United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Florida Man Jailed 41 Days Over 92 Grams of...Laundry Detergent
Source:
Reason
URL Source: https://reason.com/blog/2019/01/30/ ... n-jailed-41-days-over-92-grams
Published: Jan 30, 2019
Author: Joe Setyon
Post Date: 2019-02-04 06:42:45 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 8505
Comments: 92
A Florida man spent 41 days behind bars after police found a powdery white substance in his van last month. Spoiler alert: It wasn't drugs. Matthew Crull, 28, of Port St. Lucie, was sitting in his newly purchased van on December 5 when Martin County Sheriff's Office deputies arrived at the KFC parking lot where he had fallen asleep. Someone had reported the vehicle as suspicious, so police were investigating. When deputies searched his van, they found marijuana, a beer in the cup holder, and a bag with 92 grams of a white powder in it. Deputy Steven O'Leary claimed to have conducted a field drug test on the powder, and said it tested positive for heroin. "I just looked at him baffled and confused because I had no idea as to where 92 grams of heroin came from inside my van," Crull told WPTV later. "I really freaked out," he added to WBPF. "I started panicking and didn't really know what to think." Crull was right to be surprised. He says the alleged heroin was actually laundry detergent. But the truth wouldn't come out until much later. After his arrest, Crull was jailed for 41 days and charged with trafficking heroin. Due to the severity of the charges, there was no way he could afford bond. "It made the situation very real. [The judge] raised my bond to $100k to half a million dollars, so there was really no way I was getting out of jail," he told WPEC. Crull admits that he's been in trouble with the law before, but nothing this serious. "In the past, when I have gone to jail, it's been something where I knew I wasn't going to be there forever. It's a lot different than going to jail and the charge of trafficking of heroin carries a penalty of 25 years in prison," he explained to WPTV. Crull was eventually released, though not before he spent Christmas and New Year's behind bars, after the sheriff's office tested the "heroin" again and discovered the truth. The trafficking charge was dropped, as was the count of marijuana possession. This sort of story is more common than you might think. Reason has previously written about police misidentifying cotton candy and donut glaze for meth. In another case, North Carolina police bragged about a massive fentanyl bust, only to learn later that they had confiscated 13 pounds of sugar. The culprit in each of these cases were field test kits that provided false positives. Washington Post journalist (and former Reason staffer) Radley Balko even has a handy list of some of the things misidentified as drugs by field tests. Crull's case, meanwhile, may have been part of a larger scandal that had nothing to do with malfunctioning field drug tests. The arresting deputy, O'Leary, has been fired after the sheriff's office discovered other discrepancies. In three recent narcotics arrests, O'Leary claimed field tests had revealed drugs. Further crime lab testing revealed that wasn't true. O'Leary, who had been a Martin County sheriff's deputy since February 2018, had made about 80 drug arrests before being terminated. All of those are now under review, and 11 people, including Crull, have already been freed. "It would have been a travesty to risk leaving anyone in jail," Sheriff William Snyder said at a press conference Monday, explaining that some of those released did have drugs in their possession, just not as much as O'Leary had initially claimed. "It's better that 100 guilty people go free than one innocent person goes to jail," Snyder added. "Our goal is always justice, and there was more than enough reasonable doubt on our part on all those arrests that we would not have left anyone in jail one more minute." Spoiler alert: It wasn't heroin.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-12) not displayed.
.
.
.
#13. To: misterwhite (#12)
Your logic makes no sense at all. So what he was carrying laundry detergent in an unmarked bag. How about going after those carrying laundry detergent in marked bags but really have heroin or coke in them and never get detected at all.
I have, but more than 92 grams worth. I also had fabric softener, a pocketful of quarters, coat hangers and a basket of laundry. Were those items also in his car? You're right. STRING THE GUY UP!!!!
....as though it's any of a judge's business. Last I checked laundry detergent is a legal substance. Hell, you don't even need to show ID when you buy it, nor does it require bagging in public! Maybe you live somewhere where laundry detergent is a controlled substance?
Thanks for making it clear this was only *your* opinion.
