1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ocala, Florida
    Posts
    222

    Default Ex-Marine decries prosecution in civilian court Ex-Marine decries prosecution in civi

    Take Care & be SAFE
    Bert

  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Damn. This could change the face of warfighting in the Western World.


    Ex-Marine decries prosecution in civilian court

    CHELSEA J. CARTER AP Military Affairs Writer

    Former Marine Sgt. Jose Luis Nazario Jr., 28, from New York, speaks about his impending federal trial, at one of his attorney's, Joseph M. Preis', office in Irvine, Calif., on Saturday, Aug. 16, 2008. Nazario faces charges that he shot detainees during the 2004 battle of Fallujah, in Iraq. It's a precedent-setting prosecution with the possibility of a precedent-setting conviction that would expose all former military personnel to prosecution in civilian federal court for actions in combat. The trial starts on Tuesday, Aug. 19, 2008 in Riverside, Calif. (AP Photo/Sean Dufrene)

    Former Marine Sgt. Jose Luis Nazario Jr., 28, center, from New York, speaks about his impending federal trial, with his attorney's, Douglas L. Applegate, left, and Joseph M. Preis, right, in Irvine, Calif., on Saturday, Aug. 16, 2008. Nazario faces charges that he shot detainees during the 2004 battle of Fallujah, in Iraq. It's a precedent-setting prosecution with the possibility of a conviction that would expose all former military personnel to prosecution in civilian federal court for actions in combat. The trial starts on Tuesday, Aug. 19, 2008 in Riverside, Calif. (AP Photo/Sean Dufrene)

    Former Marine Sgt. Jose Luis Nazario Jr., 28, from New York, speaks about his impending federal trial, at one of his attorney's, Joseph M. Preis', office in Irvine, Calif., on Saturday, Aug. 16, 2008. Nazario faces charges that he shot detainees during the 2004 battle of Fallujah, in Iraq. It's a precedent-setting prosecution with the possibility of a conviction that would expose all former military personnel to prosecution in civilian federal court for actions in combat. The trial starts on Tuesday, Aug. 19, 2008 in Riverside, Calif. (AP Photo/Sean Dufrene)

    IRVINE, Calif. A former Marine sergeant facing the first federal civilian prosecution of a military member accused of a war crime says there is much more at stake than his claim of innocence on charges that he killed unarmed detainees in Fallujah, Iraq.

    In the view of Jose Luis Nazario Jr., U.S. troops may begin to question whether they will be prosecuted by civilians for doing what their military superiors taught them to do in battle.

    Nazario is the first military service member who has completed his duty to be brought to trial under a law that allows the government to prosecute defense contractors, military dependents and those no longer in the military who commit crimes outside the United States.

    "They train us, and they expect us to rely back on that training. Then when we use that training, they prosecute us for it?" Nazario said during an interview Saturday with The Associated Press.

    "I didn't do anything wrong. I don't think I should be the first tried like this," said Nazario, whose trial begins Tuesday in Riverside, east of Los Angeles.

    If Nazario, 28, is convicted of voluntary manslaughter, some predict damaging consequences on the battlefield.

    "This boils down to one thing in my mind: Are we going to allow civilian juries to Monday-morning-quarterback military decisions?" said Nazario's attorney, Kevin McDermott.

    Others say the law closes a loophole that allowed former military service members to slip beyond the reach of prosecution. Once they complete their terms, troops cannot be prosecuted in military court.

    Scott Silliman, a law professor and executive director of the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security at Duke University, says it has little to do with questioning military decisions and everything to do with whether a service member committed a crime.

    "From a legal point of view, there is no difference in law between war and peace," he said.

    The Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act law was written in 2000 and amended in 2004 primarily to prosecute civilian contractors who commit crimes while working for the U.S. overseas. One of the authors contends prosecuting former military personnel was "not the motivation."

    "I don't fault the Department of Justice for using what legal authority they have if a clear criminal act has been committed. But I do think that it would be preferable for crimes committed on active duty be prosecuted by court martial rather than in civilian courts," said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.

    "I think maybe what it says is we need to rethink the question of military personnel who are subject to prosecution."

    Telephone messages for a spokesman in the U.S. attorney's office in Los Angeles seeking comment were not returned.

