Jailed for Receiving PTSD Benefits, Wisconsin Vet Takes Case to U.S. Supreme Court

An innocent man looks to
U.S. Supreme Court

I still can't get over the fact that Vietnam-era veteran, Keith Roberts was targeted by the U.S. Dept of Veteran Affairs (DVA), convicted and then jailed in 2005 for receiving PTSD disability benefits.

By Michael Leon

His crime? According to the U.S. Attorney of the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Stephen Biskupic (2001-08), Roberts did not know his fellow airman, Gary Holland, [an absurd suggestion] who was crushed to death by a C-54 airplane at a U.S. base in Naples, Italy in 1969, and that Roberts who was on line duty exaggerated his efforts to save his friend's life.

Furthermore, Roberts was wrong to follow the advice of his Veteran’s Service Officer (Shawano County (Wisconsin)) who had determined that Keith Roberts was entitled to an earlier effective date for his diagnosed PTSD.

Roberts hates the VA, and rightfully so.

In fact, Roberts had been a thorn in the side of the Milwaukee Regional VA’s office as well as the Illinois-based regional VA Inspector General’s office for insisting on his rights as a veteran to his benefits in less-than-diplomatic tones and language.

“Keith Roberts was granted a 100% compensation rate for PTSD from his date of claim. To grant PTSD, we need both a.) a current diagnosis and b.) a verified in-service stressor. We found not only a stressor, but an in-service diagnosis for Airman Roberts,” said a source at the Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center in Milwaukee who e-mailed the Lee Rayburn radio show in Madison after a broadcast of a show on Roberts. “[T]he only reason Airman Roberts was ever prosecuted was because he was a ‘belligerent ass’ who kept insisting that he get paid back to discharge. He was demanding an appeal in Washington. I'd have to say that you guys are TOTALLY (uppercase in the original) right about Roberts' conviction being bullshit. ...”

So, in response the former VA General Counsel attorney and VA national Director of Compensation and Pension Services, Renee L. Szybala, pushed U.S. Atty Biskupic to indict Roberts of mail [wire] fraud, predicating the indictment, it bears repeating, upon the ludicrous notion that Roberts and Holland did not know each other, and that Roberts exaggerated his reported efforts to keep his friend from being crushed to death.

For the record:

Holland and Roberts were both on line duty when Holland was killed:

• - Took two weeks-long classes together while stationed together in Memphis, Tennessee in 1968
• - Were quartered in the same barracks at Lakehurst, NJ where they also trained together for weeks
• - Went into the Naval Air Force base in Naples, Italy together as two young airman
• - Slept in close quarters (feet away from each other) while at Naval Air Station base in Naples, Italy
• - Worked in the same and only base air hangar together
• - Took an advancement test together on the morning of the day Holland was killed on Feb. 4, 1969

Roberts is basing his U.S. Supreme Court petition for a writ of cert upon the fact that he was denied his fundamental right to due process and was deprived of both liberty and property.

Roberts' 200 page-plus appeal gets legal and complicated after that.

But as someone who has reported on this case from the beginning, let me break down what happened.

As readers of Uppity Wisconsin may notice there is a comment from a veteran posted some years ago about Roberts, who corroborates Roberts' narrative.

But the wronged Navy Airman Keith Roberts (1968-71) had POed the wrong people and a corrupt U.S. Attorney [see U.S. Attorneys Scandal–Milwaukee] saw to it that an innocent man was wrongfully imprisoned for "tenaciously pursuing a claim for VA disability benefits" when the neocons were in charge of the U.S. DVA and U.S. DoJ.

To give you an idea who Biskupic is, see:

• The proven-innocent Georgia Thompson
• Biskupic tried to 'squeeze' Georgia Thompson
• Voter fraud cases
• Voter-Fraud Complaints by GOP Drove Dismissals

Roberts and his family are still fighting to get their lives together.

As for Biskupic, he seamlessly moved from corrupt, Bush-era U.S. Attorney to defender of the corrupt Scott Walker campaign in Wisconsin.

Well, this regime is gone.

But the damage remains from this bunch, a fact worth noting in conclusion.

Politicalization of pubic officials - shocker

There are plenty of candidates for condemnation in this affair in today’s environment when whole agencies of the U.S. government have been usurped by an administration lacking in conscience and public accountability, politicizing virtually every agency in sight, including U.S. Atty Biskupic’s office.

· Special Agent Raymond Vasil of the regional VA Inspector General’s office [“A cop Vasil is not, just an idiot with a badge,” said one veteran assisting Roberts] who lied to and vocally mocked Roberts while flying around the country fabricating a case against Roberts.

· The VA benefits process that systemically wears down veterans with the apparent intention of inducing them to give up their fight for benefits [this process is being adjudicated in the unprecedented class action suit by veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan.] In fact, the VA claims process can be so frustrating that many vets (especially those suffering from PTSD) are thrown into fits of rage directed at the VA itself.

