FROM THE HAVE-A-TAMPA

FORT FUMBLE IN FLORIDA

Nothing like justice steeped in the teapot of time. This, from Pete Vet’s 2005 denial, is a continuing example of an ongoing crime. Read through it and you will see the fingerprints of delay and deny. He deserves Sainthood like his namesake for putting up with this injustice for so long. Wisely, he has employed Dan Krasnegor to be his leagle beagle.

How can your decision, based on all the facts, escape the AOJ and head off to Vermin Ave. in a decidedly incomplete format? Remember all those mythical signatures they talked of in Leroy Macklem’s mishap? Why would one of the VA’s finest RSVRs, who pride themselves on completeness, strict enforcement of M21, and a thorough knowledge of rating principles, allow the cat out of the bag not once but twice without checking to see if everything was accounted for? The short answer is that that much-vaunted 86% accuracy number has the decimal in the wrong place.

In view of this evidence, it appears that the Veteran does have risk factors for hepatitis C, but the evidence is somewhat ambiguous and inconsistent as to the exact factors and number of instances of the factors. Along these lines, the June 2012 VA examiner noted that the Veteran’s sexual history before, during, and after service is not known, and that the extent of his drug use prior to, during, and after service is not fully known and there is conflicting information as to the nature and extent of the drug use. In September 2012, the Veteran’s representative indicated that the Veteran is willing and able to provide whatever detail an examiner would need to more fully understand his history. Consequently, as a medical opinion based on a complete and accurate history has not yet been provided, the Board finds it necessary to again remand the claim to allow for the AOJ to schedule the Veteran for another VA examination in connection with this claim. In addition to a medical examination, a detailed history should be taken as to the Veteran’s risk factors for hepatitis C and an opinion should be provided as to whether the Veteran has hepatitis C that is attributable to his active military service.

Hmmm. And the reason the Petester was not handed a Risk Factors Questionnaire is…?  Does anyone see a pattern here? How are we to ever attain 125-day ratings with a 98% accuracy rate when a Veteran-any Veteran-is forced to wait seven years (including two remands) for the rocket boys at St. Pete’s puzzle palace to “construe” the need for a definitive history of Pete’s drug and sexual history in order to make an informed denial?  Why is it necessary for someone with a juris doctor’s degree to illuminate this glaring lack of evidence- damning or exculpatory?

This wouldn’t be so aggravating if it were the exception rather than the rule. Take the first one hundred decisions in any given year for any disease/injury and peruse them. Invariably you will find decisions predicated on absence of evidence being transposed into negative evidence, an affirmation of smoking left-handed tobacco that morphs into all manner of illicit drug use, and a marked propensity to characterize the Vet’s lay testimony as worthless or bordering on incredible.  Peter Vet is tarred and feathered here for his testimony that he never had a tattoo. If I’d taken India ink and tortured myself with a sewing needle when I was 12, I might not characterize it as a true, professional tattoo. Here, VA uses it as a springboard to prove he can’t be trusted to take out the trash.

As to tattoos, the Veteran has generally denied having a tattoo. Nevertheless, his September 1969 entrance examination notes that he had a tattoo on his right arm. At a June 2012 VA examination, the Veteran stated that he put the tattoo on himself when he was 12 years old.

Guilty, your honor. I lied. Mea culpa. Through my fault, through my fault  through my most grievous fault…

VA examiner doing what he does best.

We certainly wish Peter Pumpkin eater the best in his travails. If the VA is as nonadversarial as they tout themselves to be, the fact that he was in the service from 1969-72 and cleaning blood out of choppers sounds remarkably similar to someone who might have been in Vietnam. Given that those poor, unfortunate souls are 67% more likely to have HCV than their counterparts who served in Europe or stateside, the benefit of the doubt might be for application here-but never will.