    Nazario, of Riverside, is charged with one count of voluntary manslaughter on suspicion of killing or causing others to kill four unarmed detainees in November 2004 in Fallujah, during some of the fiercest fighting of the war. He also faces one count of assault with a deadly weapon and one count of discharging a firearm during a crime of violence.

    If convicted of all charges, he could face more than 10 years in prison.

    The case came to light in 2006, when Nazario's former squadmate, Sgt. Ryan Weemer, volunteered details to a U.S. Secret Service job interviewer during a lie-detector screening that included a question about the most serious crime he ever committed. Weemer was ordered this month to stand trial in military court on charges of unpremeditated murder and dereliction of duty in the killing of an unarmed detainee in Fallujah. He has pleaded not guilty.

    According to a Naval Criminal Investigative Service criminal complaint, several Marines allege Nazario shot two Iraqi men who had been detained while his squad searched a house. The complaint claims four Iraqi men were killed during the action.

    The complaint states the squad had been taking fire from the house. After the troops entered the building and captured the insurgents, Nazario placed a call on his radio.

    "Nazario said that he was asked, 'Are they dead yet?'" the complaint states. When Nazario responded that that the captives were still alive, he was allegedly told by the Marine on the radio to "make it happen."

    Nazario later received the Navy-Marine Corps Commendation Medal with a 'V' for valor for combat and leadership in Fallujah.

    Though Nazario and his attorneys declined to discuss the facts of the case with the AP, the former Marine has always maintained his innocence.

    After leaving the military, Nazario worked as an officer with the Riverside Police Department and was close to completing his one-year probation. He said he knew nothing of the investigation until he was arrested Aug. 7, 2007, after being called into the watch commander's office to sign a performance review.

    He said he was leaning forward to sign when he was grabbed from behind by his fellow officers, told he had been charged with a war crime and was turned over to Navy investigators waiting in a nearby room. Because he had not completed probation, the police department fired him.

    Since then, he said, has been unable to find work.

    "You're supposed to be innocent until proven guilty," he said. "I've put in applications everywhere for everything. But nobody wants to hire you if you have been indicted."

    Without income, Nazario said, he has been forced to move in with his parents in New York. He and his wife resorted to selling some of their household goods, such as electronics equipment, to a pawn shop.

    His wife, once a stay-at-home mother to their 2-year-old son, has gone to work as a customer service receptionist, he said. She will be unable to attend his trial.

    "She has to work. We need the money," he said, his eyes reddening as he blinked away tears.

    Nazario said he has no regrets about being a Marine, only regrets about what has happened since.

    "My faith in the system is shaken. There's no doubt about that," he said.

    One of Nazario's defense attorneys, Doug Applegate, said he believes that ultimately the former Marine will be acquitted because of lack of evidence.

    "There are no bodies, no forensic evidence, no crime scene and no identities," he said.

    It is unclear what, if anything, Marines being subpoenaed to testify will say about the events in the house in Fallujah.

    Another Marine, Sgt. Jermaine Nelson, 26, of New York is slated to be court-martialed in December on charges of unpremeditated murder and dereliction of duty for his role in the deaths.

    Although he has not entered a plea in military court, Nelson's attorney has said his client is innocent.

    Nelson and Weemer were jailed in June for contempt of court for refusing to testify against Nazario before a federal grand jury believed to be investigating the case. Both were released July 3 and returned to Camp Pendleton.

    Chelsea J. Carter covers military affairs in Southern California. Associated Press writer Ben Evans in Washington contributed to this report.

    Copyright 2008 The Associated Press

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Memphis Tn,USA-now
    Posts
    5,436

    Default

    Sounds like double jeopardy to me.If the Marines and Navy Department don't give him a JAG lawyer,I'm going to stop hinting to my niece's fiance to look to the Marine Corps for a job.

    What's a civilian jury going to know about what makes you react in a combat zone?

  4. #4
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    That was pretty much my thought too. Coupled with "Excuse me Sir. Can I get those orders in tripicate please."

    Troopers second-guessing their commanders orders in the middle of a firefight is the short way to both loosing the engagement and enduring unnecessary casualties. And thats what I see as a potential fall-out situation from this event.
    If you don't do it RIGHT today, when will you have time to do it over? (Hall of Fame basketball player/coach John Wooden)

    "I may be slow, but my work is poor." Chief Dave Balding, MVFD

    "Its not Rocket Science. Just use a LITTLE imagination." (Me)

    Get it up. Get it on. Get it done!

    impossible solved cotidie. miracles postulo viginti - quattuor hora animadverto

    IACOJ member: Cheers, Play safe y'all.

