Join Early Retirement Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-03-2019, 08:56 PM   #81
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 35,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacation4us View Post
I have no words. Clearly you have a personal belief that is totally biased against the defendant if you believe what you posted.

Gumby was a prosecutor, I believe. He had been working with the police, and knows more than us laymen.


About the woman yelling "Show me your hands", even if she did it, I do not see how the victim would comply, not knowing that the woman was a police officer, nor that he was doing anything wrong inside his home.

Do you obey the commands of anyone who burst through your door?

If the apartment was dark, and the woman was at the door, he could only see her silhouette against the outside, and not recognize her uniform. In any case, she said in her testimony that the victim advanced towards her while saying "Hey hey hey..."

She also said to see only his silhouette because the light was not on inside the apartment.

Again, I believe that the woman walked into the wrong apartment, and was upset to find an "intruder", and thought she was justified to shoot to kill a burglar. Even if she was truly burglarized, she was not to shoot someone if she was not in danger. And perhaps she had no reason to think she was in danger, but was outraged that her "home" was invaded.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)

"Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities Can Make You Commit Atrocities" - Voltaire (1694-1778)
NW-Bound is offline  
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 10-03-2019, 09:19 PM   #82
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 22,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacation4us View Post
I have no words. Clearly you have a personal belief that is totally biased against the defendant if you believe what you posted.
Based on some of your prior posts, I believe you are married to either an active or retired police officer, so you may have some of your own biases. That's OK. Our individual views of events are inevitably colored by our own experiences.

To repeat, for at least the third time, I do not purport to know what happened in this case. You may be right that it would be easy to misidentify her own apartment. Based on my experience, I doubt it, but you may have different experience. In any event, the apartment mistake is not dispositive for me. It is what came after that matters.

My view is that the other undisputed conduct to which Officer Guyger actually testified - among them, failure to retreat when she had the option, failure to seek backup, shooting at a target she couldn't clearly see and identify -- is so astonishingly unreasonable that her story just can't be true. Nobody, least of all a trained police officer, is that stupid.

And I don't think it is biased to observe that she had every incentive to cast herself as a moron rather than a murderer and to say that she feared for her life, because you can't shoot someone just for burgling your home, only for threatening your life.

But who knows? I could be completely wrong and she really is that unreasonable. I'm sure the appeal will get at some of these issues.
__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline  
Old 10-03-2019, 09:33 PM   #83
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 35,712
What I have seen time and time again is that an officer feels justified in pulling the trigger if he/she feels threatened, or if he/she sees the person makes a wrong move.

They absolutely don't have to see a weapon. All they need is a suspicion that the victim is "going" for a weapon. The person being shot could be making a gesture, or scratching an itch, it does not matter. Shoot to kill when in doubt.

Search the Web, and you will find plenty of cases. For example, a deaf driver was shot, and it could be because he was trying to make a sign language. He did not obey commands.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)

"Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities Can Make You Commit Atrocities" - Voltaire (1694-1778)
NW-Bound is offline  
Old 10-03-2019, 09:51 PM   #84
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Just_Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Dutchess County
Posts: 1,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby View Post
Based on some of your prior posts, I believe you are married to either an active or retired police officer, so you may have some of your own biases. That's OK. Our individual views of events are inevitably colored by our own experiences.

To repeat, for at least the third time, I do not purport to know what happened in this case. You may be right that it would be easy to misidentify her own apartment. Based on my experience, I doubt it, but you may have different experience. In any event, the apartment mistake is not dispositive for me. It is what came after that matters.

My view is that the other undisputed conduct to which Officer Guyger actually testified - among them, failure to retreat when she had the option, failure to seek backup, shooting at a target she couldn't clearly see and identify -- is so astonishingly unreasonable that her story just can't be true. Nobody, least of all a trained police officer, is that stupid.

And I don't think it is biased to observe that she had every incentive to cast herself as a moron rather than a murderer and to say that she feared for her life, because you can't shoot someone just for burgling your home, only for threatening your life.

But who knows? I could be completely wrong and she really is that unreasonable. I'm sure the appeal will get at some of these issues.
Maybe.