· The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) that demeans veterans for seeking help with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in this “culture of trauma.”

· The Pentagon that blames veterans “personality disorders” and lack of faith in God for veterans suffering after service.

· Former VA national Director of Compensation and Pension Services, Renee L. Szybala, and Jon Baker, director of the Milwaukee Regional VA office actively participated in efforts to have Roberts prosecuted, while they intentionally took steps to ensure the VA Regional Counsel did not have an opportunity to perform the mandatory legal review before the matter went to the U.S. Attorney, as required by federal regulations. Again, Szybala knew that Roberts had an appeal pending at the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, and that under VA regulations until that appeal was completed the case should not have been released for criminal or collection action.

· Barbra Nehls, formerly of the Milwaukee VA Regional office, who wrongly claimed at trial that Roberts’ benefits were reduced based upon the VA’s determination that Roberts’ statements of facts from 1969 formed the basis of the VA decision to grant or deny benefits. This is a material misrepresentation of VA procedure.

· And of course, Carolyn F. Washington, VA deputy asst general counsel, a woman without conscience and quintessential social climber.

U.S. Troops Are Technically War Criminals, Fearing Hostile VA

by Michael Leon

Just off the phone with a veteran who told me U.S. soldiers and Marines often take pictures in war zones [such as they are] of enemy dead in violation of various articles of the Geneva Conventions. Guys figure they'll have an easier time with the VA if they have pictures of the dead (if they make it out) that they can file with VA documents.

Veterans' fathers, their grandfathers (and women too) know the story about the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA), a predatory and dysfunctional agency that denied their family's health and lives.

We hope it's changing, but the VA ain't your friend, especially if you're a Vietnam-era veteran:

But the DVA does have it share of defenders: The kindest thing these defenders are called by veterans are "chickenhawks," "house cats," and "pukes."

One of the DVA's friends is AP national writer, Allen Breed.

Breed defends the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA) and the U.S. Dept of Justice (DOJ) who went after Wisconsin Navy veteran Keith Roberts in 2004 for blowing the whistle on the DVA's shredder-gate scandal in the most undiplomatic way possible: Repeated obscenities.

I broke the story on Roberts on few years' back; but Roberts is the tip of the iceberg of systemic mistreatment of our veterans.

Readers have seen saturation coverage of the deficiencies and hostilities of the DVA and embedded neocons in these pages.

Reviewing Allen Breed's national AP hit job on U. S. veterans and reformist elements at the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA), there is a danger in writing a follow-up piece asking for comment from veterans.

Namely, Breed's assertions that disability claims are being handled too "quickly, humanely, and mostly in the vets' favor" present a risk that veterans may just stroke out in righteous anger when asked their opinion of these statements. I don't want cause an activist veteran his or her life. Not kidding.

As axiomatic to veterans as the oath they swore to defend the U.S. Constitution is the reality that a veteran filing a disability benefit claim encounters the VA's 'deny-delay-and-hope-you-die' culture.

How bad is the disability claim process?

The long document that a claimant must fill out [over one-million claims were filed in 2009, predicted to grow by the 100,000s] will more than likely be denied or delayed by a some claims specialist at the Veterans Benefit Administration (VBA), like Mark Rogers quoted by writer Breed.

Rogers makes the absurd statement, unchallenged by any source Breed presents, that all a veteran has to do is "lie" and they can easily obtain "100 percent disability compensation."

Breed's editor has a nice shot of the VBA bureaucrat, posing before the camera like he's actually proud of the mess he's makes veterans slog through.

As Mike Bailey writes over at Kos, "I have spent years advocating for veterans and their families. I am used to the major news agencies that report just facts and leave opinion pieces to others to write, Reuters, AP even Bloomberg News, but this [Breed's] is the most opinionated piece I have ever seen from the AP."

For a benefits process that hums along so "quickly [and] humanely," there sure seems like a lot of suicides; see the Unseen Enemy: Corps had military’s highest rate in 2009.

Speaking of unseen enemies, they're not just embedded bureaucrats at the VBA, or pencil-necks at the the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the enemy of the veteran is in the press as well.

Writes Breed, "No one knows the full extent of PTSD fraud. But there have been some hints."

Here's a hint for you, Breed: Our sworn veterans deserve the benefit of the doubt and one hell of a lot more than that.

AP: VA Makes It's too Easy for Veterans to File Claims ... Seriously

By Michael Leon

Updated - As PTSD claims soar, the systemic problem at the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (DVA) is the ease with which veterans file for disability benefit claims, in the view of Allen Breed, a national writer for the Associated Press.

This is a hit job on veterans and the progress being contemplated by some at the DVA (VA) to help veterans.

Do you have that? Things are too easy for veterans dealing with the VA now, asserts the AP's Breed.

Moved by a huge tide of troops returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with post-traumatic stress, Congress has pressured the Department of Veterans Affairs to settle their disability claims — quickly, humanely, and mostly in the vets' favor.