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    (2nd post) we were having problems with the Embassy internet yesterday....
    Last edited by MalahatTwo7; 08-19-2008 at 08:17 AM.

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Perhaps I'm misreading this but it does not appear to be an issue of civilian trial of military service members.

    If this SGT was still in the Marines then he would be tried under court martial for his actions. The problem is he can't since he's since left the military.
    Others say the law closes a loophole that allowed former military service members to slip beyond the reach of prosecution. Once they complete their terms, troops cannot be prosecuted in military court.
    The difference is that its not a purely civilian trial but a way for the Justice Dept to bring charges against people after they have left the service. What's the alternative? Should somebody get a free walk for these allegations just because they've retired?
    Last edited by voyager9; 08-18-2008 at 02:49 PM.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager9 View Post
    Perhaps I'm misreading this but it does not appear to be an issue of civilian trial of military service members.

    If this SGT was still in the Marines then he would be tried under court martial for his actions. The problem is he can't since he's since left the military.
    This is not true. The military can recall you to active duty to prosecute for crimes commited while in the service. I have no idea where that line came from in the article, because I do believe that it is untrue.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  8. #8
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Sharkie, it would appear that the Sgt had retired from active service, sometime after he returned from Iraq, as he was employed as a Riverside Police officer at the time of his arrest.

    However, it is correct to state that any person who was a military member, now "retired" may be called back to active duty for the duration of trial proceedings. In Canada, we do not place a person back in active service for trial purposes, however we have this little remembered clause that is read and signed/counter signed that says even after release, you are still bound by the Code of Service Discipline for (usually a period of 5yrs) and if you become involved in a criminal investigation either as a witness or as the accused, you can and most likely will be supeanaed to appear. As the charged person, there is a lot of legal wrangling that goes on, about whether a civil court should be involved for punishment reasons or if a Service Tribunal will handle the case. It gets very confusing at that point.

    In my 21 years of active service, I am aware of at least 4 occasions when someone was brought back from civilian life to face a Service Tribunal and punishment. Two of those went to civic courts for processing, if I recall correctly. Both persons were involved with the break and enter of a military weapons lock up and theft of several 9mm Brownings, followed by a B&E of a jewlery store. The army handled the 9mm thefts and the civic courts took care of the jewlery theft. If I remember correctly the, Service Tribunal deferred all punishments to the civic court... but that was a long time ago in a Galaxy far far away..... early in my career.

    All that to say that the current case with the Marine is going to be something worth paying attention to, I think. This is vaguely remenicent of WWII with the German soldiers "I just followed orders." Vietnam had something similar, if I recall correctly?

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaSharkie View Post
    This is not true. The military can recall you to active duty to prosecute for crimes commited while in the service. I have no idea where that line came from in the article, because I do believe that it is untrue.
    Once your eight year obligation is up, and you are discharged without retirement, they can not recall you. Apparently the Sgt's eight year obligation was complete. If a crime was committed, I have no problem with such a use of the judicial system. We can't claim to fight with honor if we are not able to defend our actions, be it in the court of public opinion or the court of law.

    Semper Fi,
    Dennis
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  10. #10
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Once your eight year obligation is up, and you are discharged without retirement, they can not recall you.
    Interesting. Subtle, but significant differences between countries and their military service. In Canada, whether you do an initial 3 year engagement or 35 years, post retirement the Government has an option to re-enlist you for a period of 2 yrs AFTER retirement. This clause it typically invoked only in times of war or other significant national crisis. A lot of that is based on your prior service, and in particular what qualifications and experience you have. And more often as not, you would find yourself in an instructor's position.

