YOKOSUKA, Japan - May 28, 1993
A sailor who killed a gay shipmate was sentenced Thursday to life imprisonment after tearfully apologizing to the victim's mother and insisting he did not brutally beat her son to death because he was homosexual.
A jury of eight Navy and Marine officers imposed the sentence on Airman Apprentice Terry M. Helvey, 21, after deliberating only three hours.
Helvey showed no emotion as sentence was passed. The victim's mother, Dorothy Hajdys, said simply: "Thank you."
Wednesday, before the jury started its debate, Helvey faced Hajdys, the mother of Seaman Allen R. Schindler, 22, of Chicago Heights, Ill., and said, "I accept full responsibility for my actions. ... I wish your son were back. If I could redo this mess, I would. ...
"What happened that night was horrible. But I am not a horrible person. I put my life in your hands," he added, sobbing.
Helvey, 21, made the plea in an attempt to persuade the jury to reduce his punishment. Under a court-approved bargain in exchange for his pleading guilty to "inflicting great bodily harm," the maximum penalty is lifetime imprisonment. Under the original charge, it was death.
During Helvey's testimony, Navy Lt. Jacques Smith, a defense attorney, asked him directly, "Did you attack Schindler because he was homosexual?"
"No, I didn't. I did not attack him because he was homosexual," Helvey replied.
The apology contrasted sharply with testimony Tuesday by Kennon F. Privette, a Navy investigator. He told the jury of Helvey's admission to the slaying of Schindler during interrogation the day after the murder in a public toilet in Sasebo, Japan, last Oct. 27.
"He said he hated homosexuals. He was disgusted by them," Privette said. On killing Schindler, Privette quoted Helvey as saying: "I don't regret it. I'd do it again. ... He deserved it."
Wednesday, Helvey offered no direct explanation of why he killed Schindler, 22, a gay man who was awaiting discharge from the Navy. Nor did he disclose any details of what led up to the killing except to say that he and two other sailors from the amphibious assault ship Belleau Wood had purchased two large bottles of whiskey, a bottle of schnapps, a bottle of vodka, orange juice and a six-pack of beer and went drinking in a park.
Helvey said he had met Schindler before but did not explain how he knew his shipmate was a homosexual.
"Why can't he just tell me why? What terrible thing did my son do to him that led him to kill my son?" Hajdys said during a recess.
Helvey's courtroom apology was the first time since pretrial hearings began in February that Helvey had shown any emotion.
When Hajdys described her sorrow in testimony Tuesday, Helvey avoided looking at her by keeping his head facing down, seemingly writing notes.
Defense attorneys showed the jury nearly two hours of videotaped interviews from Helvey's neighbors and friends in Fredericktown, Mo., where he spent most of his youth. Many of them described Helvey, who was born in Eloise, Mich., as "closer than a brother." One old girlfriend said the family dog "never barked at Terry."
It was part of a defense attempt to portray Helvey as a youth who had overcome child abuse and a broken home to become a model citizen but who murdered Schindler under the influence of alcohol and steroids.
The prosecutor countered with a witness given immunity from prosecution who testified that he and Helvey had set Helvey's 1984 Chrysler afire just two months before the murder in a scheme to collect insurance money as Helvey was about to sail for Japan.
Copyright 1993 by The Tech. All rights reserved.
This story was published on Friday, May 28, 1993.
This article may be freely distributed electronically, provided it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice,
but may not be reprinted without the express written permission of The Tech.
On 7 October 1997, the Navy Secretary's personal representative arrived at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks, Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas, to deliver an ultimatum to Terry Helvey. The ultimatum: Mr. Helvey would either maintain his silence about orders to kill Allen Schindler, or Helvey and his team would be prosecuted for Conspiracy to Commit Murder. Prosecution of Mr. Helvey would commence immediately.
The two men, Mr. Helvey and the Secretary's representative, met in the MPI Conference Room. This 7 October 1997 meeting occurred in response to a letter Mr. Helvey had sent the Navy Secretary 29 August 1997. When Mr. Helvey refused, on advice of Miranda rights, to provide a written statement; the Secretary's representative had his answer, in fact, the desired response to his ultimatum. Mr. Helvey would maintain silence. The conversation then turned to topics raised by Mr. Helvey: USDB staff harassment (due to the recent release of a cable TV movie about Schindler's murder); federal transfers; and Mr. Helvey's release date. The representative promised to raise Mr. Helvey's concerns with the Secretary.
By this meeting, the Navy ratified and confirmed Schindler's murder, adopting it as its own, and supplying any deficiencies which may have existed in initially authorizing and directing the murder.
The keys to this case are the twin instructions (1) to "kill" Schindler, and (2) to "make an example out of him". Killing Schindler was, comparatively, an easy task. Mr. Helvey planned to dispatch him with a headlock of some sort, and indeed was in the process of applying the hold; when team member, Charles Vins, interrupted him by kicking Schindler in the face. Helvey released his hold, and Vins then inflicted fatal injuries by kicking and stomping Schindler.
With the aid of hindsight, one can also see the "make an example" instruction would require Mr. Helvey's sacrifice, as well as Schindler's. To make Schindler's death "an example" to gays meant, at a minimum, that Schindler's killer must be identified and given an anti-gay motive for the murder. The Navy did both these things in prosecuting Mr. Helvey.
Foisting institutional burdens onto individuals propels them into martyrdom. The Navy needs to bear its own burdens, and not rely upon a 20-year-old sailor to carry it. The notion is as absurd as it is unjust. For Navy leaders to hide behind a 20-year-old sailor is also, dare one say it, unmanly.
What kind of men use their subordinates to commit crimes? What kind of men then set up their subordinates to take the fall for such crimes? Is there any epithet too strong for such conduct? Despicable. Cowardly. Treacherous.
To posit the military as the seat of patriotism, or national honor, is a mistake of first magnitude. The proof is in this case. The uniforms, the medals and ribbons, the flag rituals and reverence, the exalted rank, the thousands of saluting subordinates, the ships, the jet aircraft - all hide a murder.
In a democracy, the nation's honor is entrusted to each of us.