U. S. Attorney Biskupic

I have been trying to get this news out to as many people as possible. My husband was indicted by Biskupic for wire fraud.
You may think, so what, well, my husband is a Veteran, was and still is receiving Veteran's benefits. Several attorneys that represent Veterans, agree that this action by Biskupic was part of the VA Office of Inspector General inquiry into fraud in 120,000 Veteran's claims for Post-traumatic Stress Disorder. They believe that because certain members of Congress and the Senate have gathered together and ordered that this VAOIG investigation be stopped, that criminally indicting Veterans may be the VAOIG’s way of getting around the congressional mandate to stop the investigation. A statement was issued by the Secretary of the VA that there was no fraud found in the PTSD claims, but clerical error. My husband was granted service connected disability for PTSD in 1998 based upon his application of August 4, 1993. His service medical records report that he was hospitalized and treated in service for a psychiatric disoder on December 13, 1969. In 1998 he was granted benefits based upon his entire record, which includes his service medical records and his service personnel records. In 1999 he was granted 100% following an appeal. Several years later in 2002 with the assistance of the Shawano County, Wisconsin, Veteran's Service Officer he filed to reopen the 1999 decision as they believed he was entitled to an earlier effective date, which was finally granted on March 28, 2003. In that 2003 rating decision, VA specifically states that he was granted PTSD based upon in-service stressors. Then after many different appeals and hearings, my husband complied to the VA Office of Inspector General at VA Hines, Illinois, the Agent he spoke to said he would investigate the possible fraud by the VA with their handling of my husbands claims. Instead the VA agent opened an investigation into my husband's PTSD claims and determined that my husband had committed fraud. Before I explain how it is alleged that he committed fraud, I want to explain some of VA's Laws and Case Law. Feel free to also review these on the VA websites, which are easily accessible for our use. Title 38 United States Code and Title 38 Code of Federal Regulations contain VA Law. 38 CFR Section 3.303 is principles relating to service connection and 3.304(f) service connection for PTSD. Under these two sections you will find that in order to be entitled to service connected benefits, the disability claimed must have occurred coincident to military service and it must be corroborated (verified) in the Veteran's service medical records. Case Law, determinations from the Court of Appeals for Veteran's Claims in such cases for example, In order to establish entitlement to service connection for PTSD, the
appellant must establish (1) a current diagnosis of PTSD, (2) credible
supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually occurred,
and (3) medical evidence of a causal nexus between current symptomatology
and the claimed in-service stressor. 38 C.F.R. 3.304(f) (2005); see
Forcier v. Nicholson, 19 Vet.App. 414, 421 (2006). "Where a current
diagnosis of PTSD exists, the sufficiency of the claimed in-
service stressor is presumed. However, credible evidence that the
claimed in-service stressor actually occurred is also required."
Sizemore v. Principi, 18 Vet.App. 264, 270 (2004) (citations omitted).

****If the claimed stressor is not combat-related, the veteran's lay testimony
of its occurrence must be corroborated by credible supporting evidence

...See id.; Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet.App. 128, 142 (1997); Moreau v. Brown,

9 Vet.App. 389, 396 (1996) (holding that when a PTSD claim is based on a
noncombat stressor, "the noncombat veteran's testimony alone is
insufficient proof of a stressor").

This Court and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have
defined " credible evidence " as "that which is plausible or capable of
being believed." Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 498, 506 (1995), aff'd
per curiam, 78 F.3d. 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (table); see Collette v. Brown,
82 F.3d 389, 392 (Fed. Cir. 1996). "[Section] 3.304(f) does not
necessarily demand the submission of official documentary evidence to
satisfy the credible - supporting - evidence requirement. Indeed, a lay
statement from someone other than the claimant may provide the necessary
'credible supporting evidence .'" Moran v. Principi, 17 Vet.App. 149, 159 (
2003); see YR v. West, 11 Vet.App. 393, 397 (1998) (" 'Credible
supporting evidence' is not limited to service department records, but can
be from any source."); Cohen, 10 Vet.App. at 142 (holding that 38 C.F.R.
3.304(f) "does not limit the source of the required ' credible
supporting evidence .'"). In addition, there need not be credible
supporting evidence "of every detail including the appellant's
personal participation" in the claimed stressor. Suozzi v. Brown, 10 Vet.
App. 307, 311 (1997); see also Pentecost v. Principi, 16 Vet.App. 124,
128 (2002) (holding that Board "erroneously insisted that there be
corroboration of the veteran's personal participation" in the claimed stressor.