New York Penal Law § 35.20 states:

3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to
be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that
another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such
dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other
person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such
burglary.
Just_Steve is offline  
Old 10-03-2019, 10:23 PM   #85
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 35,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Steve View Post
Maybe.

New York Penal Law § 35.20 states:

3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to
be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that
another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such
dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other
person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such
burglary.
I like the above.

"Hey, drop my TV or I will shoot! No, put it down gently on the ground."

I wonder if other places have the same law.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)

"Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities Can Make You Commit Atrocities" - Voltaire (1694-1778)
NW-Bound is offline  
Old 10-03-2019, 10:33 PM   #86
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 35,712
OK, I found out more about the laws where I live.

Regarding home intruders:

Quote:
Arizona doesn’t have specific castle laws; however, Arizona does permit physical force, and deadly force when reasonable and immediately necessary to prevent several serious crimes, including Burglary in the first and second degree. Practically speaking, intruders inside the home can usually be reasonably perceived to be committing theft or another felony in one’s home, which is the definition of burglary. Thus, the use of physical force against home intruders is almost always permissible. Deadly force is also allowed, but it must be reasonable and immediately necessary under the circumstances.
On the other hand, use of deadly force for theft outside the home is not permissible.

Quote:
In Arizona, under ARS 13-408, a person can use reasonable physical force to prevent theft or criminal damage of property that’s currently under their control and possession. However, if only the loss of personal property is threatened, one cannot use deadly force. For example, if a thief were to try to take your cell phone, you would likely be justified in kicking, punching, and slapping in an effort to stop the thief. Conversely, it would be unreasonable to shoot or stab that person, unless of course, the thief was simultaneously threatening deadly force.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)

"Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities Can Make You Commit Atrocities" - Voltaire (1694-1778)
NW-Bound is offline  
Old 10-03-2019, 10:52 PM   #87
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Laurel, MD
Posts: 8,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montecfo View Post
oh really? scaredy-cat trigger happy?
Despite wall to wall publicity, such shootings are quite rare. And of course these "scaredy cats" respond to calls and get ambushed. Several cops have died that way recently.

I think your comments are way out of line.


Not out of line at all IMO. I wholeheartedly agree that too many cops are not well trained and/or lack temperament for the job.
__________________
...with no reasonable expectation for ER, I'm just here auditing the AP class.Retired 8/1/15.
jazz4cash is offline  
Old 10-03-2019, 11:16 PM   #88
Full time employment: Posting here.
Vacation4us's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 530
I admit I too have my own bias. I definitely knew nothing about this case prior to seeing a snippet on the news yesterday. I have no real opinion on her guilt or innocence. My initial impression was she must be young and unseasoned.

I haven’t learned the art of multi quotes or highlighting specifically what I was referring to in your message.

My DH is in law enforcement. So clearly I am pro law enforcement. I do find it astounding how law enforcement has been vilified in recent years. Certain organizations pushed for body cams, cops resisted and lost. Guess what those certain organizations have changed their tune and so have the beat cops. Why? Because more cops have been proven to be telling the truth and it’s no longer just the cops or the defendants word. But I digress.

My comment was based on;

. I'm sure every police officer in the country knows that they should always say they yelled "Show me your hands " whether they actually did or not.

Your statement leaves me speechless and once again disappointed for all the men and women who work tirelessly to serve their communities.
Vacation4us is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 12:12 AM   #89
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 35,712
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montecfo View Post
oh really? scaredy-cat trigger happy?
Despite wall to wall publicity, such shootings are quite rare. And of course these "scaredy cats" respond to calls and get ambushed. Several cops have died that way recently.

I think your comments are way out of line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazz4cash View Post
Not out of line at all IMO. I wholeheartedly agree that too many cops are not well trained and/or lack temperament for the job.

I no longer watch TV so do not know of all incidences. However, a quick search on Youtube will show plenty of unarmed people being shot.

For example, here's the case of Justine Damond who was shot dead after she called 911 to report a possible assault and rape case behind her home.

