The Strange Case of PFC Robert Garwood

[badbob]

This is by far one of the most perplexing Vietnam War stories that you will ever encounter <br />
<br />
The first Marine POW of the Vietnam War , Garwood was captured near China Beach on September 28th 1965...

[Sparrowhawk]

Garwood to me was a traitor, especially his helping the enemy by broadcasting against America over radio Hanoi.

If I remember correctly the story was he had a thing for a Vietnamese girl, went AWOL to see her was captured and won favor in the eyes of his captures as his girlfriend was a VC after awhile he simply went over to their side.

Unless you were an officer, most captured POW's were mutilated and killed, Garwood wasn't.

Its been awhile since I read what others have said occurred and I might be mistaken in this version but to me he was a traitor, what the reason he used to justify his actions, makes no difference.

I do recall of sightings in the area around Dai Loc of a salt and pepper team, a team of a white and black American soldiers helping the VC/NVA in the area.

I even have some of those captured propaganda leaflets around here someplace..

I'll see if I can find them....

[badbob]

That's pretty much what came out at the trial. He went to town to get laid and was captured without incident, on his return. The girl was a VC spy as were most of the prostitutes at that time, and...

[Sparrowhawk]

around here someplace, here's a site where some of those leaflets are available for review at Mike Pomakis' wed sit, "Visions of Vietnam".

http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/2689/cbsb.htm

[MillRatUSMC]

From the book &quot;Conversations with the Enemy&quot;, Robert Garwood was on stand-by in the motor pool. <br />
They had drawn cards to see who would get the last assignment of the day. <br />
He bad luck was that he got...

[MillRatUSMC]

He was driving the jeep with MAF Commander's flag.
He drove General Walt occasion.
Also he had on new utilities and was armed with the .45
The VC thought that he was a Marine Corps Officer.
Much later they found out that he fact was just a PFC.
But by then they were using him as a translator.
Which really is against all the rules on POW's.

Semper Fidelis
Ricardo

[Sparrowhawk]

My Marine Corps training at that time dictated what I would do and I know I would have been killed by the enemy.


Garwood was convicted of assaulting a fellow POW, of aiding the enemy as a translator, interpreter, and <b>interrogator,</b> of wearing the uniformof the enemy , and carrying an AK-47 while on patrol in the service of the North Vietnamese Army.

[Sparrowhawk]

I really don't know what. Perhaps it has something to do with what is embedded in my memory of what we heard at that time.

There was more as I recall, but I don’t or can't remember what.

I found the information below on Garwood and decided to read it. I could only read a few inserts. I'll come back and read the rest later.

Perhaps it was because of the three Marines I remember that were captured and dragged away from us during a firefight and they had to play dead at the feet of the enemy while we continued to exchange bullets with the enemy. Perhaps its those memories of seeing them again, ashen white in color when Foxtrot 3/7 found them still alive and brought them back to us.

Maybe its that and being separated from my unit, a full night and alone out in the boonies and having to make my way back crawling and realizing that I wouldn’t let the gooks take my gun no matter what. I don’t know but those memories are embedded there somewhere and for some reason it all comes together.....


http://www.aiipowmia.com/sea/grwd1.html

[badbob]

hawk, I'm right there with ya.

There is definately something here that just doesn't add up. it was the rule for the VC to kill the enlisted man. My suspicion is that Garwood told that VC Wh***Slut that he was a an officer.



The following articles are taken directly from a report prepared for the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communication and Intelligence (ASD/C3I) and published in June 1993. Citations are provided in the text.



Garwood disappears

Private Robert Russell Garwood, USMC, was a motor-pool driver stationed at the Marine base, DaNang, Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam). On 28 September 1965, Garwood was found absent at the 2300 hours bed check. No unauthorized absence (UA) was reported because Garwood was thought to have had a "late run." He was reported UA after he failed to report for muster at 0730 hours on the 29th.
Several actions were initiated:


On 30 September, the Secretary of the Navy was informed by message from the commanding general, Third Marine Division, that Garwood was missing and that an investigation would be conducted.

Garwood's next-of-kin were notified

A counter-intelligence (CI) investigation was opened to determine the circumstances surrounding Garwood's disappearance and to ascertain if there was any evidence to suggest that he had deserted, defected, or been kidnapped.

USMC investigators attempted to find the last people to see Garwood prior to his disappearance.
Those who saw Garwood on 28 September just prior to his disappearance were some of his USMC tent mates in DaNang. According to PFC John Geill, PFC Allen F. Braverman, and LCpl Gary Smith, Garwood was with a group of Marines at the DaNang Hotel, or, the DaNang USO just around dusk on the 28th. He indicated that he had to pick up his laundry outside the base and wanted to make a "skivvy run" as well. Garwood then said that he would see the group back at the tent in "about an hour." He never showed up. (Information from debriefings of Geill, Braverman, and Smith. Also, information from the Summary of Investigation.)

