Arlington's buried secrets

[babylonsister]

Arlington's buried secrets

The cemetery admits it can't identify grave-site remains -- while new evidence casts doubt on Army investigation

Editor's note: This is the third article in a special Salon investigation of America's renowned cemetery.

By Mark Benjamin


Salon/Mark Benjamin

This block of empty grass is Grave 449 in Section 68 at Arlington National Cemetery. Officials have known for six years about unknown remains there.



July 21, 2009 | Salon has uncovered further evidence of grave offenses at Arlington National Cemetery. It is now clear that the cemetery, which is managed by the U.S. Army and calls itself "our nation's most sacred shrine," lost track of the identity of remains buried in a grave, and covered up the disturbing discovery for six years. New information also casts doubt on Army statements about when the Army learned of criminal misconduct by a top cemetery official.

Last week Salon reported allegations by former and current employees that headstones and graves do not match in some cases. The article noted internal cemetery documents over the past several years that revealed "information listed on grave cards and burial records were not consistent with the information on the actual headstone." It documented an expensive, 10-year-old effort to computerize operations at Arlington -- a feat cemeteries of similar size and age have achieved relatively quickly and cheaply.

Arlington admitted to the paperwork problems but insisted the confusion stopped at the grave's edge. When asked -- "Has the cemetery ever dug a grave only to find there is already someone there, though the grave is unmarked?" -- cemetery spokeswoman Kaitlin Horst responded, "We are not aware of any situation like that."

But Salon has discovered evidence to the contrary. In 2003, Arlington workers dug into the ground at Grave 449 in Section 68 -- the cemetery had paperwork that said the grave was empty -- to bury somebody who had recently died. They came across remains already interred in that grave. There was no headstone. Soon after the discovery, workers filled out a grave card (obtained by Salon), generally used to note information about each burial site, with an urgent note to colleagues: "do not DO NOT USE!!! CASKET IN GRAVE REMAINS UNKNOWN."

Since Arlington does not know the identity of the remains in Grave 449, there is no way of knowing when the burial occurred. Arlington tends to bury service members who pass away at around the same time in each section. The graves in Section 68 are generally from the late 1980s through 2008, suggesting the original burial occurred in that era.

In response to a query about Grave 449, Arlington admitted the error. "The identity of the remains in Grave 449 in Section 68 is unknown at this time," Horst admitted. "Arlington National Cemetery officials have known about this situation since 2003, when in the process of preparing for a burial, a casket was discovered in Grave 449 in Section 68," she added. "At that time, a review of records took place to locate the corresponding documents. The files could not be matched and as a result, the card you have described was filed. Following your inquiry this morning, a search for corresponding records in the paper files was conducted and again, proved inconclusive."

more...

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/07/21/arlington_secrets/

[liberal N proud]

1. As they say, Dead men tell no tales

This is sad that this has happened in one of the most honored spots in America

[S_E_Fudd]

2. I just don't understand sometime why simple things are not tried...

How about in the future marking the casket with identifying information if this happens again. Hardly an unusual occurrence at any cemetery...

[rsmith6621]

3. My Dads casket was marked on the lid and inside the vault

of who is in there.....