When the police arrived and checked out the area, she came out and approached a squad car on the driver's side, and startled the two policemen inside the car. The one in the passenger seat drew a gun, and shot her through the open window. She was in her pajamas, and barefoot.

There are more cases like the above, if one is interested.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)

"Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities Can Make You Commit Atrocities" - Voltaire (1694-1778)
NW-Bound is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 12:39 AM   #90
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 35,712
Here are some statistics.

Each year, about 1000 people are shot dead by law enforcers. There's no statistics on how many are innocent and unarmed. There are another 2000 who are shot but survive.

On the other side, each year about 50 policemen are shot and killed by civilians in the US.


PS. It is estimated that 1 in 10 shot dead by law enforcers are unarmed.
__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)

"Those Who Can Make You Believe Absurdities Can Make You Commit Atrocities" - Voltaire (1694-1778)
NW-Bound is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 04:23 AM   #91
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 22,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacation4us View Post
I admit I too have my own bias. I definitely knew nothing about this case prior to seeing a snippet on the news yesterday. I have no real opinion on her guilt or innocence. My initial impression was she must be young and unseasoned.

I haven’t learned the art of multi quotes or highlighting specifically what I was referring to in your message.

My DH is in law enforcement. So clearly I am pro law enforcement. I do find it astounding how law enforcement has been vilified in recent years. Certain organizations pushed for body cams, cops resisted and lost. Guess what those certain organizations have changed their tune and so have the beat cops. Why? Because more cops have been proven to be telling the truth and it’s no longer just the cops or the defendants word. But I digress.

My comment was based on;

. I'm sure every police officer in the country knows that they should always say they yelled "Show me your hands " whether they actually did or not.

Your statement leaves me speechless and once again disappointed for all the men and women who work tirelessly to serve their communities.
I suspected that was the part to which you objected, so let me explain why I say that.

First, let me give you some context. In my 27 year career as a lawyer, I questioned literally hundreds of witnesses. Every single one of them lied to me at least once. Simply put, witnesses lie - for a wide variety of reasons, but mostly because the truth jeopardizes them in some way. And the greater the negative consequences of telling the unvarnished truth, whether it be loss of their job, their freedom or their money, the more likely it is that they will lie. I don't have any reason to believe that police officers are less honest than other people, but I do know that they are people and all people lie.

How do I know that you (not you personally, but any witness) are lying ? Because the vast majority of the time (exceeding 99% of the time if I am questioning you on the stand and not at deposition), I already know the answer to my question before I ask it. I know everything you and every other witness has previously said about the topic. If there are documents involved, I know them inside and out, forward and backward -- better than you do. And I have sketched out for myself in advance, on paper, all the ways that you are going to try to evade, deflect, obfuscate, or otherwise not answer fully and truthfully. Then I have sketched out, for each one of those dodges, how I am going to follow up to make you say what you don't want to say, but which you and I both know is the truth.

Sometimes, confronting the witness this way is all it takes to get the truth. Other times, if they are particularly intelligent and recalcitrant, I will employ other methods. I have feigned ignorance or naivete in order to get people to drop their guard (the Lieutenant Columbo method). I have also done things to make them frustrated and angry, because angry people are more likely lose control (the "Few Good Men" method). I once deliberately mispronounced the witness' name over a dozen times, even after he corrected me, until he got so angry at me that he made a mistake and told the truth. I have deliberately nitpicked inconsequential errors in a witness' calculations and implied that they don't know how to do their job, to get them frustrated and angry before I move on to the important questions.

Now, with respect to this particular matter. You may think otherwise, but I don't believe police officers are stupid. I am fairly certain that every single officer in the country knows that if he or she has shot someone on the job, the smart thing to do is to say that the victim posed a threat to your life, so the shooting is considered justified. That means you say that you told them to show their hands, they wouldn't and you thought they were reaching for a weapon. Heck, I'll concede that 99% of the time it actually did happen exactly as the officer testified. But in that other 1% of the time, the officer is still going to say that it happened even if it didn't (unless he or she knows that there is dash cam or body cam evidence to the contrary). Why? Because: a) the consequences to the officer for actually telling the truth are severe and b) he or she is human and all humans will lie under those circumstances.

