From the Congressional Record in 2000:
"... the second charge, failure to zigzag, including the phrase ``in good visibility,'' became the basis for his conviction. In other words, failure to zigzag in good visibility became the basis for his conviction, one which effectively destroyed his career as a naval officer.
Let's look at the validity of that charge. Captain McVay sailed from Guam with orders to zigzag at his discretion. Shortly before midnight on July 29, 1945, the day before, with visibility severely limited--you zigzag in clear weather--visibility severely limited, and with every reason to believe the waters through which he is sailing were safe, McVay exercised discretion with an order to cease zigzagging and retired to his cabin, leaving orders to the officer of the deck to wake him if the weather conditions changed.
Whether weather conditions changed is debatable. Some survivors say it did. Some were not sure. But survivors were unanimous in depositions taken shortly after their rescue that it was very dark prior to and at the time of the attack; that the visibility was poor. Chief Warrant Officer Hines, for example, stated he could hardly see the outlines of the turrets on the ship. His and other similar depositions were not made available to Captain McVay's defense counsel.
Again, why not? The Navy maintained, and still does today, that the visibility was good when the Indianapolis was spotted and subsequently torpedoed and sunk that night, ignoring the sworn statements of those who were there when it happened; ignoring them. Why is this important? It is important because there were no Navy directives in place then, or today, which either ordered or even recommended zigzagging at night in poor visibility. The order to zigzag was discretionary even if the weather was poor.
Moreover, in voicing opposition to Captain McVay's court-martial, Admiral Nimitz, in charge of the Pacific Fleet, pointed out:
'The rule requiring zigzagging would not have applied, in any event, since Captain McVay's orders gave him discretion on that matter and thus took precedence over all other orders.'
This is a point, I might add, which Captain McVay's inexperienced defense counsel never even addressed at the court-martial...."
Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 7 - NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001--Continued There is much more at the link. Search for "zigzag" on the page, and then scroll up to find the beginning of the discussion.
"... the second charge, failure to zigzag, including the phrase ``in good visibility,'' became the basis for his conviction. In other words, failure to zigzag in good visibility became the basis for his conviction, one which effectively destroyed his career as a naval officer.
Let's look at the validity of that charge. Captain McVay sailed from Guam with orders to zigzag at his discretion. Shortly before midnight on July 29, 1945, the day before, with visibility severely limited--you zigzag in clear weather--visibility severely limited, and with every reason to believe the waters through which he is sailing were safe, McVay exercised discretion with an order to cease zigzagging and retired to his cabin, leaving orders to the officer of the deck to wake him if the weather conditions changed.
Whether weather conditions changed is debatable. Some survivors say it did. Some were not sure. But survivors were unanimous in depositions taken shortly after their rescue that it was very dark prior to and at the time of the attack; that the visibility was poor. Chief Warrant Officer Hines, for example, stated he could hardly see the outlines of the turrets on the ship. His and other similar depositions were not made available to Captain McVay's defense counsel.
Again, why not? The Navy maintained, and still does today, that the visibility was good when the Indianapolis was spotted and subsequently torpedoed and sunk that night, ignoring the sworn statements of those who were there when it happened; ignoring them. Why is this important? It is important because there were no Navy directives in place then, or today, which either ordered or even recommended zigzagging at night in poor visibility. The order to zigzag was discretionary even if the weather was poor.
Moreover, in voicing opposition to Captain McVay's court-martial, Admiral Nimitz, in charge of the Pacific Fleet, pointed out:
'The rule requiring zigzagging would not have applied, in any event, since Captain McVay's orders gave him discretion on that matter and thus took precedence over all other orders.'
This is a point, I might add, which Captain McVay's inexperienced defense counsel never even addressed at the court-martial...."
Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 7 - NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001--Continued There is much more at the link. Search for "zigzag" on the page, and then scroll up to find the beginning of the discussion.
