In short, the Navy had absolute freedom to falsify, alter, delete and misrepresent the facts and law at every step of the summary dismissal. The attorney who drafted Kinney's revised affidavit makes reference to routine procedures which were never violated. In reality, there is not a rule, regulation, policy or law that was NOT violated.

Capt. Kinney Affidavit (Commandant)

The Umsted performance evaluations were supposed to be routed through Commandant Kinney who was in charge of conduct.  Kinney sent a conflicting affidavit to the Bureau for Correction of Naval Records (BCNR) stating that I had an outstanding record as a midshipman.  The BCNR, reporting to SecNav Dalton 64, rewrote Kinney’s affidavit to remove all reference to an outstanding record – which the courts refused to address. Click to view the sanitized version of Kinney's affidavit.

In the normal course of business, Kinney would have reviewed and approved the fraudulent performance evaluation supposedly forwarded by Company Officer Lt. Umsted. I had worked with Capt Kinney my second class (junior year for you civilians) year as class president and chairman of the honor committee and he was well aware of my performance record.

Kinney does note that he had no recollection of meeting with me in regard to the alleged offense even though he was in charge of conduct at the Academy. His recollection is correct in that we never met. Supt Kauffman had pre-empted the process.

The attorney who drafted Kinney's revised affidavit makes reference to routine procedures which were never violated. In reality, there is not a rule, regulation, policy or law that was NOT violated. And though his offense was probably one of ommission rather than commission, how can you believe anyone approving such a blatantly fraudulent performance evaluation coupled with a flagrant violations of the rules. But, hey, what is a little corruption amongst friends.