Evening star., 1955-07-24
3 Turncoots Unlikely
To Escape Reckoning
If Crimes Are Proved

Whether the hypothetical charges
would include aiding the enemy
andior prisoner misconduct. such
as proved the basis Of convicting
Bachelor and Dickinson, Is known
only to the Army. It has been
reported that the Army is studying
the question whether the returning
GIs may have done some of the
same things which resulted in the
Bachelor Dickinson convictions.
such as informing on fellow prison.
ers. making propaganda broadcasts.
etc. But proving this Is another
matter.
The turncoats might, Of course,
be tried in the civil courts. What
actually happens will depend on
the kind of q case Defense and
Justice Department lawyers think
they have in their respective juris-
dictions.
Treason Triol improbable
It is conceivable. though scarcely
probable. that any Of the 81 GIs
who declined the Panmunjom in
vitation to "come home" could be
prosecuted for treason. sedition,
espionage or giving out classified
information. These crimes are all
punishable in civil courts under
the United States code.
AS to the treason charge, severe
constitutional limitations exist.
The Constitution states that
Treason against the United States
shall consist only In levying war
against them, or In adhering to
their enemies. giving them aid and
comfort. =" One problem here Ia
whether the Korean conflict was
war. in legal sense. War was
never declared and official pro-
nouncements referred to it as q
United Nations police action" A
definition Of war for treason pur-
poses has never been made by the
Supreme Court. There have been
less than 80 treason cases in
United States history and only
four have reached the Supreme
AOQIt. 11ICC VI tAACDC WCAC VOAAO
War II cases
Curiously enough. the closest the
Supreme Court has come to con-
sideration of this particular issue
involved Aaron Burr's 1907 con-
spiracy to take over the Louisiana
Territory. In deciding that Burr's
agitation did not amount to levy.
ing war;" Chief Justice Marshall
set the tone for future treason
cases when he said that "the crime
Of treason should not be extended
by construction to doubtful cases"
Charging the Turncoat Trio with
espionage or disclosing classified
information would also seem very
unlikely if for no other reason than
difficulty in producing evidence and
proving opportunity.
What About Sedition?
Sedition. the crime Of promoting
disaffection for ene's own country
by measures short of warlike acts,
stands out as the most likely civil
court charge. Even so, there is
doubt that it could be made to stick.
Perhaps the most significant ele-
ment in all these military cases,
from long range point of view, is
the gradual adjustment Of the law
to meet changing methods Of war
fare. Due to scientific advances,
psychological warfare is immensely
more practical than it was even in
World War I. AS with criminal
cases involving insanity, military
law is shifting to take into ac-
count increased psychological fac
tors.
In almost every case where Amer
ican servicemen have been charged
with military crimes while under
control Of the enemy, the defend
ant has alleged psychological coer-
cion, threats, "brainwashing" and
so on That the military forces
recognize this as a legitimate de-
fense was evidenced in the Schwable
case. Moreover, the section of the
Military Code dealing with mis-
conduct of prisoners seems broad
enough to excuse certain viola
tionS on this ground.
Revolutionary Cose
While the defense Of psyche
logical coercion can certainly be
overdone, times have changed since
the first standards of excusable col
laboration with the enemy were
set UP during the Revolutionary
War. In 1777 Continental soldier
named McCarty was captured In
Delaware by the British and, under
pressure, agreed to fight with the
Redcoats. Later McCarty was tried
for treason in a civil court and
acquitted. However. the court held
that in order to escape punishment
by claiming coercion a soldier must
have been in imminent danger Of
death or grave bodily harm
During the Civil War thousands
on both sides went over to the
enemy, but the Union courts de-
cided to loosen the standards a bit
and said this was justif1able II done
to escape severe privation and suf-
fering-and provided the prisoner
took advantage Of the first oppor-
tunity to escape! The doctrine ap-
peared to be more one OF expediency
than logic.
English soldiers have tradition
ally functioned under strict stand
ards. Six British regulars cap
tured by Napoleon's forces prior
to Waterloo were frozen, starved.
beaten and kept In cave. Finally
they were promised better treat
ment If they would aid the French
by standing little guard duty.
They did, and subsequently all six
were hanged for treason in the
Tower of London.
Clearly the problem of the dis
loyal POW is not new. What In
new is ID that the Military Code
now specifically defines, prisoner
misconduct and collaboration as
ulIniShq hle crirnas ord (0l tha ia,r,