Continues Breed in his piece, PTSD cases rise and rules for claims ease, VA warned that more frauds will slip through: "The problem: The system is dysfunctional, an open invitation to fraud. And the VA has proposed changes that could make deception even easier."

That's the issue and it's political.

No deny-delay-and-hope-you-die culture at the DVA, just too many veterans taking advantage of "profitably working the levers of sympathy for the wounded and obligation to the troops, and exploiting the sheer difficulty of nailing a surefire diagnosis of a condition that is notoriously hard to define."

No years waiting on a claim, it's the ease with which veterans navigate the system now that is the real issue.

This is just crazy.

Stated Atty Robert Walsh at oral arguments in a federal criminal case cooked up by the VA and DOJ in October 2007 against a Navy veteran:

... (I)t's a total distortion in this record, and any suggestion that any veteran can just walk into the V.A., file a claim and say, you know, a peace time Veteran, that I was here in the states and I was sexually assaulted, and it's stressful, give me money. And the (VA’s) answer is, did you tell the chaplain, did you go to the hospital, did you confide in a family member, do you have a contemporaneous letter, do you have documentation? ‘No, I was embarrassed’. Then the claim fails. Your own statement, no matter how compelling the argument, how tragic the circumstances, is not going to be the basis of an award of PTSD.

Breed disagrees.

No "system stack[ed] deck against injured soldiers by forcing them to prove they have post-traumatic stress disorder [PTST,’ (Marine Corp Times (Kelly Kennedy, April 5, 2007)).

PTSD

The only reason that PTSD is "hard to define" is the DVA's contrived definition and the VA's systemic barriers to proving its existence in our veterans.

This is axiomatic to any veteran's advocate, but evidently eludes Breed. He did not talk to Paul Sullivan at Veterans for Common Sense or any other veteran in these pages who could have set him straight.

Let's get back to Wisconsin Navy veteran Keith Roberts (covered in these pages) targeted by the U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (VA) in 2003-05, who became the central figure in an Alice-in-Wonderland tale, after U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic of Wisconsin and top VA officials schemed to convict Roberts’ of fraudulently receiving VA benefits (by wire transfer as the VA requires).

Breed quotes the prosecution approvingly, taking the VA's and CAVC's (U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims) positions at face value as though these institution have a shred of credibility.

The basis of the prosecution: Holland and Roberts were not friends (an assertion knocked down) it was divined after 35 years by VA cops, after the death of Roberts' friend and fellow airman.

The VA cop. Raymond Vasil of a VA regional Inspector General's office. found that Navy veterans could not recall the presence of a given person 35 years later as another man lay being slowly crushed to death. No kidding.

Navy veteran Keith Roberts filed a claim, several claims as he learned how, and then listened to his veteran service officer and asked for retroactive awarding of his benefits to his discharge.

Roberts often screamed at the Milwaukee VA regional office that they were illegally altering his C-File, his claims file. He was right. But they turned around and charged him with fraud.

The case had drew the attention of Harper's magazine contributor and human rights attorney, Scott Horton, after the U.S. Attorneys' scandal broke during the Bush administration:

(T)ake a look at another prosecution brought in Wisconsin against a wounded vet, whose claims for benefits was turned into a criminal prosecution for wire fraud. As Wisconsin Public Radio reports,Keith Roberts, a Navy veteran got into the U.S. attorney’s crosshairs by filing a claim for benefits related to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) diagnosed as occurring because he witnessed and tried to prevent his friend from being crushed to death by a C-54 airplane while stationed at a Naval air base in Naples, Italy 1969, and unrelated assault by the Navy Shore Patrol—granted and then denied, has not yet been decided by the CAVC. But the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) after being accused of fraud in 2003 by Roberts ignored the CAVC process and investigated and asked that Roberts be prosecuted for fraud by the US Attorney’s office.

The prosecution smacks of retaliation and a plan to suppress veterans claims—Roberts was prosecuted for tenaciously pursuing a claim for benefits, which VA resisted and which is still in the benefits review process. It may be that the veteran is making claims which shouldn't be granted, but the decision to resist them by a criminal complaint is very heavy handed. What happens if the Veterans’ Appeals process rules for Roberts? As I read these papers, that seems possible. ...

Who knows? Roberts's case now is being appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and we can expect a decision in a few years.

In reading Breed's piece, a rare national piece on the processes at the VA, I cannot for the life of me believe he reports that VA Secretary Eric K. Shinseki is making things too easy by proposing new rules.

Breed cites the Board of Veterans Appeals and CAVC on decisions made against veterans without comment and context.

This is like asking Karl Rove for his objective opinion of President Obama's performance. Did Breed talk to any member of the CAVC bar board off-the-record on the opinion?

And of course, Breed essentially takes the position of the chickenhawks at the American Enterprise Institute's (AEI) like Dr. Sally Satel who ridicules veterans diagnosed with PTSD, a view that has permeated the Dept of Veterans Affairs, though the proposed changes are bemoaned by Breed's sources.

