Editing Eddie Slovik (section)

===Court-martial===
The 28th Infantry Division was scheduled to begin an [[Battle of Hürtgen Forest|attack in the Hurtgen Forest]]. The coming attack was common knowledge in the unit, and casualty rates were expected to be high, as the prolonged combat in the area had been unusually grueling. The Germans were determined to hold the terrain, and weather greatly reduced the usual American advantages in armor and air support. A small minority of soldiers (less than 0.5%) indicated they preferred to be imprisoned rather than remain in combat, and the rates of desertion and other crimes had begun to rise.

Slovik was charged with desertion to avoid hazardous duty and tried by court-martial on November 11, 1944. Slovik had to be tried by a court-martial composed of staff officers from other U.S. Army divisions, because all combat officers from the 28th Infantry Division were fighting on the front lines.<ref name="JAG" /> The prosecutor, Captain John Green, presented witnesses to whom Slovik had stated his intention to "run away". According to his defense counsel, Captain Edward Woods, Slovik had elected not to testify. At the end of the day, the nine officers of the court found Slovik guilty and sentenced him to death. The sentence was reviewed and approved by Major General [[Norman Cota]], the division commander. General Cota's stated attitude was "Given the situation as I knew it in November 1944, I thought it was my duty to this country to approve that sentence. If I hadn't approved it — if I had let Slovik accomplish his purpose — I don't know how I could have gone up to the line and looked a good soldier in the face."<ref name="JAG" />

On December 9, Slovik wrote a letter to the Supreme Allied Commander, General [[Dwight D. Eisenhower]], pleading for clemency.<ref name="auto">{{Cite web |last=Gibbons-Neff |first=Thomas |title=Why Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl will never face an Army firing squad |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/12/16/why-sgt-bowe-bergdahl-will-never-face-an-army-firing-squad/ |access-date=December 17, 2015 |newspaper=The Washington Post, washingtonpost.com}}</ref> However, desertion had become a systemic problem in France, and the [[Battle of the Bulge]], a surprise German offensive through the Ardennes, began on December 16 with severe US casualties, bypassing and surrounding many units and straining the morale of the infantry to the greatest extent yet seen during the war.

The case was reviewed by assistant staff judge advocate Maj. Frederick J. Bertolet, who recommended against granting clemency. Bertolet wrote: 
{{blockquote|There can be no doubt he deliberately decided that confinement was preferable to the risks of combat, and that he deliberately sought the comparative comfort of the guardhouse. To him and those soldiers who might follow his example, if he achieves his end, confinement is neither deterrent or punishment. He has directly challenged the authority of the government, and future discipline depends upon a resolute reply to this challenge. If the death penalty is ever to be applied to desertion it should be imposed in this case, not as a punitive measure or retribution, but to maintain that discipline upon which an army can succeed against the enemy. There was no recommendation for clemency in this case and none is here recommended.<ref name="kimmelman">{{cite web |last1=Kimmelman |first1=Benedict B. |title=The Example of Private Slovik |url=https://www.americanheritage.com/example-private-slovik |website=American Heritage |language=en}}</ref><ref name="nationalarchives">{{cite web |title=[Court Martial Case 290498 (Private Eddie Slovik)] Record of Trial [folder 2 of 2] |url=https://catalog.archives.gov/id/6231404 |website=National Archives|series=Records of the Office of the Judge Advocate General (Army) }}</ref>}}

Brigadier General E. C. McNeil, the senior Army lawyer in the European Theater, and lawyers on McNeil’s staff, reviewed Slovik’s case. McNeil wrote:
{{blockquote|This is the first death sentence which has reached me for examination. It is probably the first of the kind in the American army for over eighty years - there were none in WWI. In this case the extreme penalty of death appears warranted. This soldier had performed no front line duty. He did not intend to. He deserted from his group of fifteen when about to join the infantry company to which he had been assigned. His subsequent conduct shows a deliberate plan to secure trial and incarceration in a safe place. The sentence adjudged was more severe than he had anticipated, but the imposition of a less severe sentence would only have accomplished the accused's purpose of securing his incarceration and consequent freedom from the dangers which so many of our armed forces are required to face daily. His unfavorable civilian record indicates that he is not a worthy subject of clemency.<ref name="nationalarchives"/>}}

Lt. Col. Henry J. Sommer, the division judge advocate who had previously offered Slovik a final opportunity to have his charges dismissed, wrote:
{{blockquote|The death sentence is deemed appropriate in this case. The accused
is a habitual criminal. He has never seen combat, has run away twice when he believed himself approaching it and avows his intent to run again if he has "to go out there".<ref name="kimmelman"/><ref name="nationalarchives"/>}}

Eisenhower confirmed the execution order on December 23, noting that it was necessary to discourage further desertions. The sentence came as a shock to Slovik, who had been expecting a [[dishonorable discharge]] and a prison term, the same punishment he had seen given to other deserters from the division while he was confined to the stockade. As he was an ex-convict, a dishonorable discharge would have made little impact on his civilian life as a common laborer, and military prison terms for discipline offenses were widely expected to be commuted once the war was over.