Offering any defense based on what might be normal amounts of detergent to use is immaterial. The guy spent 41 days in jail in spite of not having any drugs in his car. I'm sure misterwhite would end 41 days in jail being completely understanding about the confusion and apologize to the police officers and prosecution for wasting their time because he had one of hundreds of types of white powdery substances in a bag that he made the unforgivable sin of not labeling. Indeed, a tour of MW's home would prove that MW *never, ever, ever* puts anything into a bottle or bag without expressly labeling it's contents for police eyes to see, JUST IN CASE, there's a raid on his house. He really plays it safe, that MW guy! I was at a lunar eclipse event last month. There was some spiced wine left over, so I poured it into an UNMARKED container and capped it to take home. My god, I had no idea what I opened myself up to!
Apparently, this isn't the only time "officer" O'Leary has pulled this little stunt Crull's case, meanwhile, may have been part of a larger scandal that had nothing to do with malfunctioning field drug tests. The arresting deputy, O'Leary, has been fired after the sheriff's office discovered other discrepancies. In three recent narcotics arrests, O'Leary claimed field tests had revealed drugs. Further crime lab testing revealed that wasn't true. O'Leary, who had been a Martin County sheriff's deputy since February 2018, had made about 80 drug arrests before being terminated. All of those are now under review, and 11 people, including Crull, have already been freed. So let's recap - you have a criminal cop, lying and falsifying evidence in numerous drug cases, possibly as many as 80 and was subsequently fired for his actions, and still the cop groupies will claim he's a good cop and the bust was all good and legal
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. I opened a can of soup and poured it into a Tupperware container to take to work - I feel like a criminal.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. That is a really stupid opinion. Thanks for confirming again.
I disagree. Then the corrupt people just over charge. Then the person has a huge potential time or fine hanging over their head. Then they out of fear not right or wrong cop a plea to a lesser charge. There should be no such thing as a plea bargain. If someone committed a crime charge them with what they did. Not something else lesser. It is complete bullshit and probably truly unconstitutional.
Negative. Every states criminal laws are written by folk who your PEERS ELECT, with certain wording. The police MUST make sure ALL the elements of that crime have been met by the defendant. Upon arrest, every defendant has the legal right for a PRE-LIM or GRAND JURY hearing, specifically for determining if there is PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE ALL elements of the crime had been conducted by the defendant. So... the only bitch you could have is how and what laws are written. And if you don’t like that, RE- ELECT A NEW POLITICIAN. We have, hands down the best criminal justice system of any place on this planet. Why do you let the drug lovers to even get you to bite? lol
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
If you are gonna say this, PROVE IT. Find one case of over-charge where an American was charged with a crime, HIGHER than the case had criminal elements for. Post the investigation reports, statements, evidence reports & photos, oral admissions (if any)... and ALL THE SECTIONS OF THE LAW THAT COVER THAT TYPE OF CRIME. EXAMPLE: Find me a case where a person was charged outside the written section for the purpose to “over charge”. 221.10 Criminal possession of marihuana in the fifth degree. A person is guilty of criminal possession of marihuana in the fifth degree when he knowingly and unlawfully possesses: 1. marihuana in a public place, as defined in section 240.00 of this chapter, and such marihuana is burning or open to public view; or 2. one or more preparations, compounds, mixtures or substances containing marihuana and the preparations, compounds, mixtures or substances are of an aggregate weight of more than twenty- five grams. Criminal possession of marihuana in the fifth degree is a class B misdemeanor. Find me a case where some pothead was charged & convicted of 221.10 (2) while having 25 grams of weed OR LESS. If it’s such a fucking epidemic, it should be easy to find a DOCUMENTED case, and post your PROOF of your absurd allegations.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
I couldn't explain why I had 92 grams of laundry detergent in a baggie in my car. Could you? Wait. I could use a good laugh. Put yourself in this guy's situation and tell me why you had 92 grams of laundry detergent in a baggie.
So if you were this guy, how would you explain the 92 grams of laundry detergent in a plain baggie? If you won't (or can't) then don't criticize the cops for being suspicious.