See the Post: "Psychiatrist Sally Satel, who is affiliated with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said an underground network advises veterans where to go for the best chance of being declared disabled. The institute organized a recent meeting to discuss PTSD among veterans."

Don't you think it's odd that VA investigators ordered by top VA officials pulled this prosecution?

Why not mention the political environment?

Roberts was targeted by the US Dept of Veterans Affairs (VA) in 2003-05, and became the central figure in this Alice-in-Wonderland tale, after U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic of Wisconsin and top VA officials schemed to convict Roberts’ of fraudulently receiving VA benefits (by wire transfer as the VA requires).

Veterans’ advocates know well Roberts is a victim of a vigorous attempt to marginalize, investigate, and prosecute veterans receiving disability benefits in an aborted attempt to fabricate a fraud crisis among veterans who were injured and traumatized during their service to their country.

As the Iraq and Afghanistan wars produce 100,000s more wounded veterans—a phenomenon that is was the subject of an unprecedented class action law suit by veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan against the VA [dismissed but its allegations found as fact}—advocates allege that Roberts’ extraordinary prosecution was part of the Bush administration’s priorities to discourage VA disability benefits claims, especially among Vietnam-era veterans, serving to carry out the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)/Bush policy that demeans veterans for seeking help with PTSD in what the AEI derisively brands a “culture of trauma.”

The Pentagon has gone so far as to blame veterans “personality disorders” and lack of faith in God for veterans suffering after service. [A VA May 1, 2008 e-mail obtained via FOIA request reveals, that because of “compensation seeking veterans,” VA staff should “refrain from giving a diagnosis of PTSD straight out” and they should “R/O [rule out] PTSD” and consider a diagnosis of “Adjustment Disorder” instead.

One administration initiative to investigate 72,000 cases of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was halted in 2005 after a storm of outrage from veterans’ groups and Democrats, including the then Senator Obama.

Here's how Breed concludes his piece without casting a single doubt on the Roberts prosecution, ignoring why he was a political target, or even quoting a knockdown from one source on his thesis that the VA is taking it too easy on veterans now-a-days:

But investigators later determined that Roberts didn't even participate in the rescue effort and was not as close to Holland as he'd claimed. The Board of Veterans Appeals said the VA's regional office "simply conceded" Roberts' claims "without obtaining credible supporting evidence."

After losing his benefits, Roberts was convicted of wire fraud, sentenced to 48 months in prison and ordered to pay $262,943.52 in restitution. Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims concluded in a 45-page ruling that Roberts "committed fraud in securing VA benefits for his PTSD" and affirmed the BVA's decision to sever them.

In a recent telephone interview, the 62-year-old veteran denied that he lied, but argued that under VA rules, he could have PTSD from merely being "vicariously aware of the situation."

When asked whether the new rule would throw open the doors to more fraud, Shinseki stressed the need for more research into PTSD and traumatic brain injury, the war on terror's other "signature" wound.

"I know if we take your temperature and you're registering at 102 degrees, you've got a fever, and there are ways to cope with that," the VA secretary told the AP. "PTSD and TBI are in need of the same kind of metrics."
___

AP Writer Kimberly Hefling in Washington, D.C., also contributed to this report. Allen G. Breed, a national writer for The Associated Press based in Raleigh, N.C., can be reached at features@ap.org.

Actually, investigators never proved a thing. But after 35 years, Roberts couldn't prove anything either, so he must be a criminal, the IG and DoJ reasoned.

It turns out, the federal government can make a jury in northern Wisconsin believe just about anything.

- elements of this story were previously published -

Pardon Jailed Wisconsin Veteran

President-elect Barack Obama has tremendously more on his plate than reinventing government and restoring some semblance of accountability to Americans.

Ensuring that the world does not enter into a second depression, halting a war or two, saving the environment, formulating an industrial policy on alternative energy, one can go on; all are problems of a massive scale.

But readers of Uppity Wisconsin may notice a comment from a veteran posted this week about another veteran who is serving a four-year sentence in federal prison.

That jailed veteran is Navy Airman Keith Roberts (1968-71), a Vietnam-era veteran, [see Wisconsin Navy Airman Keith Roberts and U.S. Attorneys Scandal–Milwaukee] from Gillett, Wisconsin; and he’s an innocent man wrongfully imprisoned.

Roberts was convicted on five counts of wire fraud for receiving U.S. Dept of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits after the national VA office launched a vendetta against Roberts for being a pain to the VA regional office in “tenaciously pursuing a claim for VA benefits" (Harper’s).

U.S. Atty Stephen Biskupic's office took up the VA’s case that resulted in the 2006 conviction.

In sum, Roberts served his country and was railroaded by a corrupt VA and an appalling U.S. DOJ.

President-elect Obama should grant an extraordinary pardon that will not only serve the cause of justice but will also repudiate a VA that has become outright hostile to veterans.

