Six Officers Selected as Jurors in Court-Martial of Navy Captain

Six Navy captains, four of them from San Diego, were chosen Friday to sit as a jury in the court-martial of Capt. Alexander G. Balian, who is charged with dereliction of duty for failing to rescue Vietnamese refugees adrift last June in the South China Sea.

The six officers were chosen from a panel of eight after four hours of questioning. They were asked repeatedly by Balian’s lawyer if they believe that commanding officers should be held accountable for the actions of their crews.

Balian has said that crewmen of his ship, the amphibious transport Dubuque, gave him incorrect information about the condition of the refugees in the course of an encounter with their vessel. Balian gave the refugees food, water, maps and directions to the nearest land, but decided not to take them on board his ship.

The refugees, who had been at sea for 18 days, drifted for another 19 days after the June 9 encounter with Balian’s ship. Some said they resorted to cannibalism in order to survive. Of the 110 who left Vietnam on the junk, 52 survived, rescued by Philippine fishermen.

The captains selected for the court-martial said they believe strongly in the accountability of commanding officers but conceded there could be exceptions. All six said they felt that at times they had been unfairly second-guessed by superior officers. Several said they had rescued Vietnamese refugees.

Balian’s lawyer, Dan Donato of San Diego, used his only peremptory challenge to excuse Capt. Michael E. Fitzgerald, commander of a logistics group in San Francisco, after lengthy questioning about his views on accountability.

Fitzgerald said at one point, “All the fiber of my career says the commanding officer is responsible for things in his command.”

The judge, Capt. James A. Freyer, turned down a defense request that Fitzgerald be dismissed for cause. Donato argued that Fitzgerald had already made up his mind about the case and could not give Balian a fair hearing.

“Clearly he felt the commanding officer is responsible for everything, no matter what,” Donato said.

Navy prosecutors used their peremptory challenge to excuse Capt. Larry J. Andrews, commander of a minesweeping unit in Seattle. Andrews said under questioning that he had heard from other commanding officers that the Dubuque was “particularly responsive to their needs.”

Lt. Cmdr. Raymond H. Carlson, the chief prosecutor, offered no reason for the challenge.

Under court-martial procedure, prosecution and defense are both permitted just one peremptory challenge, which can be used to dismiss any potential member of the court without explanation.

In Navy courts-martial, jurors are chosen from among military personnel with the same rank or higher than that of the defendant. The jury hears evidence and then makes a finding. If a guilty verdict is reached, the jury then issues a sentence of punishment.

The judge rules on matters of military law during the trial and ensures that all court-martial procedures are carried out properly.

The six officers selected are Capts. Robert L. Klein, of a surface ship readiness support group in San Diego; Lawrence B. Blumberg, commander of a destroyer squadron in San Diego; Carl A. Weegar, commander of a naval beach group in San Diego; Howard S. Stoddard, commander of an amphibious squadron in San Diego; William C. Fox, commander of fleet activities in Korea, and Ronald F. Walters, commander of a sealift command in Yokohama.

They will begin hearing testimony Monday from about 30 witnesses who are expected to be called.