So if you were this guy, how would you explain the 92 grams of laundry detergent in a plain baggie? Why does it even matter? The point is, it was laundry detergent, not heroin. The arresting deputy, O'Leary, has been fired after the sheriff's office discovered other discrepancies. In three recent narcotics arrests, O'Leary claimed field tests had revealed drugs. Further crime lab testing revealed that wasn't true. O'Leary, who had been a Martin County sheriff's deputy since February 2018, had made about 80 drug arrests before being terminated. All of those are now under review, and 11 people, including Crull, have already been freed. This badged "hero" has been pulling the same scam for at least a year apparently, as many as 80 times in fact. As a self admitted drug warrior, it seems to me that you should be condemning O'Leary's lies (and probable perjury in court) and falsifying evidence. Yet you continue to ignore his criminal actions.
Government is in the last resort the employment of armed men, of policemen, gendarmes, soldiers, prison guards, and hangmen. It just goes to show that when you do put a substance into an unmarked bag or bottle, not only should you label it, you should also weigh it so you know exactly how much, in grams, is there.
You dont have to explain it it's not a crime. I've been to the laundry mat before and saw detergent in a big zip loc bag. Not a crime. I saw some white powder 9n some bags at Walmart. What knows maybe they're smuggling coke. The cops need to start some investigations and arrest someone until they find out it's powdered sugar. You. An be really dumb sometimes. More often then you should be.
I agree. My point is, why risk 42 days in lock-up? Had he not been carrying it around, he could have avoided all the hassle. Ergo, he's partly to blame. Unless he has a good reason to be carrying around 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked baggie. You come up with one yet? Uh-huh. Just as I thought.
And unless you want to take the chance of being thrown in jail, you might want to have a believable reason for doing so. Believable reason: You're headed to the laundromat and you also have dirty laundry in the back seat, fabric softener on the floor, and a pocketful of quarters. Not a believable reason: Falling asleep in the KFC parking lot with a beer in the cup holder and marijuana and a white substance in the van and no explanation for any of it.
Take my advice. When you find you've dug yourself into a hole.... stop digging. I suppose your car, if you have one, is right now, completely free of any traces of anything related to anything you've done more than a day ago.
Hey. Why don't you let him explain the laundry detergent? I already asked you (in post #24) to explain it and you refused.
92 gram bags? Unmarked?
As I said... stop digging. He doesn't have to explain squat. If some cop starts asking all kinds of questions about everything in my car, I'll tell him to take a hike. If he arrests me over laundry detergent, then he and/or the department is on hook for damages. It's as simple as that. But you just refuse to get it. I suppose another load of BS from you will be forthcoming.
Perform that same test in court, under oath, and if it doesn't come up positive, give the "hero" deputy's house to his victim. His car too, if it isn't a piece of shit. If the "hero" deputy objects, do it anyway, plus shoot his dog.
August 1st, 2014 “• Matthew Ryan Crull, 23, of 1552 S.E. Crown Street, Port St. Lucie, was arrested on an active warrant for burglary of a conveyance.” JUST ONE OF HIS PRIORS. You fuckers defend a burglar. lol A stand up guy. He must be innocent.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Like he could. Look. My point was that if he's going to carry around 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked baggie -- and refuse to explain it -- then he's going to jail if it tests positive. F**k him.
As though an explanation would have kept him from going to jail?
What would that explanation be?
It could have been a faulty test kit. You blame the cop for that? Retest it in a lab and if the original test was a false positive, drop the charge. I believe that's the procedure.
As per Grand Island, all explanations are lies unless they are a confession of guilt.
Only it takes 42 days, or sometimes, 5 years for them to get around to doing that. One woman was basically extorted into taking a plea deal over a white crumb in her car which ruined her career with a felony conviction, and it took that long for the lab to do the real test and determine it was not what the field test said it was. I remember Nolu Chan seemingly not wanting to blame the legal system as broken for that, blaming instead the woman for not voluntarily remaining in jail, rejecting the advice of her court appointed attorney, taking it to court and risking years in prison, all without knowing the full ramifications of taking the plea deal. And that while she was aware of the possibility it was a piece of crack cocaine belonging to a hitchiker she had in the car at the time who denied any wrong doing. Yes, a wonderful system we have her. Let's continue to use these faulty field test kits that cannot even be admitted in court to totally screw over people's lives.