  11. #11
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Memphis Tn,USA-now
    Posts
    5,436

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MalahatTwo7 View Post
    Interesting. Subtle, but significant differences between countries and their military service. In Canada, whether you do an initial 3 year engagement or 35 years, post retirement the Government has an option to re-enlist you for a period of 2 yrs AFTER retirement. This clause it typically invoked only in times of war or other significant national crisis. A lot of that is based on your prior service, and in particular what qualifications and experience you have. And more often as not, you would find yourself in an instructor's position.
    When my 4 year hitch in the Navy was up,I was placed in the Individual Ready Reserve which meant that in case of national emergency,I could have been recalled and more than likely assigned back to the ship I'd just left.
    I didn't have to attend drill meetings nor was I paid for my status.I do not recall anyone telling me that I could be arrested for any crimes that I may have committed while in the service either.
    If someone had committed a crime while in the military and was NOT on the streets of the United States of America,how does it follow that they can be arrested and tried for said crime in an American court of law?

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    If someone had committed a crime while in the military and was NOT on the streets of the United States of America,how does it follow that they can be arrested and tried for said crime in an American court of law?
    Ya got me there Chum. I ain't no lawyer. LOL

  13. #13
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Memphis Tn,USA-now
    Posts
    5,436

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MalahatTwo7 View Post
    Ya got me there Chum. I ain't no lawyer. LOL
    Someone's out to make a political name for themselves,sounds like.Just because they are against the war in Iraq,they want to find a way to punish those fighting it by prosecuting them under U.S. civilian laws which unless I am mistaken are not the law of the land in Iraq or any other foreign country.
    US servicemen can be charged for rape and murder and have been.But charging someone for shooting an enemy soldier in the performance of his duties of shooting at American troops is just asinine.

  14. #14
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doughesson View Post
    When my 4 year hitch in the Navy was up,I was placed in the Individual Ready Reserve which meant that in case of national emergency,I could have been recalled and more than likely assigned back to the ship I'd just left.
    I didn't have to attend drill meetings nor was I paid for my status.I do not recall anyone telling me that I could be arrested for any crimes that I may have committed while in the service either.
    While in the IRR, five months past my discharge from active duty, I was actually recalled to duty to testify in case back on my base. Was a great deal, they postponed the trial until my winter break from school, flew me out on CINCPAC's Gulfstream, put me up in the Hale Koa in Waikiki for a week, and I only had to testify for about a half hour on Wednesday. The race rioting idiots got six month in the brig, and dishonorables to bring back to their Crip brothers.

    Quote Originally Posted by doughesson View Post
    If someone had committed a crime while in the military and was NOT on the streets of the United States of America,how does it follow that they can be arrested and tried for said crime in an American court of law?
    Quote Originally Posted by doughesson View Post
    Someone's out to make a political name for themselves,sounds like.Just because they are against the war in Iraq,they want to find a way to punish those fighting it by prosecuting them under U.S. civilian laws which unless I am mistaken are not the law of the land in Iraq or any other foreign country.
    US servicemen can be charged for rape and murder and have been.But charging someone for shooting an enemy soldier in the performance of his duties of shooting at American troops is just asinine.
    Real simple, an American soldier is under US law in the form of the UCMJ while deployed. Iraq, or any other "host" country, is not supposed to prosecute them for this type of situation. In fact we really don't want that to happen, can you imagine the kangaroo courts our people would go through. Even in Japan and Okinawa, our folks are usually not tried in town when they break their laws, and usually it only happens after a UCMJ Hearing takes place. These guys were under American law during the incident, they unfortuantely are now civilians, so once the appearance of a crime was discovered, the only possible prosecution is through civilian courts. Hopefully it will be a well run trial by both sides with a good judge, and the real truth will come out, and real justice will then be served. Killing someone, enemy or not, based on an unlawful order is wrong. We have all been trained on knowing what a lawfull order is and how enemy prisoners are to be handled. We are better than the enemy, and we need to show it every day with every action, even when being shot at. it is why we are better than they are.
    Semper Fi,
    Dennis
    Last edited by DennisTheMenace; 08-19-2008 at 01:20 PM.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Killing someone, enemy or not, based on an unlawful order is wrong. We have all been trained on knowing what a lawfull order is and how enemy prisoners are to be handled. We are better than the enemy, and we need to show it every day with every action, even when being shot at. it is why we are better than they are.
    Semper Fi,
    Dennis
    And that is a very basic and very intense truth. And one that needs to be remembered at all times. When we deployed for the Gulf in October 2001, JAG sailed with us for two weeks making sure we fully understood both what we were getting into and exactly what the words "Rules of Engagement" meant both to us and to the potential enemy we might be fighting.