So I'm not biased against police officers. I'm biased against human beings.


P.S. - Let me add one more thing. You mention "all the men and women who work tirelessly to serve their communities" and I have no doubt that that is your experience with your husband and his colleagues. I personally know several people in law enforcement and they are dedicated public servants and decent people. But not everyone in law enforcement is. I once prosecuted a state trooper. He was the responding trooper in a fatal motorcycle crash on the highway. While at the scene, he stole several thousand dollars and gold jewelry from the deceased cyclist. He probably would have gotten away with it too, but the young man's parents knew that he always carried a lot of cash and had some distinctive gold jewelry. When they went to claim their son's body at the hospital, they asked where it was. Subsequently, the ambulance crew was questioned and they said the trooper took it. It was found hidden up under the seat in his cruiser. He took a plea deal, which resulted in a felony conviction, the loss of his job and his pension, and a year in prison.
__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 05:41 AM   #92
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 22,973
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Steve View Post
Maybe.

New York Penal Law § 35.20 states:

3. A person in possession or control of, or licensed or privileged to
be in, a dwelling or an occupied building, who reasonably believes that
another person is committing or attempting to commit a burglary of such
dwelling or building, may use deadly physical force upon such other
person when he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to
prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of such
burglary.
Here are the relevant Connecticut General Statutes

Sec. 53a-19. Use of physical force in defense of person. (a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section, a person is justified in using reasonable physical force upon another person to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of physical force, and he may use such degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose; except that deadly physical force may not be used unless the actor reasonably believes that such other person is (1) using or about to use deadly physical force, or (2) inflicting or about to inflict great bodily harm.

Sec. 53a-20. Use of physical force in defense of premises. A person in possession or control of premises, or a person who is licensed or privileged to be in or upon such premises, is justified in using reasonable physical force upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by such other person in or upon such premises; but he may use deadly physical force under such circumstances only (1) in defense of a person as prescribed in section 53a-19, or (2) when he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent an attempt by the trespasser to commit arson or any crime of violence, or (3) to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to prevent or terminate an unlawful entry by force into his dwelling as defined in section 53a-100*, or place of work, and for the sole purpose of such prevention or termination.

MY NOTE

* this is "home invasion" defined as entry by force to commit a felony upon the person inside (i.e. - not property)


So, in Connecticut, you can use physical force to stop a burglary in progress, but not deadly physical force. Moreover, she was not in possession or control or licensed or privileged to be in the premises, so Sec 53-20 would not apply in the first instance. Her only available defense would have been reasonable fear for her life or great physical harm under 53-19.

I don't know the law in Texas.
__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 06:37 AM   #93
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacation4us View Post
So the apartments are confusing and at least 50 other people have a history of going to the wrong apartments.

But you still see no possibility that her story is true?
I actually believe her testimony 100%, but unfortunately, being confused is not an excuse for ending an innocent persons life. She deserves the verdict and far more jail time than she got IMO, even though I believe it went down as she said. Being a cop is not a license to do what you'd like w/o consequence (which is how a lot of them act IMO).

The jury didn't get to see it, but she has a lot of racist crap she spewed out in texts and on social media before this incident. She was also sexually involved with her married partner. She seems like a pretty big POS from my vantage point.
DFDubb is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 08:35 AM   #94
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 2,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vacation4us View Post
So the apartments are confusing and at least 50 other people have a history of going to the wrong apartments.
But you still see no possibility that her story is true?
A whole new application of the old phrase: "They all look alike."

No judgement. No discretion. No brains at all. Just go for the gun first last and always. Why? because you know you can. Eff'ed it up? Just say, for a split second, you "felt threatened" whether or not you had a legitimate reason to. Or mumble something about "waistband." Killing is always the first stop after "feeling threatened", right? At least for those those who know they will get away with it. If it's so easy to walk into an identical apartment why didn't she try that angle first instead of cavalierly killing somebody who was minding his own business and not theartening her in any way!? You walk into somebody's house by mistake you apologize profusely and leave. Or kill 'em I guess? I guess she's stupid. Or a murderer looking to get an H/O that day. If he had shot her because she deserved it 50 cops would have been there in 5 mins emptying their guns into him because,.... you guessed it,.... they "felt threatened."