When PFC Geill was debriefed in 1965 immediately after Garwood's disappearance, he gave a different version of his last sighting of Garwood. Geill indicated that he and Garwood had been in their tent just prior to 1800 on the 28th when Garwood came into the ten, picked up his weapon, and was supposedly going on a driver's run to pick up a USMC officer at G-2 headquarters, approximately 1/2 mile away. Garwood never showed up for that pick-up. However, the Asst. Chief Admin. Officer for the division stated that he had secured Garwood after his 1300 run was completed at 1430 and Garwood was not told to report back at 1800. PFC Geill later stated that he misspoke in 1965 as he was trying to "protect" Garwood for any possible "indiscretions" on Garwood's part. (Investigating agent's report, dated 16 November 1965.)

On 29 September, the Division Provost Marshal was notified of Garwood's absence and an all points bulletin was issued for him and his missing vehicle. This bulletin was repeated for three days with no results. Personnel from the motor pool searched areas of Da Nang that Garwood was known to frequent but no leads were uncovered. On 2 October, the division's provost marshal contacted the Republic of Vietnam's Military Security Services. Their search efforts also produced no information regarding Garwood. (Letter from CO to Cmdt, USMC, 13 October 1965.)

As these investigations proceeded, Garwood's commanding officer reported to the Commandant, USMC, that, in view of Garwood's past record of UA, it was his opinion that Garwood was possibly UA and this UA could have resulted in Garwood being taken POW. Because of the lack of any evidence of Garwood's capture, however, the CO recommended that there be no change in Garwood's status and that he remain UA until evidence to the contrary proved otherwise. (Letter from CO to Cmdt, USMC, 13 October 1965.)

Two separate Vietnamese agents reported that the Viet Cong (VC) claimed that a US serviceman and his jeep had been picked up in the Cam Hai region, approximately 11.5 miles from the DaNang base, after the serviceman had become lost. The American had been captured and the jeep burned. A ground and aerial search for the burned vehicle produced no results, as did four platoon search operations on 1 October. Two additional platoons swept the area in the vicinity of Marble Mountain the et morning but found nothing. (Report from 704th ITC Det (CI), 3 October 1965.)


On 12 October, the 704th ITC Det (CI) authorized the offer of a 100,000 $VN reward for information leading to the successful recovery of the missing serviceman and additional 2,500 $VN for the recovery of his vehicle. (Ltr from CO, 704th ITC Det (CI).)

Garwood remained in UA status until 15 October when his CO recommended to the Cmdt, USMC, that Garwood's status be changed to "missing" despite his having probably been UA initially. (ltr from CG, 3d MARDIV) On 4 November 1865, the Cmdt concurred and directed that Garwood be carried as "missing" since sufficient evidence was not available to establish UA at the time of disappearance. (Msg from Cmdt, USMC, 4 Nov 65)



On 3 December 1965, India Company, 3d Battalion, 3d Marine Regiment found a document entitled Fellow Soldier's Appeal (dated 20 October 1965) with Garwood's signature on it, on a gate near DaNang (click here to read a transcription of the document). The document recommended, among other things, that US troops stop fighting in Vietnam and return home. The signature -- B. Garwood -- may have been made by a rubber stamp and the English usage in the letter suggests that it was not written entirely by a native English speaker. A second version of this document was found on 18 July 1966 in the DaNang area, but it appeared to be on better quality paper and the signature was at a different angle.

In view of this information, Garwood's status was changed from "missing" to "presumed captured" on 17 December 1965.

On 23 December 1965, the CG, FMFPAC (Commanding General, Fleet Marine Force, Pacific) directed that a counterintelligence case on Garwood be opened, that the Fellow Soldier's Appeal be evaluated for "subversive content and authenticity," and that Garwood's service record book (SRB) be reviewed. Following this review, the USMC concluded that:

It was considered doubtful that Garwood personally composed the document;

The authenticity of Garwood's signature could not be ascertained but it appeared that a rubber stamp was used to make the signature;

Garwood was listed in the document as a Chaplain's assistant when he was a motor pool driver;

Garwood's family background, and his education and disciplinary backgrounds demonstrated a possible susceptibility to propaganda and indoctrination efforts.

(Memo from Asst Chief of Staff/G-2, to Cmdt, USMC, 23 December 1965.)

NOTE- I hate this mother F*****g, piece of ****, cock sucking , profanity blocker.

whooops - found one that the censors didn't get!

Still confusded,
Semper Fi,
Bob

[MillRatUSMC]

That bit of evidence is; <br />
He had less than 12 days to do in-country. <br />
A man getting ready to go home doesn't walk over to the other side. <br />
He may have made a bad choice in going on that skivvie run....