How long to execute someone after they've been found guilty -- 15 years? Here's a thought -- don't carry around 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked baggie, then refuse to cooperate.
Yeah. Go with that. I was watching some cop show where the scumbag was searched and had drugs in his pants pocket. He said they weren't his. When asked how they got there, he said they must have been there when he bought the pants. The explanation is on a par with your "hitchhiker" story.
Still can't come up with one, huh?
It would be... most do it that way. I did it different. In many cases, I confiscated my evidence, and let the scumbag go. Once the lab results came back, I got a warrant. It also works well because at the time of interdiction, you might not need Miranda, since they were released. Everything they say after you advise them they are free to leave, is admissible. Drug users are fucking stupid. Drugs do kill brain cells.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
IOW, waive your 5th Amendment rights. Got it. Legal advice from a true expert!
Dude... if you read the whole thing.... It wasn't crack. It was not anything illegal. At all. And it destroyed a woman's career by tainting her with a felony conviction.
I think you would be quite at home in either Nazi Germany or Stalin's USSR.
[misterwhite #40] [Pinguinite #42] I remember Nolu Chan seemingly not wanting to blame the legal system as broken for that, blaming instead the woman for not voluntarily remaining in jail, rejecting the advice of her court appointed attorney, taking it to court and risking years in prison, all without knowing the full ramifications of taking the plea deal. And that while she was aware of the possibility it was a piece of crack cocaine belonging to a hitchiker she had in the car at the time who denied any wrong doing. It did not take 5 years, or even 1 year, to test the sample. Albritton was arrested August 3, 2010, booked on August 4, 2010 at 3:37 a.m., and was convicted upon her plea of guilty on August 5, 2010. Following a guilty plea, confirmatory lab testing loses urgency. The lab test was performed on February 28, 2011. There was no hitchhiker involved. The driver of the vehicle, Anthony Wilson, was her boyfriend who had no license to drive. As the owner of the vehicle, Albritton was responsible for what was found. Albritton consented to the search. Albritton most certainly knew she was pleading guilty to a felony. She signed a waiver of indictment which read, "I am the defendant in the above felony information. My attorney has explained to me my right to be prosecuted by grand jury indictment, which I hereby waive, and I consent to the filing of the above felony information." And there is the incident report: You do not remember what nolu chan said in 2016. You misremember. As I noted in 2016: If she pleaded not guilty and waited for the confirmatory drug test result, there is no guarantee the 45-day offer would still be there. Albritton sued for damages in Federal district court in 2016. Her suit for damages was dismissed on the merits, with prejudice, on 28 March 2017. Albritton et al v. The City of Houston, Texas et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas (Houston), 4:16-cv-02662, Doc 31, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (28 March 2017) [Excerpt at 13-14] [Excerpt, ORDER at 19] ORDERED that Defendants City of Houston and David Helms's Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 10) , Defendants Harris County, Texas and Harris County District Attorney Patricia Lykos's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) (Document No. 13), Defendant Due Nguyen's Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 19), Defendants City of Houston, David Helms, and Due Nguyen's Supplemental Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 27), and Defendants Harris County, Texas and Harris County District Attorney Patricia Lykos's Supplemental Motion to Dismiss (Document No. 28) are GRANTED and Plaintiffs' claims against all Defendants are DISMISSED on the merits with prejudice. A Final Judgment will be entered separately.