U.S. v. Roberts
The title of the case is fitting for this honorably discharged veteran diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

The crux of the case against Roberts is that Roberts was not friends with his fellow Navy airman (Gary Holland) when both the men were on line duty at a Naval base in Naples, Italy on February 5, 1969 when Holland was crushed to death by a C-54 aircraft.

The prosecution also says that Roberts exaggerated his efforts to save Holland, which constituted fraud for which Roberts was convicted by a jury in northern Wisconsin. And that Roberts therefore lied about the friendship and the effort to save Holland.

Holland and Roberts did not have a friendship, and Roberts exaggerated his efforts to save Holland. That’s the alleged fraud, that’s the intent to engage in fraud? Yes.

In fact, the two men had parallel service histories that would make it unlikely that Holland and Roberts were not at least friendly in their relationship, and that contradicts the prosecution’s indictment and trial statements.

So what happened, why the prosecution on such a slender reed?

"[T]he only reason Airman Roberts was ever prosecuted was because he was a ‘belligerent ass’ who kept insisting that he get paid back to discharge. He was demanding an appeal in Washington," said a background source at the Clement J. Zablocki VA Medical Center in Milwaukee who e-mailed the Lee Rayburn radio show in Madison in early June 2007 after a program about the Roberts case, and asked to remain anonymous out of fear of losing his job. "I'd have to say that you guys are TOTALLY (uppercase in the original) right about Roberts' conviction being bullshit ... ."

Said Roberts’ attorney Robert Walsh, a combat Vietnam Army veteran, at the oral arguments in October 2007 before the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, referencing this VA standard for judging any first-person account by veterans of what happened to them during their service:

… I submit to you that they are inconsistencies in every veteran's record, combat or peacetime. And that Congress has recognized that. And that’s why VA benefits is a very paternalistic, claimant-friendly, non-adversarial system. It’s even more paternalistic that the Social Security benefits adjudication system (per the Veterans Judicial Review Act). So, where’s the intent (for fraud)?

Good question.

Roberts criminal case is before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit (U.S. v. Roberts, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin) where Roberts is seeking an en banc hearing, and his benefits case is on appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC).

A three-member panel for the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in July found that, "The record might also have supported a jury determination that Mr. Roberts sincerely believed that his statements were true and that he had no intention to defraud the Government ... (but) (i)t is beyond our authority to disturb (a guilty) finding on appeal (in this case)."

As for the comment by the veteran who served with Roberts in Italy, it corroborates what Roberts has claimed for decades had occurred:

James W. Ervin PH3 (not verified) on Tue, 12/16/2008 - 4:13pm. I was stationed @ NAF (Naples), Italy at the time of this "incident". July 1968 thru Nov.1969 . I also remember the young sailor be trapped / crushed up inside the wheel well (nose) of the aircraft inside the hangar of NAF naples,Italy. I do remember someone wanting to drive a forklift into the side of the aircraft ; but an officer or someone of authority would not let them do that....so what they did was have men climb up into the plane & go to the rear of the plane to put weight in the rear of the plane to let the nose come up to release the trapped sailor. (Unfortunately) that process was too slow to save the sailor from death. I also remember taking photographs of the " Pin " that was in the nose gear at the time. I remember it as being a homemade looking pin without a locking clip to keep it from being removed without unlocking the device. As for the names of the people involved , I don't remember ; but there definitely was someone there who wanted to use the (fork) lift to rescue the sailor from the collapsed nose wheel and was ordered NOT to use the fork lift. Sincerely ,

Roberts' family and fellow veterans supporting him in his case remain hopeful, but desperate.

President-elect Obama should grant this family a full pardon and make things right.
- Contact author at: maleon64@yahoo.com
See also:

1. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: US Atty Biskupic and VA ...

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran ..... In June of 1999, Airman Keith Roberts (1968-71) was granted a disability rating by the ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2007/06/us-atty-biskupic-and-va-defied-us-law.html - Similar pages

2. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: Fight Is on to Free ...

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran. Keith Roberts .....Keith Roberts (1968-74) sits behind bars, ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2007/05/fight-is-on-to-free-wisconsin-vet.html - Madison, Wisconsin—As Airman Similar pages

3. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: National VA Director Pushed ...

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran ..... In the PTSD case of U.S. Navy Airman Keith Roberts (1968–71) the U.S. Dept of Justice ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2007/09/national-va-director-pushed-us-atty.html - Similar pages

4. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran. Keith Roberts, 07827-089. FCI Englewood, East-Upper FCI 9595 West Quincy Avenue ... malcontends.blogspot.com/ - Similar pages

5. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: Jailed Wis Vet Files Reply ...

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran ..... Keith Roberts, an honorably discharged Navy veteran (1969-71) from Gillett, Wisconsin, ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2007/08/jailed-wis-vet-files-reply-brief-calls.html - Similar pages

6. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: Jailed Wisconsin Veteran ...

