Cruiser captain guilty in Indianapolis sinking (12-19-45)

The Evening Star (December 19, 1945)

McVay court-martial retires for verdict in Indianapolis sinking

Takes case at 11:40 a.m. after opposing counsel conclude arguments
By Robert Bruskin

BULLETIN

Capt. Charles B. McVay III was acquitted today of charges of culpable inefficiency in failing to give timely warning to abandon ship before the cruiser USS Indianapolis sank. By inference he was found guilty of negligence in failing to zigzag the cruiser. The judge advocate explained that only findings of acquittal are announced in court, but findings of guilty are not announced until the secretary of the Navy and the naval judge advocate have examined the record.

The Navy court-martial board hearing charges of negligence and inefficiency against Capt. Charles B. McVay III, skipper of the ill-fated cruiser USS Indianapolis, took the case under advisement today after hearing final arguments.

The board retired at 11:40 a.m. to consider a verdict following a closing plea by Capt. John P. Cady, defense counsel, that Capt. McVay had tried to save his ship “in contrast to some other cases which are known of,” and after Capt. Thomas J. Ryan, the judge advocate, had stated it was up to the court to “make its decisions in accordance with the evidence.”

Under Navy regulations, announcement of a verdict will be made immediately only in case of acquittal. A finding of guilty on any or all counts is subject to review through higher authority before any public disclosure is made.

Capt. Cady ‘confident’

Asking acquittal of Capt. McVay, whose vessel went down last July 30 in the Philippine Sea, Capt. Cady said he “felt entirely justified and confident” in making this request.

Capt. Cady, making his closing arguments before the court at the Washington Naval Gun Factory, did not expand upon the “other cases” in which ship commanders allegedly had not given first consideration to saving their vessels.

Capt. McVay is specifically accused of being negligent in failing to zigzag his cruiser in the Philippine Sea, where enemy submarines might be encountered, and inefficient in failing to give timely warning to abandon snip.

Capt. Cady told the court that Capt. McVay’s action and testimony given at the trial “led to the belief that no enemy submarines were operating along routes to Leyte.”

Visibility held bad

The ship’s captain was not required by Navy regulations to undertake any “extraordinary degree of care” in anti-submarine measures, Capt. Cady said. Capt. McVay followed the doctrine of the fleet “to zigzag during good visibility by day and during bright moonlight by night,” he added.

“On the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence, especially of those men who were in the best position to know,” Capt. Cady said, “it seems unquestionable that the amount of cloud cover, together with the known feebleness of the moon’s light, made the visibility anything but good.”

In any case there was a question of whether zigzagging was worth its value and in the particular circumstances of the Indianapolis’ sinking it would have “been of no protection,” he said.

Capt. Ryan, the prosecutor, declared that evidence pointed to the failure to issue “timely” word to abandon ship. “Men drowned,” Capt. Ryan declared, “immediately after abandoning ship due to lack of life preservers,” although there was “sufficient gear for abandoning ship” which was not cleared from the ship.

He pointed out that although communications “except by word of mouth” were inoperative from the bridge to other parts of the ship as the result of the explosions, “it has been shown that there was telephone communication between sky forward and gun stations on the boat deck.” Sky forward, he said, was only one level above the captain’s bridge, but it was not utilized to disseminate the abandon ship order.

Capt. McVay, he said, did not utilize the bugler of the watch and boatswain’s mate of the watch who were on the bridge at the time the order was issued to abandon ship. The judge advocate also said that “no orders were issued to the engine room in order to kill headway on the ship,” implying that the ship’s forward speed aided in breaking down the watertight compartments.

Capt. McVay listened intently to the closing arguments, upon which is based his future standing in the Navy. If convicted, he faces the possibility of dismissal or confinement or both. Mrs. McVay was in the courtroom. She has not missed a single hearing.

The Pittsburgh Press (December 19, 1945)

Cruiser captain guilty in sinking

McVay held negligent in failing to zigzag

WASHINGTON (UP) – Capt. Charles B. McVay III today was found guilty on a Navy charge that he was “negligent” in failing to order the cruiser USS Indianapolis to follow a zigzag course before her sinking last July 30.

The cruiser was sunk by a Jap submarine in the Philippine Sea with the loss of 880 lives.

Innocent on one charge

Capt. McVay was found innocent on a second Navy charge that he was guilty of “inefficiency” in failing to order the crew to abandon the ship promptly.

Adm. Wilder D. Baker, president of the court-martial, said that the specification in the charge that Capt. McVay had not issued “timely” orders to abandon ship “was not proved.”

Capt. McVay, who testified on his own behalf yesterday, said he did not order the ship to pursue a zigzag course because he did not believe it necessary in view of cloudy weather conditions.

Vessel ‘hazarded’

Capt. McVay was found guilty of “suffering a vessel of the Navy to be hazarded.”

The court’s findings will go to the Navy Department for review. The court’s recommended sentence, which will not be made public, also will be subject to review.

The case and the sentence then will be sent to the secretary of the Navy who will announce the findings.