Okay, great. I stand corrected. But then they didn't bother to notify Albritton until July 29 2014, about 3.5 years AFTER they discovered she was innocent, and almost 4 years after the ordeal began. www.nytimes.com/interacti...ent-Innocence-letter.html And if the account of an investigative journalist is correct, it was that journalist that was the first inform Albritton of the formal lab results, not the prosecutor's office. So all in all there is/was still a FUBAR situation within the state's legal system. This appears to be a reasonably factual rundown on all that happened which mentions not only Albritton but a few hundred others who took plea deals in cases where subsequent tests found no drugs were present from this one jurisdiction. trofire.com/2016/07/11/di...ar-drugs-false-positives/ By your own postings, Albritton was told that if she plead guilty, she would receive a much lighter sentence. That in spite of the fact that when people are asked by a judge about their state of mind in relation to pleading guilty, they are supposed to be doing so WITHOUT it being in exchange for anything whatsoever. So if in her case, if she affirmed that, then she flat out lied to the judge when she did so. And she lied to the judge because it was required to save herself from years in prison. And anything and everything she signed and/or confessed to in official legal documents was done done *under coercion*. Now you can pretend that there was no coercion there if you want and cite the court verdict, but that is simply living in denial. Just because the courts are obligated to pretend that the papers she signed were signed honestly without coercion doesn't mean there wasn't any coercion because everyone knows it's there. EVERYONE who pleads guilty in exchange for a lighter sentence lies when they say they are doing so freely and NOT in exchange for something. It is all a total farce. I know it, prosecutors know it, those taking plea deals know it, and the judges know it too. But on paper it looks good so that's why it's required. You seem to be the only one that is in denial as you essentially treat the legal system as a priest would treat his religion. And I'm totally serious about that. I totally respect you for your desire for accuracy in all legal matters, but at the same time, I do criticize you for failing to recognize that the system, quite often, fails and does so in a manner that is not the fault of the people who are wrongly convicted EVEN IF they take a plea deal. This is a case of "the customer is always right" and the customers are the average people, like Albritton. And it failed Albritton along with hundreds, thousands, hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of people.
HAAAAAAA... that’s a fucking understatement. You swallow Dicktards kook aid... you gulp that shit down with your already set in place police hatred... and he can sell you a fucking bridge for a dollar. Dicktard does to you, what CNN does to the angry young stupid sheep. They slant the news to form hatreds... and after that, those stupid fuckers buy anything LameStreamMedia reports.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Comments (53 - 92) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIn my opinion, he brought this on himself.
#14. To: misterwhite (#7)
#15. To: misterwhite (#8)
That's the system.
#16. To: misterwhite (#12)
In my opinion, he brought this on himself.
#17. To: hondo68 (#11)
#18. To: Pinguinite, hondo68, misterwhite, GrandIsland (#17)
Offering any defense based on what might be normal amounts of detergent to use is immaterial. The guy spent 41 days in jail in spite of not having any drugs in his car.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#19. To: Pinguinite, hondo68 (#17)
There was some spiced wine left over, so I poured it into an UNMARKED container and capped it to take home.
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#20. To: misterwhite (#12)
In my opinion, he brought this on himself.
#21. To: GrandIsland (#5)
That’s “reasonable” standard.
#22. To: A K A Stone (#21)
Then the corrupt people just over charge.
#23. To: A K A Stone (#21)
(Edited)
Then the corrupt people just over charge.
#24. To: Pinguinite (#17)
#25. To: A K A Stone (#20)
In my opinion, he brought this on himself.
That is a really stupid opinion.
#26. To: misterwhite, A K A Stone (#25)
The essential feature of government is the enforcement of its decrees by beating, killing, and imprisoning.
Those who are asking for more government interference are asking ultimately for more compulsion and less freedom.
#27. To: misterwhite (#24)
Put yourself in this guy's situation and tell me why you had 92 grams of laundry detergent in a baggie.
#28. To: misterwhite (#25)
#29. To: A K A Stone (#28)
You dont have to explain it it's not a crime.
#30. To: Pinguinite (#27)
It just goes to show that when you do put a substance into an unmarked bag or bottle, not only should you label it, you should also weigh it so you know exactly how much, in grams, is there.
#31. To: misterwhite (#30)
#32. To: Pinguinite (#31)
#33. To: A K A Stone (#28)
I saw some white powder in some bags at Walmart.