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran ..... Madison, Wisconsin - Keith Roberts awaits the decision of his appeal before a ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2008/06/jailed-wisconsin-veteran-awaits.html - Similar pages

7. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: Law Firms Rushing to ...

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran ..... Walsh is representing Wisconsin Navy veteran Keith Roberts who is a victim of VA ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2007/09/law-firms-rushing-to-veterans-aid.html - Similar pages

8. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: Jailed Wisconsin Vet Loses ...

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran. Keith Roberts, 07827-089 ... Contact Airman Keith Roberts' (Ret.) Attorney, Robert Walsh ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2008/07/jailed-wisconsin-vet-loses-appeal-va.html - Similar pages

9. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: VA Document Contradicts US ...

   Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran ..... “Keith Roberts did not seek out an earlier effective date on his own. ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2007/05/va-document-contradicts-us-atty-in.html - Similar pages

10. Michael Alan Leon: MAL Contends . . .: Commending Wisconsin ...

    Write to Keith Roberts - Wrongly Imprisoned Vietnam-era Veteran ..... Navy veteran Keith Roberts — An innocent victim of the U.S. Dept of Justice and U.S. ... malcontends.blogspot.com/2008/12/commending-wisconsin-citizens-in-2008.html - Similar pages

Death of 1960s Navy Airman Focus of Jailed Vet's Plight

Airman Gary Holland

The death of Airman Gary Holland on February 5, 1969 continues today to cause hardship and despair.
Holland was crushed to death by a C-54 aircraft at a Naval base in Naples, Italy.

Holland's death causes despair today because former VA General Counsel attorney and VA national Director of Compensation and Pension Services, Renee L. Szybala, helped engineer the prosecution of Gary Holland's (pictured above-right) fellow airman, Keith Roberts, by US Atty Stephen Biskupic.

The crime?

Roberts was for over a decade "tenaciously pursuing a claim for benefits" related to his actions at the death scene where he was on line duty at the same airbase as Holland.

And Roberts was convicted of five counts of wire fraud for receiving disability funds related to his diagnosed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

U.S. Atty Stephen Biskupic's office convinced a jury that Holland and Roberts did not have a friendship, and Roberts who was on line duty at the base at the time of Holland's death exaggerated his efforts to save Holland.

A thin reed for a federal prosecution.

The truth is the VA just wanted to shut Roberts up and the VA found a useful tool in U.S. Atty Stephen Biskupic who was willing to the do the administration's dirty work that demeans veterans for seeking help with PTSD in this “culture of trauma,” that the Pentagon says is really just veterans' “personality disorders” and lack of faith in God for veterans suffering after service.

As Roberts’ attorney Robert Walsh states in his Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) Supplemental brief (where Roberts' disability claim still remains as he fights in the federal criminal appellate court simultaneously) filed in July 2007:

“Ms. Renee Szybala, who responded to the (Roberts') letter for the (VA) Secretary, then appears to have had a direct involvement in orchestrating the efforts to commence criminal proceedings against the appellant in Federal District Court when she knew his appeals were pending at either the BVA (Board of Veterans' Appeals) or this Court (the CAVC).”

Szybala, who since has moved on from her position as Director of Compensation and Pension Services, was responsible for managing the network of VA Regional Offices across the country.

Roberts' defense attorneys unearthed in discovery e-mails language suggestive of Szybala's complicity in the prosecution of Roberts. Delivering compensation was not high on Szybala's mind, the e-mails suggest.

In an e-mail of January 27, 2005 from Debi Bevins, Special Assistant to the former (VA) Secretary Jim Nicholson, Bevins asked Szybala: “Is there any truth to what Keith Roberts alleges in this e-mail?” referring to Roberts’ allegations of VA fraud and violations of his due process rights, and Roberts declarations of his rightful entitlement pertaining to his experiencing what the VA calls "stressors.”

In the same e-mail, Bevins asks: “Have we heard any news on the prosecution of Keith Roberts?”

Szybala replies in part in an e-mail dated January 27, 2005 that: “Of course not (there is no truth to Roberts’ allegations). But he (Roberts) may be confused and believe it. I have known of and been dealing with Mr. Roberts’ complaints for several years now, dating to my time at OGC (VA Office of the General Counsel) as explained in the message below. … In the interest of full disclosure, I also have a letter on this case from the American Legion, dated October 15, 2004 (asking for Vasil’s report), to which I have not yet responded. The fraud for which Mr. Roberts’ service connection was severed was uncovered, investigated, and reported by the OIG (Office of the Inspector General). To respond to the Legion’s letter, we need to confer with the OIG and have had trouble connecting. When we do we’ll ask them the question about the prosecution, too. My guess is, however, that this case would not interest a U.S. Attorney. …”

Several points made in this and subsequent e-mails obtained by the defense and not presented at the criminal trial (though successfully made part of the record of appeal at CAVC after efforts by atty Robert Walsh) are critical and raise questions about the legality and propriety of the prosecution instigated by the VA.

