units.
“And what do you suppose happened to them?” he asked.
I had no idea, but guessed, “Well, REAL cutthroats and thugs (unlike movie ones) would probably desert the first chance they got, and never be heard from again.”
He laughed and said, “That’s exactly what happened.”
Now, how about the real story. DID the Army actually try to put together outfits like the Dirty Dozen? And if so, were the results as comically disastrous as my relative suggests?
They had enough volunteers - and I mean trained soldiers with good morale - for commando units to not risk using prisoners. Even for apparently suicide missions (vide St. Nazaire Raid or any other of many special operations). So - not much truth.
I would note that there was a novel about the Civil War, A Company of Cowards, that had a similar theme (disgraced soldiers formed into a unit to redeem themselves) that had been published a few years earlier.
(That I am aware, the movie comedy, Advance to the Rear**, shown outside the U.S. as Company of Cowards, was not related to the novel, although it also shared that theme (and little else).)
It’s true that when the enemy attacked, a commander might empty out the stockade of all the servicemen who were in being held for minor offenses and return them to full duty. So if you were doing thirty days for drunk and disorderly you might get your “sentence” eliminated, but if you were doing thirty years for rape and murder, no.