True story. I once defended a civil lawsuit for a retailer where the customer claimed his Agent Orange exposure was aggravated by falling styrofoam coolers. His VA medical records repeated a history of Agent Orange exposure during the Vietnam conflict which left his skin being so sensitive that minor contact or trauma would result in necrotic sores. He obtained a disability, wheelchair, and handicapped van. He also had multiple claims for injuries from minor contact.
During his deposition, he told a fantastic story about his service and injuries which included special forces, punji stick accident, and Agent Orange exposure while “serving in the bush. I had requested a copy of his DD 214 and was told it was lost and that his records had been lost in a ST Louis records fire. But, as indicated, local VA doctors had dutifully written down his history of Agent Orange exposure.
In preparing for trial, I was really bothered by his birthday, which would have made him 18 in March of 1973. I was also bothered by the fact he claimed he graduated high school, which precluded early service at 17. I also found a marajuana possession conviction in early 1973, which to me suggested he could not have shipped out till late 1973, which made his claims of service in the bush even more fantastic.
In any event, the styrofoam cooler accident left him with very ugly looking blackish sores and scars on his shoulders and he seemed to have VA records to support his claim that it was a rare side effect of chemical exposure from a defoliant. If I confronted him at trial, and I was wrong, it could really backfire. So I kept my suspicions quiet during the early stages of the trial and did not mention them in my opening.
He testifies on direct about his service and like any BS artist with an audience spins a fantastic tale. He said he was in active combat, won a Purple Heart and other awards he couldn’t disclose because they were secret. But his big mistake was claiming he fought house to house trying to retake Hue after the Tet offensive, a time when he would have been 13.
My first question on cross whether he was still in active service in Vietnam on June 17, 1973 and could he tell us what he was doing. (When I googled his name, it reminded me he graduated in 73, not 72, which is why his birthday alone made his story suspect.)He actually said he was over there during that time but his specific mission and location were classified because his borders of operation were murky. I then asked him if he knew why that specific date was important historically. He said that when he was out in the bush, the days flowed together and he couldn’t possibly know what happened decades earlier. I told him that he personally had good reason to remember this date and he should think hard. He said he still didn’t know what he was doing. I then approached with the 1973 Holidaysburg High School yearbook showing he was a senior and his transcript showing he graduated on June 17, 1973 (Pre internet days) It was the most single awesome impeachment I ever made. I then asked him his birthday and whether he knew when the battle of Hue took place. At this point he became indignant and said he did have records that could show he was in Vietnam when he said he was, but was instructed to never disclose his actual dates or locations because they were classified so they were told to disclose involvement in missions that were known like Hue. He was so sincere, I was almost nervous about what records he was going to bring.
After a nervous lunch break, his attorney showed me a “General Discharge” from 1974 and a letter from a Veterans group acknowledging his request that they make an Agent Orange claim on his behalf. Even the attorney agreed that these documents did not substantiate his story beyond showing that he was in the military before 1974. At this point, I had confirmed with a local veterans group that he had not earned the Vietnam Service Era medal, which was required by their group to be recognized as a Vietnam Vet. The head of the group was annoyed by the St Louis story which he’d heard a lot but he confirmed that the records confirming Vietnam Era Service had not been lost or destroyed in a fire.
I finished my cross on other areas, and the plaintiff’s Attorney did not question him at all about his service, probably because he was worried ethically about eliciting further false testimony. He presented his doctor, who I got to admit that he could not rule out that the sores were self inflicted, probably with a caustic substance. He presented his family doctor whose testimony was equally as nutty. I presented my experts who opined that they were self inflicted.
Right after I rested, his attorney told the court, outside the jury’s presence, that his client wanted to testify in rebuttal about the historical discrepancies. The attorney said he would not be asking questions and that the plaintiff would be doing his own examination of himself. He also said that he had told his client that he did not recommend it. The judge cautioned the plaintiff not to ignore his attorney’s advice, and that he could be exposing himself to perjury. The plaintiff said he understood but needed to clear the misunderstanding to the jury and his family who had heard him challenged.
The jury comes back and the plaintiff proceeds to question himself. He explains that he was part of a secret special forces group that was actually operating in Korea in the early 70 s and that his memory was chemically scrubbed to protect them and the government from what they were doing because they were operating way outside the Geneva Convention. Suffice it to say, it was crazy and completely fantastical. Rather than make it look like I was picking on a crazy guy, I asked him no questions about his Korea story.
Jury returned with a defense verdict after 40 minutes including their lunch. We had learned that he had been incarcerated in the late seventies for statutory rape, and that he, like a lot of prisoners, learned to self induce superficial skin injuries which they would then send him to the VA for treatment and which would get him out of the corrections facility for a while. So I wasn’t operating completely without some clue he was lying. Because the conviction was so old I couldn’t introduce it.
Update. So, I googled his name. Can’t swear it’s the same guy, but this article mentions another “Vietnam Vet” with the same name who would have only just turned 18 in 1973. Strange coincidence if it’s not him. If it is, I like the fact he’s switched his service to the Marines. I could have sworn his 1974 General Discharge said Army. Looks like himVFW post will get new kitchen thanks to donor