[badbob]

I think it's clear that Garwood didn't set out to defect, he was either captured, or the burned out jeep was set up to look like he was captured. Wether he put a fight or not is debatable, but Capture is the only theory that makes sense here.


(Evaluation reports from COMUSMACV, 149th MI Group, 3 Jan 66-21 Feb 67, 6 Mar 67) End of 1967 Summary prepared for the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Command, Control, Communication and Intelligence (ASD/C3I) published in June 1993.

Garwood's "Appeal" Gains Wide Distribution

On 4 January 1966, fourteen ARVN POWs were released by the North Vietnamese in observance of the Tet holiday. These POWs produced a letter from Garwood to his mother, written on 27 December 1965.

The released ARVN also reported that US Army Captain William F. Eisenbraun (Ike) was being held with Garwood at a prison camp called Camp Khu. According to the ARVN, Eisenbraun and Garwood had arrived at the camp within a week to ten days of each other.

With this new information in hand, the CG FMFPAC directed the 3d CI Team, 3rd MAR DIV to conduct a second investigation of the Fellow Soldier's Appeal. This investigation reached essentially the same conclusions concerning the document as did the initial investigation. (Report from Asst Head of CI Branch to Asst Chief of Staff/G-2, 18 January 1966)

On 22 January 1966, the head of the investigating team reported that at least one of the ARVN officers released from "Camp Khu" claimed that Garwood himself has shown him the propaganda letter which he (Garwood) had allegedly signed. The ARVN officer could not say definitely if Garwood had personally signed the document.

On 3 March 1966, the contents of the Fellow Soldier's Appeal were broadcast over Radio Hanoi. The announcer who read the Appeal was reported by Foreign Broadcast Information System (FBIS) station in Okinawa to be a foreign national whose English pronunciation "had a French accent." Although the announcer claimed that "he was reading a statement attributed to Robert R. Gouch," the text was identical to that of the 20 October letter with Garwood's signature. (3d CI Team, FMF PAC report, 21 Mar 66)

(NOTE: At least two former US POWs held in Hanoi reported that they had heard Garwood himself on Radio Hanoi during the time that they were held captive. Both Naval aviators, Captain John Fellowes, captured on 27 Aug 66, and Commander Everett Alvarez, captured on 5 Aug 64, stated in personal interviews in November 1992 that Garwood identified himself as "Bobby Garwood" in the broadcasts and stated that he was a US Marine who had "crossed over." The two returnees stated that Garwood never in the broadcasts they heard used the word "captured" to refer to himself.)

On 5 May 1966, FBIS monitored a Radio Hanoi broadcast to American servicemen in South Vietnam that was identical to the 3 March broadcast. The broadcast also noted that "a US Marine captured in a raid on Cam Hai, had called on his mates to stop terrorizing the South Vietnamese people and burning their houses, gardens, and rice fields."

On 13 May 1966 the international service of Radio Hanoi broadcast the same message with the same wording and the text was later released by the Liberation Press Agency in English. (FBIS Okinawa reports of 5 May and 13 May 1966)

Reports Emerge of Garwood's Imprisonment

Following the publication of the document, nothing was heard from or about Garwood until late in 1966. On 9 November, one ARVN lieutenant and two enlisted men reported that they had seen Garwood on or about 1 October 1966 while they were prisoners of the VC. They identified Garwood's photograph from a photo line-up. (COMUSMACV 135th MI Group msg 15 Nov 66)

On 9 January 1967, an ARVN Special Forces soldier was debriefed. He reported that he had been in a POW camp with Garwood and Eisenbraun in late 1965. In early 1966, in celebration of Tet, all the POWs in this camp were released, except for the two Americans and four ARVN officers. The ARVN SF soldier claimed that Garwood handed him one of his dog tags and asked him to return it to US authorities. The ARVN did not have the dog tag in his possession.

On 21 February 1967, an ARVN Military Intelligence unit reported that a "coded source" had said that two American POWs were being detained in Quang Ngai Province, RVN. The source did not identify the US POWs, the Marines concluded that the two included Eisenbraun, Garwood, and now LCpl Edwin Russell Grissett, captured on 22 January 1966. Another unidentified ARVN source reported that he had been held by the VC from December 1966 until his escape in March 1967 during which time he claimed to have been held with three US POWs; he could not communicate with them.

End of 1967 Summary

By this time, US agencies and forces had accumulated a considerable amount of information regarding POWs being held by the VC and NVA in South Vietnam. While they were generally aware of the number of US POWs being held, information was not sufficient to pinpoint their locations. Information on Garwood suggested that he was collaborating with the enemy but such collaboration could not be confirmed.

At this point of the Garwood report, we need to pause and consider three items:

First. The real circumstances surrounding Garwood's disappearance in September 1965 are yet to be told; only Garwood and the people who captured him know.