No testimony or evidence was presented at Roberts’ trial pertaining to Ms. Szybala’s statement that Szybala had been dealing with Roberts’ allegations and complaints for several years and that Szybala stated that “… he (Roberts) may be confused and believe it.”

This is significant because if Roberts believed the VA claim that he was pursuing and Szybala assumed Roberts’ believed his claim, this discredits the principal allegation of the government’s criminal case that Roberts devised a “scheme” to formulate misrepresentations with the intent of defrauding the VA, the alleged crime for which Roberts now sits behind bars.

Walsh, Roberts attorney at the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit as well as CAVC, made this lack-of-intent argument in the appellate brief and at oral arguments in October 2007.

In fact, the US government in the person of Barbra Nehls of the Milwaukee VA Regional office, wrongly claimed at trial that Roberts’ benefits were reduced based upon the VA’s determination that Roberts’ statements of facts from 1969 formed the basis of the VA decision to grant or deny benefits.

This is a material misrepresentation of VA procedure: The determination of PTSD-related benefits relies upon medical evidence (such as being diagnosed by five different medical professionals that a vet has PTSD, as Roberts has been) and the existence of an in-service stressor (such as the reality that a man was crushed to death by a C-54 aircraft while an Airman was on duty), per 38 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 3.304(f). All a veteran has to achieve in first-person testimony is corroboration, not verification.

The CFR defines Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as Service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder; (PTSD) requires medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 CFR 4.125(a); a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptoms and an in-service stressor; and credible evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred (38 CFR 3.304(f)).

Officials from the Milwaukee Regional Office and Special Agent Raymond Vasil’s Inspector General’s (OIG) office were included in the series of e-mails including one e-mail from the OIG's Vasil dated January 27, 2005, stating: “The U.S. Attorney is interested in prosecuting. He is not 100% yet and wanted me to interview any additional persons I could find that were present when the original accident happened in 1969 … ."

The engineering of the prosecution is evident from the e-mails.

And the rushed, extraordinary prosecution itself that was challenged in Roberts’ supplemental brief filed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) in July.

“As detailed in the brief, the conduct of the (VA) Secretary has been contrary to law, in bad faith, highly adversarial. There is an inference of impropriety by any number of senior officials in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs,” reads the brief filed by attorney Robert Walsh.

And it bears repeating from the brief: “Ms. Renee Szybala, who responded to the letter for the Secretary, then appears to have had a direct involvement in orchestrating the efforts to commence criminal proceedings against the appellant in Federal District Court when she knew his appeals were pending at either the BVA (Board of Veterans' Appeals) or this Court (the CAVC).”

The two VA e-mails cited above are linked below.

- E-mail One

- E-mail Two

Roberts’ CAVC brief continues:


In this case the pursuit of the criminal conviction of this Appellant was ongoing during the entire pendency of this appeal. The (VA) Secretary appears to have willfully and knowingly circumvented the jurisdiction of this Court (CAVC) and his employees and agents made material misrepresentations of the precedent rulings of this Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit in open court, under oath.



Roberts' cases, one of many scandals of the VA under the Bush administration, remains under appeal both at CAVC and the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit while the 39-years-old death of the young Gary Holland continues to haunt his fellow airmen.

[Much of the above piece has been previously published at this site and other sites.]

Jailed Wisconsin Navy Veteran May Get Win

- Accessing oral arguments. [Enter 07-1546 in the Case Number's fields by entering 07 in the "Year," and entering 1546 in the "Year Fragment's" field. Give the file some 45 seconds at least to load.]

Navy veteran Keith Roberts (1968-71) is serving a four-year sentance for wire fraud for trying to help save his buddy, Florida native Airman Gary Holland, from being crushed to death by a C-54 airplane while stationed at a Naval air base in Naples, Italy in 1969. The government says he lied, and that his diagnosed Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is based on lies.

Roberts is appealing.

Using one’s perceptions of the ideology, judicial integrity and past rulings of a three-judge panel as a means of predicting a ruling on a criminal appeals case is akin to a 16-year-old guy guessing the outcome of a first date with a 16-year-old girl: Conjecture seems a useless enterprise, and surprises and unpredictability are the rule.

But I’ve learned a lot about women and judges since being a teenager.

In the matter of Keith Roberts v. United States (case number 07-1546) appearing for oral arguments before a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit yesterday, I am cautiously optimistic that the conviction of the Wisconsin Navy veteran on five counts of wire fraud in 2006 will not stand.

One could offer a multitude of qualifications, but based on my reading of the briefs and the relevant administrative, case (cited by government and defendant briefs) and statutory law, Roberts has a strong case. [I ought to state my bias here against U.S. Attorney Stephen Biskupic who argued the Roberts case himself at oral arguments, for whom I harbor ill feelings for his obscene prosecutions of the innocent Georgia Thompson and the ridiculous voter fraud cases. In fairness, Biskupic is known by many in the legal field as a gentleman, although one who had a bit too much time on his hands at the office where ambition appears to have overtaken discretion.]

