Navy Reinstates 2 Fliers Fired in Tomcat Follies

In a move rare in the Navy, the Pacific Fleet’s top admiral reversed himself Friday and reinstated two officers whom he had stripped of command three weeks ago for their roles in the Tomcat Follies, which featured a skit that included sexual references about a congresswoman.

Adm. R. J. Kelly, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, who had initially rejected two other admirals’ recommendations of leniency for the officers, announced that he was reinstating Capt. Richard F. Braden and Lt. Cmdr. Dale A. Bruetting.

Three other officers who were removed from command for their ties to the offending skit--Capt. George L. Moe, Cmdr. Robert H. Clement and Cmdr. David M. Tyler--were not reinstated. The careers of the three officers are, for all practical purposes, over, Navy sources said. The five are aviators at Miramar Naval Air Station.

Clement, 42 and a 17-year-Navy veteran, had also been recommended for reinstatement by his commanding officer, Vice Adm. Edwin R. Kohn. However, Kelly overruled Kohn’s recommendation on July 24.

Several fliers who did not want to be identified said Friday that the reinstatement of Braden and Bruetting proved that Kelly’s earlier decision to discipline all five pilots was a “knee-jerk reaction.”

Critics, including Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham (R-San Diego), a former Top Gun pilot, complained that Kelly’s decision last month to permanently strip the five men of command was an appeasement to politicians critical of the Navy’s investigation of the 1991 Tailhook sex scandal.

Both Braden, who was reinstated, and Clement, who was not, had complained publicly that Kelly had judged them before reviewing the results of an investigation of the follies, held in June. Each man said that Kelly had acted hastily in imposing discipline because of the Tailhook controversy and the public’s demand that aviators guilty of misconduct be punished.

Pacific Fleet spokesman Capt. Tom Jurkowsky denied that political or public pressure played any role in Kelly’s initial decision to remove all five officers from command and then reinstate two of them.

The follies investigation was ordered in June by the Navy’s top admiral, Chief of Navy Operations Frank B. Kelso, after he received a complaint from a retired female captain who said she was offended by the skit, held at the Miramar Officers’ Club.

The offensive skit included a banner with a message about Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.) and oral sex. Schroeder, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, has been a vocal critic of the Navy’s investigation into the Tailhook sex scandal. More than 25 women charged that they were fondled, groped and sexually assaulted by drunken Marine and Navy aviators at the Tailhook Assn. convention in a Las Vegas hotel.

Last month, Kelly said that Braden, a 24-year-Navy veteran, was relieved of command because he was the senior officer present during the skit and failed to stop it. Braden, 45, was chief staff officer of Fighter Airborne Early Warning Wing at Miramar when he was removed from command.

Braden, who had no direct ties to the skits, told The Times in a recent interview that he decided at the last minute to go to the Officers’ Club for a drink on the afternoon of the follies. The admiral who supervised the investigation had recommended that no action be taken against him.

Braden said he had “mixed emotions” about Kelly’s decision to reinstate him. He noted that Kelly’s recommendation also included the caveat that Braden “be reassigned according to the needs of the Navy,” which means he will not be returned to his old job as chief staff officer.

“This is another fallout of the Tailhook incident . . . I regret that this incident ever occurred,” Braden said in a written statement. “ . . . I can only hope that we in the Navy can address the Tailhook incident rationally, conscientiously and appropriately and put it behind us without destroying the careers of any more innocent men.”

In a written statement Friday, Kelly said that, “after a thorough review” of the investigation and an interview with Braden, he concluded that “Braden’s actions were not inconsistent with his position as senior officer present.”

As for his decision to reinstate Bruetting, Kelly said Bruetting did not have “the opportunity to view the squadron’s skit before it went on.” Bruetting was executive officer of VF 111, a fighter squadron commanded by Clement.

A Navy spokeswoman said that Bruetting did not wish to speak with reporters.

Clement, who was most vocal in his attempt to be reinstated, said he was disappointed by Kelly’s decision. He maintained his innocence in numerous interviews and flew to Washington to apologize to Schroeder.

The follies investigation cleared Clement of criminal wrongdoing. In July, in a meeting with the San Diego Union-Tribune editorial board, Kelly said Clement and the other officers would be reinstated “if they were not guilty of anything, and if the actions they took subsequent to the (follies) are open and aboveboard.”

“I was totally vindicated by the investigation. It’s very difficult for me to comment on why I was relieved,” Clement said Friday.

In a prepared statement, Kelly said he removed Clement from command because he had lost confidence in Clement’s ability as a leader.

“The fundamental issue in this episode is the lack of leadership; the failure to follow all acceptable parameters of conduct . . . ,” Kelly said.

According to Jurkowsky, Kelly’s decision to relieve Clement was also influenced by Clement’s failure to attend a May 1 meeting in San Diego on sexual harassment called by Kelly.

However, Clement said he had conflicting orders on that day. He said that he had also been ordered to attend a change-of-command ceremony by another admiral.

Jurkowsky said that Clement “deprived himself of the opportunity to gain a better appreciation for some definitive guidelines dealing with potentially offensive conduct” by not attending the May 1 meeting.

Earlier this year, everyone in the Navy was ordered to attend lectures on sexual harassment. Though Clement failed to attend the May 1 meeting, a highly-placed Navy source said Clement and others who have not attended the lectures have until next month to do so.

Clement said he was on vacation when the offensive skits were planned. While he was on vacation, Bruetting was in command of the squadron. Clement said he returned from leave only to witness the skits.

However, Jurkowsky said that Bruetting did not have “the opportunity to view the skit before it went on.” Although Clement was on leave, he still had a duty to “instill in his squadron a sense of acceptable conduct for officers,” Jurkowsky said.

Notwithstanding Clement’s absence when the skit was planned, “the decision to put the skit on . . . was entirely that of Clement,” Jurkowsky said.

Moe and Tyler, who were also stripped of command, declined to comment. Moe was in charge of the skits. Clement said he had not reviewed his squadron’s skit until the afternoon of the show.