My husband is a non-combat Veteran, his statements, standing alone can not be used by the VA to grant service connection for PTSD. This is what the U. S. Attorney Biskupic has determined happened. My husband supposedly lied to VA, VA believed him and granted his service connection. VA employees testified before the Court in the Eastern District of Wisconsin that VA relies on what the Veterans says and grants benefits based on what the Veteran says. If such were true then why have an extended appeal processs, just grant every Veteran based on the veteran's statements. Go back to the part above where I quoted VA Law, the non-combat Veteran's disability must be corroborated in his records. My husband's is, on December 13, 1969 he was forcibly taken by Shore Patrol, put into a straightjacket, bedrestraints and twice against his will injected with 75 mg of the anti-psychotic drug of IM Thorazine. On January 14, 1970 he was sent for a psychiatric consultation to see if he was fit to return to duty. After dropping dramatically in his performance evaluations and was warned of a possible administrative discharge he again sought psychiatric help while still in the Navy and was on June 26, 1970 and again on July 22, 1970 given prescriptions for the anti-anxiety drug of Librium. His performance marks went from a 3.6 sailor down to a 2.0 and back up again after the treatment with Librium. The "stressor" they are saying is fraudulent is the accidental death of a fellow shipmate on February 4, 1969. My husband was assigned to the Transient Line Operations Division at NAF Naples, Italy, his duties were to direct, park, tow, service and secure all military aircraft at NAF Naples, which was a major landing point for NATO aircraft. On February 4, 1969 the nose gear on a C-54 aircraft collasped (the Safety Officer had ordered the safety jacks removed several days earlier but the hydraulic lines to the landing gear cylinders had not been pressurized with hydraulic fluid and an improper safety pin had been used to hold the plane upright and it accidently came out causing the plane's front landing gear to collaspe) which crushed my husband's shipmate. Because my husband's name was not on the official JAG Manual Report of Investigation and because my husband has repeatedly stated that he was there on that day, he had "allegedly" lied to get his benefits. My husband's VA benefits claims are still pending before the Court of Appeals for Veteran's Claims, which was granted exclusive jurisdiction by Congress to review any decision of the Secretary of the VA. The Secretary does not have a right of review in this Court, only Veterans. There are procedures that must be followed in 38 CFR beginning in section 42.1 that mandates how the VA can sever benefits. This was not followed.
Title 38 USC Section 6301 Forfeiture for Fraud was never followed. Mr. Biskupic charged my husband with Wire Fraud for obtaining his VA service connected benefits for PTSD by means of wire transfers or direct deposit from the Treasury. He was convicted by a jury that was not allowed to see what VA law he violated, which there is none, and now he is sitting in prison.
I realize this is a personal story, that no one wants to get involved with personal stories, but if you take a honest look at the VA Laws, my husband did not break any VA Laws in obtaining his benefits. He is however entitled to his benefits back to his date of discharge because his service medical records were before the VA for a service connected benefits claim and at that time VA was to inform him of his potential benefits, as the service records contain his informal claim for service connected benefits. It was obviously a way to get rid of this Veteran before they had to pay out money back to 1971. The U. S. Supreme Court in numerous decisions has determined that all administrative remedies must be exhausted prior to seeking relief in a court other than the one designed by Administrative Law. Benefits for Social Security must go through all proper channels prior to going to federal court. This is simply food for thought, this is what our government is doing to avoid paying what my husband is entitled to because of what happened while on duty. He is not more important than any other veteran, he is more important to the Courts because if the government wins at appeal then you can rest assured that other Veterans with PTSD, or other psychiatric disorders will be next on the hit list and then the US Treasury will start saving millions of dollars that should be going to Veterans. If my husband was granted benefits based upon his statements regarding a stressor or injury, then it would be VA’s error not his. The funny thing is that the Board of Veteran’s Appeals, the final decision before a Veteran can go to the Court of Appeals for Veteran’s Claims severed my husband’s benefits based upon an error by the Milwaukee VA Regional Office and even stated in writing that “the only other evidence in support of the claim was the veteran’s own unverified statements which are inadequate to establish service connection as a matter of law”. So what then did my husband do to be sitting in prison? No one can answer that question. Can YOU? My name is Delores Roberts and my husband is Keith Roberts.

by Delores Roberts (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 3:14:37 PM
 

U.S. Attorney Biskupic

I'll look into this next week.

by Michael Leon (111 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 29 comments) on Thursday, April 19, 2007 at 5:45:05 PM