A Question

[purple]

I don't intend for this topic to become an argument. Just something I've been wondering for a very long time and want to get the opinion of others.

I know a vet who is receiving benefits at the 100% SC rate because this vet was in a severe vehicle accident while on duty. So far so good right? Here's the problem. This vet was drunk on duty. This vet's injuries were so severe that he was in a coma for weeks and has permanent brain injuries. He has admitted to several ppl (including me) that he crashed the military vehicle he was driving because he was drunk.

I don't believe he should be receiving benefits.

Thoughts?

[tagandbag]

Thats a good question Purple. I'm of the opinion, if noone else was injured/killed and the vet was genuinely remorseful about it. Also if he is not driving and not a fall down drunk.I would let it slide, but give him an earful regardless of his condition. On the other hand if he thinks he got away with it and is being boisterous about, I would have second thoughts and would be vocal about it with this vet. Just an opinion.

T&B

[Berta]

The VA determines in cases like this if the veteran's actions were willful misconduct.

(which they even do in cases of suicide too as VA considers some sucides as willful misconduct)

Apparently they were satisfied his actions were legit -since he receives comp.

Years ago when my email was public a member here contacted me with information about a vet member here getting 100% who they felt had been dishonest with the VA.

Long story- but the reason they contacted me was to urge me to report this vet to the VA as they didnt want to get involved.

No Way would I ever do that.

There are circumstances to everything and I am sure that VA checked this above vet's story out quite well as well as the vet that someone wanted me to report to the VA.

Edited December 14, 2008 by Berta

[gdsnide]

I'm sure anyone who came to the wreck site would have been aware he was drinking

GARY

[Philip Rogers]

The VA made it's decision. Who are we to decide? We weren't there and have no other evidence other than your "heresay" statement that he was drunk. My opinion, you should let it go. Even if he admits to being drunk "was it willful misconduct," at the time of the accident?? jmo

pr

I don't intend for this topic to become an argument. Just something I've been wondering for a very long time and want to get the opinion of others.

I know a vet who is receiving benefits at the 100% SC rate because this vet was in a severe vehicle accident while on duty. So far so good right? Here's the problem. This vet was drunk on duty. This vet's injuries were so severe that he was in a coma for weeks and has permanent brain injuries. He has admitted to several ppl (including me) that he crashed the military vehicle he was driving because he was drunk.

I don't believe he should be receiving benefits.

Thoughts?

[carlie]

purple,

Let it go. There is also no way to know if this vet was

self-medicating with alcohol.

jmho,

carlie

[PE1]

The guy's not alqueida, and if the gov doesn't give him the money, they'll give it to someone else that will trow rocks at convoys bringing them food........