The defendant's case before the three-judge panel was argued by attorney Robert Walsh, a former VA staff attorney, who is also the attorney arguing Roberts' case involving the same transactions and occurrences before the Washington D.C.-based U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans' Claims (CAVC).
A decision favorable to the defense would represent a stunning blow to the Bush administration’s policy on veteran’s PTSD benefits, that has sought to marginalize veterans contending that veterans are to some extent responsible for their own conditions in that they had pre-existing personality disorders and, some administration figures have asserted, a lack of faith in God that would have assisted coping with PTSD.
A favorable defense decision would also likely draw the attention of the House Committee on the Judiciary that has been investigating selective and politically motivated prosecutions by the Bush Department of Justice.
Roberts was diagnosed by numerous government and private medical professionals as suffering from PTSD, for which the stressor event is contended by Biskupic to have been fabricated, constituting fraud.
Frustration with the VA drove Keith Roberts to phone the VA Inspector General’s office at Hines, Illinois, in November 2003 at which time Roberts spoke with Special Agent Raymond Vasil.
Roberts accused the VA of “fraud” in altering a transcript at a local hearing in the VA Regional Office in Milwaukee as the VA was in the process of determining the date from which his retroactive disability pay was to become effective, among other benefit issues.
At oral arguments Walsh knocked down that government's contention of fraud, arguing a lack of intent and asserted that only after Roberts' complaint of fraud was made did the VA look for inconsistencies in the veteran Roberts' VA claim file.
Walsh also asserted a cover-up of negligent conditions at the Navy air base that caused Airman Gary Holland to be crushed to death by a C-54 aircraft.
Following is an extended excerpt from Walsh's address yesterday that was interrupted just once with a question pertaining to Roberts' state of mind.
Look back here for an analysis of U.S. Attorney's Biskupic's address on Monday.
Said Walsh:

Nothing that a veteran says is going to be the basis of a PTSD award of benefits by the VA. They need a medical diagnosis and they need a verified stressor, and I have never seen, it's a total distortion (of VA adjudication procedures) in this (and made at the trial court) record, and any suggestion that any veteran can (hypothetically) just walk into the VA, file a claim and say, you know peace-time veteran, that 'I was here in the states and I was sexually assaulted and it's stressful and give me money'. And the answer is did you tell the Chaplin? Did you go the hospital? Did you confide in a family member? Do you have a contemporaneous letter? Do you have documentation?
‘No, I was embarrassed’. Then, the claim fails. Your own statement, no matter how compelling the argument and how tragic the circumstances is not going to be the basis of an award of PTSD.
Now, the VA adjudicated this, with all the King's horses and all the King's men for about 10 years. They conclude that this man has PTSD. They grant the award. And now they decide, after he's a whistle blower and he complains to VAIG (Department of Veterans Affairs Inspector General) (in November 2003). Now they decide that they are inconsistencies in the record. I submit to you that they are inconsistencies in every veteran's record, combat or peacetime. And that Congress has recognized that.
And that’s why VA benefits is a very paternalistic, claimant-friendly, non-adversarial system. It’s even more paternalistic that the Social Security benefits adjudication system (per the Veterans Judicial Review Act).
So, where’s the intent (for fraud)? The intent is to get some benefits because the man (the veteran) can’t work. Now, as far as wire fraud, when Congress changed the law and suggested that electronic funds transfer would be a permissible vehicle for pain (disability) benefits across the government, they made it elective. In the Social Security administration it was elective … VA general counsel in 1997 issued a(n) … opinion … (mandating) that everyone is going to have electronic funds transfer. ... every VA beneficiary … (is compelled to receive benefits electronically). …

This (case) is a remarkable event because we have the interposition of the Department of Justice right square in the middle of a VA benefits dispute, and effectively they (the DoJ) are litigating in the district court the same transaction and occurrence (as the VA).

And they (the DOJ) (said) ‘no, we’re not going to do that’ (at trial). The judge’s pre-trial motions and pre-trial conference were all predicated on the fact that I am not going to relitigate the veteran's (VA) benefit case. And then they proceed at trial, after they’ve denied many of the witnesses that Mr. Roberts attempted to call, they proceed to relitigate the 1969 events.

Now, they (the prosecution) also call for their witnesses, the individuals, the officers, the non-commissioned officers, who were in charge of the maintenance of that aircraft and who negligently removed the jacks, creating a situation which led to the unnecessary and accidental death of airman Holland.

And now to bring those people in, by the way who then retired from the military. So they have pecuniary (direct financial interest because of pension and other VA benefits) interest in the outcome of this case, having been subpoenaed in the court; they have to stick to their story that Mr. Holland caused his own death. He did not. (Prosecutor’s witness) Chief Stewart testified that the airplane was safe.

Res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself), the aircraft was not safe; it collapsed and killed a young man.
###