St. Paul recorder. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1934-2000, 1950-12-08

the TreSluentlal decision TO moo
Leon Gilbert for misconduct be-
fore the enemy to 20 years seem
too severe? 2. Do you think the
case should be appealed for
further reduction OF sentenceg s.
How win the decision affect the
family OF 1t. GilbertY (The third
question was asked OF the wo-
mem.
Robert Harris, s95 Rondo Ave-,
st. Paul. a veteran of three years,
eight months in the Army. 20
months being overseas In the ETo
theatre of World War II. said,
THE penalty In my opinion Is
much too severe. It was a bum
decision in the first place. All dur
ing my service in the Army,
never heard Of man getting any
more than five year sentence for
a similar offense. Sure the case
should be appealed. It's a throw
back TO the statement that Me-
gro officers are not capable Of
leadership. which some high
ranking officers believe"
Curtis o'Conner, 41S6 9Th st.
N. 4. Minneapolis, reserve officer
who saw five years, three of
which were served with the goth
Infantry, Sixth Div, during
World War II said, II think the
guy deserves a better break. After
all he was the leader Of his pla-
toon and should have known what
the situation was better than any
rear echelon officer. I have seen
a man get twenty years for that
sort of thing but from what I've
read OF this case the facts aren't
too clear and II doesn't add up
right"
Mrs. Alice simms onque, direc-
tor of Halle Q. Brown, st. Paul
said, II think the punishment is
much too severe. II would be diff
ferent II 1t were for treason. Not
many war criminals have received
sentences this severe. The fight
should certainly be pushed for
further consideration. In answer
TO the third question asked Of
women, Mrs. onque said, Unless
there is a chance Tor 1t. Gilbert
to be released, the life OF his
family is relatively over"
Reginald Harris, a former Off
Ger of 80 months overseas in the
CHI. theater during World War
II answered. Although the mans
life was saved. the Communication
was really no victory. The penalty
Is much too harsh. Certainly the
fight to reduce the sentence
should be carried on. Gilbert only
did what any officer should have
done under the circumstances and
that is look after his men. You
can charge the sentence off TO
prejudiced superior officers"
Marcella Killen, political can
didate and civic leader in Min
neapolis replied, TOO harsh. A
full review by not only military
but outside authorities is needed.
The president should be asked TO
appoint a committee of private
citizens 10 work with military
authorities to review the case.
There should be a complete re-
hearing of persons connected. The
case has all the earmarks of
protecting Army brass. / think
family consideration has very
little to do with the case. They
are not nearly as important as
having this whole thing revealed"
Douglas Hall, attorney of Min
neapolis answered: "on the
basis Of the facts as I have them,
the punishment is harsh and un-
justified and without relation TO
to the condition which he faced. I
think every effort should be made
TO correct the present situation"
Henry Thomas, head resident of
Phyllis Wheatley settlement house
said: AS to the punishment,
couldn't say whether it is or isn't
too severe. The man, as a good
soldier has certain obligations
which are his TO carry out even
though he may question them. As
for carrying the court case fur
ther. don't see harm in this eff
fort. Possibly in appealing the
case, new evidence win be brought
before the court that hasn't been
revealed"
Senator Hubert Humphrey
from his bed at the University
hospital where he was recovering
from an operation said, II think
the President acted commercially
in reducing 1t. Gilbert's sentence.
As I'm not familiar with all the
facts about the case cannot an
swer as to the severity Of the
punishment. II new evidence Is
revealed then an appeal certainly
should be made. Every person Is
entitled to an appeal"