#34. To: misterwhite (#32)
Hey. Why don't you let him explain the laundry detergent? I already asked you (in post #24) to explain it and you refused.
#35. To: Deckard, misterwhite (#0)
Deputy Steven O'Leary claimed to have conducted a field drug test on the powder, and said it tested positive for heroin.
#36. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
#37. To: Pinguinite (#34)
He doesn't have to explain squat.
#38. To: misterwhite (#37)
Look. My point was that if he's going to carry around 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked baggie -- and refuse to explain it -- then he's going to jail if it tests positive.
#39. To: Pinguinite (#38)
As though an explanation would have kept him from going to jail?
#40. To: Hank Rearden (#35)
Perform that same test in court, under oath, and if it doesn't come up positive, give the "hero" deputy's house to his victim.
#41. To: misterwhite (#39)
What would that explanation be?
#42. To: misterwhite (#40)
Retest it in a lab and if the original test was a false positive, drop the charge. I believe that's the procedure.
#43. To: Pinguinite (#42)
Only it takes 42 days, or sometimes, 5 years for them to get around to doing that.
#44. To: Pinguinite (#42)
And that while she was aware of the possibility it was a piece of crack cocaine belonging to a hitchiker she had in the car at the time
#45. To: Pinguinite (#41)
What would that explanation be?
As per Grand Island, all explanations are lies unless they are a confession of guilt.
#46. To: misterwhite (#40)
(Edited)
Retest it in a lab and if the original test was a false positive, drop the charge. I believe that's the procedure.
#47. To: misterwhite (#43)
Here's a thought -- don't carry around 92 grams of laundry detergent in an unmarked baggie, then refuse to cooperate.
#48. To: misterwhite (#44)
The explanation is on a par with your "hitchhiker" story.
#49. To: misterwhite (#45)
Still can't come up with one, huh?
#50. To: Pinguinite, misterwhite (#42)
Retest it in a lab and if the original test was a false positive, drop the charge. I believe that's the procedure.
Only it takes 42 days, or sometimes, 5 years for them to get around to doing that. One woman was basically extorted into taking a plea deal over a white crumb in her car which ruined her career with a felony conviction, and it took that long for the lab to do the real test and determine it was not what the field test said it was.
Incident Report:
EVIDENCE:
OFFICER HELMS FOUND THE CRACK ROCK ON THE PASSENGER FRONT SEAT FLOOR BOARD AND TOOK CUSTODY OF THE EVIDENCE. I FOUND THE UNKNOWN POWER (sic) IN THE CENTER CONSUL (sic) AND THE USED NEEDLE HIDDEN IN BETWEEN THE LINING OF THE ROOF ON THE DRIVERS SIDE. OFFICER HELMS The defendant's profession of innocence plays no role in explaining the legal alternatives and explaining an offered plea bargain. In this case, he [the appointed lawyer] should have explained that she could take 45 days or plead not guilty and possibly do several years, depending on the confirmatory drug test. Her professions that the drugs belonged to the boyfriend speak to her expectation that the presumptive drug test would be confirmed. It was her car. She got arrested because the evidence was found in her car. If the evidence were to be confirmed, she could/would be convicted.
Albritton premises the County's liability on the District Attorney's Office's use of unreliable evidence as part of its actual prosecution and conviction of Albritton, its lack of appropriate policies related thereto, and its offer of a plea bargain to Albritton. These allegations involve "classic law enforcement and investigative functions" carried out by the District Attorney's Office in its prosecutorial capacity as an agent of the state. Id. at 855. Accordingly, Albritton's claims against the County are subject to dismissal.
For the foregoing reasons, it is
#51. To: nolu chan (#50)
It did not take 5 years, or even 1 year, to test the sample. Albritton was arrested August 3, 2010, booked on August 4, 2010 at 3:37 a.m., and was convicted upon her plea of guilty on August 5, 2010. Following a guilty plea, confirmatory lab testing loses urgency. The lab test was performed on February 28, 2011.
#52. To: Pinguinite (#51)
(Edited)
Okay, great. I stand corrected.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]