    Igni Obstare
    If you don't do it RIGHT today, when will you have time to do it over? (Hall of Fame basketball player/coach John Wooden)

    "I may be slow, but my work is poor." Chief Dave Balding, MVFD

    "Its not Rocket Science. Just use a LITTLE imagination." (Me)

    Get it up. Get it on. Get it done!

    impossible solved cotidie. miracles postulo viginti - quattuor hora animadverto

    IACOJ member: Cheers, Play safe y'all.

  16. #16
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default Not Guilty

    Update:

    Jury acquits former Marine in killing of Iraqis

    By CHELSEA J. CARTER, AP Military Affairs Writer

    Friday, August 29, 2008 (08-29) 04:13 PDT Riverside, Calif. (AP) --

    Jurors wept and embraced former Marine Jose Luis Nazario Jr. after acquitting him of voluntary manslaughter in the killings of unarmed Iraqi detainees during a fierce 2004 battle.

    Tears rolled down Nazario's cheeks and courtroom spectators openly sobbed and cheered Thursday. He is the first U.S. veteran tried by a civilian court for alleged actions in combat.

    "It's been a long, hard year for my family," Nazario said outside the courtroom. "I need a moment to catch my breath and try to get my life back together."

    Jurors took less than six hours over two days to find the former sergeant not guilty of charges that he killed or caused others to kill four detainees in Fallujah, Iraq, on Nov. 9, 2004. The detainees were shot during a battle marked by house-to-house fighting that was considered one of the fiercest of the Iraq war.

    Nazario had been charged with voluntary manslaughter, assault with a deadly weapon and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence. He could have faced more than 10 years in prison if found guilty.

    Prosecutors had urged the jury to convict Nazario, saying he violated his duty as a Marine and must be held accountable for his actions in Fallujah.

    Juror Ted Grinell said the panel acquitted Nazario because no witnesses testified to actually seeing the shootings and there was "not enough evidence to point that he was guilty."

    Jury forewoman Ingrid Wicken said the panel was not making a statement with its verdict, but added: "I think you don't know what goes on in combat until you are in combat."

    Minutes after the verdict was read, jurors shook hands with and hugged Nazario and his sobbing mother, Sandra Montanez.

    Nazario's attorney, Kevin McDermott, said he believes the verdict will curb similar federal prosecutions in the future.

    "I don't think they are going to put on a case in the future with a lack of evidence," he said.

    Nazario, 28, was the first former military service member brought to trial under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, which was written in 2000 and amended in 2004 primarily to allow prosecution of civilian contractors who commit crimes while working for the U.S. overseas.

    It also allows the prosecution of military dependents and former military service members accused of committing crimes outside the United States.

    His attorneys did not call any witnesses. They argued during the trial that a conviction by a civilian jury would have lasting effects on combat troops, who might fear their actions could be judged long after they left the military.

    The case against Nazario rested primarily on the accounts of former comrades, including two of his squad members who have been found in contempt of court for refusing to testify in court. Other former Marines testified during the five-day trial that they did not see Nazario kill the detainees but heard the gunshots.

    The squad members who refused to testify, Ryan Weemer and Jermaine Nelson, are still in the Marines. They are facing murder charges in military court in connection with the shootings.

    Outside court, Nazario told The Associated Press that he had no ill will against the Marines who testified against him.

    "After all this, they are still my brothers. I wish them the best," he said.

    Nazario said he wants to return to his job as a Riverside police officer. He was fired by the department shortly after his arrest last year.

    "I just want my life back. I want my life to be how it was before this all started," he said.

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Paddiegrunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Huntington Beach
    Posts
    113

    Default

    WHORAW!!!
    Should have never gone this far, He was protecting and serving his country.

    Ian Thompson
    U.S. Army 1967 - 1969
    Slop sink, Flags and pump 150
    Getting there is half the fun

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Marine FF
    By JStern in forum Federal & Military Firehouse Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-05-2006, 01:35 PM
  2. Hunters Brooke Prosecution Notes
    By NJFFSA16 in forum Fire Investigation
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 09-11-2006, 12:20 AM
  3. Fake Marine
    By SPIPER in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 03-13-2005, 08:27 AM
  4. Prosecution Rests
    By webteam in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 05-26-2002, 10:12 PM
  5. Agressive Prosecution in Long Island Death
    By JayTL in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-30-2002, 08:45 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register