Nobody, no society needs people like this in it. Take out the trash.

As far as a possibility of her story being true? So what? It's "reasonable doubt" not absolutely no possibility of doubt. People make that mistake all the time. Maybe the judge did it? Or the D.A.? Who's better positioned to cover up their own crime spree? But it's not likely. It all comes down to who do you believe. No way I'm believing that cock and bull story.
razztazz is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 08:38 AM   #95
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 4,172
Anyone seen this? https://www.dallasnews.com/news/2019...nBlKgcG0QeXuQ/
kaneohe is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 08:50 AM   #96
Full time employment: Posting here.
Silver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Orlando, Fl
Posts: 950
I guess the take home message of this entire incident is......make sure the door to your home is closed and locked, even when you are there.

If the door had been locked, and she tried to use her key and it failed.....he might still be alive.
__________________
"Some people describe themselves as being able to see things as a glass half full. For some, the glass is half empty. Me? I can't even find the f***king glass."
Silver
Silver is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 09:28 AM   #97
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
easysurfer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneohe View Post

Yes, I read that. Very touching. I'll save you from being hammered for posting a naked link :

Quote:
Chants of “No justice, no peace” drifted from the hallway into the the 204th District Court, and then Botham Jean’s 18-year-old brother stepped up to the witness stand Wednesday.
This was Brandt Jean’s chance to tell Guyger exactly what he thought of the former Dallas officer after she was sentenced to 10 years in prison for murdering his brother last year when she mistook his apartment for hers.
Quote:
There were only two rules for his “victim impact statement”: no threats and no profanity.
What came next was a stunning moment that played out after many had left the courtroom and the world watched online. Even courthouse veterans wept at something they’d never seen before.
Jean took a breath into the microphone and began to speak. He hadn’t told his family what he planned to say, he told Guyger. He spoke for himself, not them.
"If you truly are sorry," Jean said. "I know I can speak for myself, I forgive you."
__________________
Have you ever seen a headstone with these words
"If only I had spent more time at work" ... from "Busy Man" sung by Billy Ray Cyrus
easysurfer is online now  
Old 10-04-2019, 09:33 AM   #98
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 2,962
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silver View Post
I guess the take home message of this entire incident is......make sure the door to your home is closed and locked, even when you are there.

If the door had been locked, and she tried to use her key and it failed.....he might still be alive.
yes. Protect yourself from mindless murdering cops who make transparent excuses to "get away with it" because they know they can.
No reason to keep doors locked at all times just in case the cops wrongfully decide to kill you, None.
Cops need to know they can't simply "get away with it." THAT would have saved an innocent life. The door is not at issue.
razztazz is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 09:36 AM   #99
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 22,973
razztazz. I think you are painting with an unfairly broad brush and unnecessarily intemperate language, and if we continue down this path, my fellow moderators will close the thread.
__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline  
Old 10-04-2019, 10:23 AM   #100
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Just_Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Dutchess County
Posts: 1,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby View Post
Truncated.

So, in Connecticut, you can use physical force to stop a burglary in progress, but not deadly physical force. Moreover, she was not in possession or control or licensed or privileged to be in the premises, so Sec 53-20 would not apply in the first instance. Her only available defense would have been reasonable fear for her life or great physical harm under 53-19.

I don't know the law in Texas.
I agree with this, my response above was only to your statement "because you can't shoot someone just for burgling your home," which in a lot of jurisdictions is not the case.
Just_Steve is offline  
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Leave of Absence (Trial Retirement) over, getting ready to go back DivinDave Hi, I am... 23 02-10-2013 08:39 AM
PSA Test Found to Save Few Lives Over A 10 Year Period in Large Trial haha Health and Early Retirement 63 04-02-2009 05:51 PM
The Sabbatical...the one year "trial" retirement Frugalityisthenewblack FIRE and Money 2 01-08-2009 11:58 AM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:52 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.