To whom it may concern,

Sometime in April of 2000 I received a letter from the Dept. of the Army, dated 3/17/00 in response to my “Freedom of Information” request 18 months earlier. Along with this letter were other documents sent to me that would be referred to at a live hearing in September of 2000. The only records that I had requested were the “voting sheets” by board members concerning my “Medal of Honor” recommendations.

Please notice the 3rd paragraph: “with held are the Army Decorations Board voting sheets. Release could prohibit future open, honest communications between members of the board and the command. Accordingly, they are withheld under Exemption 5 of the FOIA.”The same day I got this letter, I received all of the voting sheets, 1996-1998! Even though the letter stated they would be withheld, I received them!

Question, what kind of people work for the army personnel command?

After viewing the voting sheets, I can see why they were not supposed to be sent to me. Please note 3 voting sheets supposedly signed by the board on 12/12/96. One was signed on 11, Dec 96 and two were signed on 12/12 96. Question, how could a discussion be held on two different dates with 3 board members?

On March 27, 1997 three board members met again. At least this time their dates matched, but please notice, the voting sheet signed by Marsha Killan. Nothing is filled out on the form except for a check mark by disapproval! Nothing else is filled out on the form! Finally, note the voting sheets from Oct of 1998. Chief warrant officer Roberson dated his sheet 7, Oct 98, he downgraded the proposed award of the “Medal of Honor” to the SS (Silver Star) no reason at all given! Is this competent?

Next we have the voting sheet of Sgt. Major Wayne Cream no date even given. Again nothing filled out on the form except downgrade to SS. Can you be more incompetent than this? The only sheet properly filled out dated 8, Oct 98 is by Howard Mc Milean, Col. AG. Three voting sheets, only one filled out properly, one dated 7,Oct 98, one dated 8, Oct 98, and one no date at all! Unreal! The reason for the 3 different board meetings was because of new evidence presented to the board on different occasions. Please notice one more thing on 11, Dec 1996 Paul Martinez marked yes to questions 1 & 2 on the form. On 27, March 1997 a little over 3 months later, after receiving more new evidence to my deeds Mr. Martinez marked no to questions 1 & 2. How can this be with even more evidence?

In closing please notice paragraph 4 of the March 17, 2000 letter from the “Dept of the Army.” they make mention about “Insight Polygraphic and Investigatory Services.” I took two different Polygraphic exams about what I did during the battle of “Boomerang” June 14 th & 15 th of 1953. The first was in 1991 and the second test a computerized test designed by the John Hopkins University I took in 1996. I passed both of the test, and on the John Hopkins test I passed with a score of 0.01 probability of deception! In the early spring of 2000 I had called the Army Board inquiring about my freedom of information request. A woman at the board said she had worked there for over 10 years, and I was the first person that she had heard of to take a polygraph exam concerning an award recommendation. When I took the first polygraph exam in 1991 I didn't have any affidavits at all to my actions. In fact the first affidavit that I received was in 1995. My reasons for taking the test were, I was told in 1953 I was being recommended for a high award. I thought I could prove to my children what I said was true and I had intentions of writing my autobiography.

 

Robert C. Barfield

Click HERE To Go To The Letter
Robert is Speaking Of