Rare Tactic Used in Army Misconduct Case

Drawing on a seldom-used military statute, an Army hearing officer took steps on Thursday to force the original accuser in the sexual misconduct case against Army Sgt. Maj. Gene McKinney to testify at the soldier’s pretrial proceedings.

The presiding officer in the hearing, Col. Robert Jarvis, asked the Army to return retired Sgt. Maj. Brenda Hoster to active-duty status so she can be compelled to appear as a witness.

Hoster, one of four women who has accused McKinney of sexual misconduct, has refused to testify out of fear the defense would attack her reputation, her lawyer said. She cannot be forced to appear at the hearing--which will determine whether McKinney faces a court-martial--as long as she is a civilian.

Based on Jarvis’ request, the Army now will consider recalling her to military status under a statute intended to allow reactivation of former service members in times of war or national emergency.

Susan Barnes, Hoster’s lawyer, said her client will do her duty as a soldier if she is reactivated and ordered to testify. “She’s a soldier through and through,” Barnes said. “She’ll put on her uniform and go back and testify if they want her to.”

Barnes added she does not know if she will appeal to the Army to reject the highly unusual move to recall Hoster.

Hoster has contended that McKinney touched her and pressured her repeatedly for sex. Three other women also have come forward with allegations, resulting in 18 preliminary charges against McKinney, a 29-year veteran.

McKinney, who has denied all the charges, has contended he has been singled out because he is black. His accusers are white.

*

Hoster has been refusing to testify in order to avoid questions from McKinney’s lawyers pertaining to allegations that she had a homosexual affair in her barracks while on active-duty service.

Barnes denied that Hoster is a lesbian but said Hoster is refusing to testify because of the Army’s failure to protect the alleged victims from abusive questioning in a hearing that has featured questions about the alleged victims’ sex lives and sexual attitudes.

“We think the scene the Army is making is ridiculous. . . . There are rules about what they are supposed to ask,” Barnes said. “They aren’t supposed to be asking them all those extraneous things. . . . They are really abusing these women.”

If Hoster does not testify, her written statements will speak for her, depriving the defense of the chance to cross-examine her during the hearing, although Hoster could be subpoenaed in a court-martial.

Col. Charles Trant of the Army’s Judge Advocate General’s Office said he does not know of any case that drew upon the statute to reactivate a potential witness.

But McKinney’s lead attorney, Charles W. Gittens, said the statute was used to reactivate a former client of his, Sgt. Maj. Edward Gleason, in a 1995 case. But Gleason was recalled to serve as a defendant in that case, Trant said, not a potential witness.

At least one other alleged victim said she is disappointed with Hoster’s refusal to testify.

Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Johnna Vinson, who testified Tuesday, said she felt betrayed by Hoster’s actions, adding that she came forward with her accusations to support Hoster.

Times staff writer Kasper Zeuthen contributed to this story.