Second. It is likely that Garwood was on an unauthorized trip to a local village, probably to visit a brothel or a girl friend. Claims that Garwood was captured after a firefight are bogus.

Third. The USMC searched diligently for Garwood following his disappearance.

The real circumstances surrounding Garwood's disappearance may never be known but the following should be considered.


In a letter reportedly written just before he disappeared, to a high school friend, also a Marine stationed in Vietnam, Garwood allegedly expressed how happy he was to be "going home" within 10 to 12 days. (Transcript of September 1992 telephone interview with Gunnery Sgt. (Ret) Leo Powell) It does not appear logical that Garwood would have defected to the other side if he had only 10 to 12 days left in country.

Garwood told his biographer to write that he had been captured after he had become lost, while enroute to Marble Mountain, near Da Nang, to pick up a USMC officer. (Groom, Winston. Conversations With the Enemy. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1983)

SGT. Willie Watkins, US Army, incarcerated with Garwood in a POW camp in South Vietnam, stated that Garwood told him that "he had been captured in a brothel." (SGT Watkins' debrief, November 1969)

PFC Geill, possibly the last American to see Garwood prior to his disappearance, told debriefers that Garwood told debriefers that Garwood said he was going to pick up his laundry and make a "skivvy run," likely in a village close to or contiguous with DaNang base.

Senior People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) officials told US investigators in Hanoi in June 1992 that Garwood was not captured, but that he "crossed over" willingly. Hanoi has consistently maintained that Garwood was never a POW but rather was a "rallier" to the North Vietnamese cause.

One of the ARVN POWs released in December 1965 stated in his debriefing that Garwood told him that he had been "captured after he had drunk a coca-cola and was driving a military vehicle near the city of Da Nang." This ARVN POW added that Garwood was not wounded.

In a made-for-TV-movie, shown in the US in 1993, Garwood is shown asking directions to Marble Mountain from sentries at the Da Nang gate, getting lost on a coastal road, being surrounded by VC, then getting involved in a firefight. This movie version is also reflected in Spite House and other revisionist material on Garwood. (The Last POW?: The Bobby Garwood Story; ABC television, 28 June 1993) There are serious problems with the claim that Garwood was "on duty" when he was captured, or "rallied."

The claim that Garwood had an 1800 hours run to pick up a USMC officer is refuted by the statements from the 3 MAR DIV Asst AO to the effect that Garwood was relieved of duty following his mid-day run and was not required to report for the 1800 run. The debriefings of Geill and Braverman also make it clear that Garwood was not planning to make the 1800 run.

Even if Garwood did have to make an 1800 pickup at the G-2 -- which he did not -- the G-2 in 1965 was located approximately 1/2 mile from Garwood's tent, within the same defensive perimeter. That is, Garwood would never have had to drive outside the wire of Da Nang to make the 1800 run.

The record demonstrates that the USMC made a serious, continuing, all-out effort to find Garwood. No rescue mission was ever launched because it was simply impossible to pinpoint where he -- or any other US POWs -- were held.

Communist prison camps in the south were often mobile and tended to be in double and triple canopy jungle in remote regions. The were virtually impossible to detect from the air and were difficult to detect on the ground.



My question isn't whether he defected, I don't think he did. I want to know why he conducted himself as testified to by so many of his fellow POW's, Why did he play the VC game? It appears that he played right into their hands for the purpose of self preservation, which was definitely a crime.

[Sparrowhawk]

"Conversations with the Enemy", can be said to be Garwood's account. The book was written to glory him as a hero, the movie made about him was a total flop. One of the writers was a liberal writer for a Washington based newspaper and the other has written mostly fictional stories and novals, including Forest Gump and another account of war, "Better Times Than These," a controveral noval about the Vietnam War.


One reader of "Conversations with the Enemy", wrote;


The author's do not incude one fragment of testimony from Garwood's other American POWs who later testified against him at his court martial where he was convicted of being a turncoat traitor. This is nothing but a collection of half truths and fabracations.

<b>There were seven (7) POW's that testified against Garwood at his trial. </b>

Their accounts are believeable, Garwood's accounts keep changing.
<hr>


</b>In 1973, when all US POWs were released by the North Vietnamese, Garwood elected to remain in North Vietnam. </b>Following the 1975 conquest of South Vietnam by the North, tens of thousands of former South Vietnamese military officers were incarcerated in concentration camps -- dubbed by the North Vietnamese "reeducation camps" -- <b> in an area northwest of Hanoi. Garwood worked as a member of the staff of this camp complex where he was seen by many of the South Vietnamese personnel. Many of these South Vietnamese personnel later emigrated from Vietnam and told interviewers of their encounters with Garwood. Their testimony provides further evidence of Garwood's willing collaboration. </b>


I suggest this reading about Garwood's account from this MIA Facts Site;

http://www.miafacts.org/grwd_1.htm