Captain,
ISSUE:
AO2 Darrion W. Washington missed the opportunity to turn in his re-enlistment papers on-time to the Command Career Counselor due to being undecided. Undecided in this case means that he was not sure if he wanted to stay in the Navy or not, or how many years he wanted to re-enlist for especially without having confirmation of his orders. AO2 Washington along with everyone else on-board HST was supposed to turn in his re-enlistment papers NLT 26 May and regrettably he held up to his re-enlistment papers until May 29th missing the 35 day window from HST to BUPERS. HST CCC gave all Sailors from (20 - 26 May) to decide whether they wanted to take advantage of this tax free re-enlistment opportunity or not. After May 26th, everyone
who did not submit his/her re-enlistment papers or communicate his/her informal decision to the CCC via email was going to be outside the tax free zone during the month of June making him/her ineligible for tax free money. AO2 Washington falls in this category. Crunching some numbers for AO2 Washington, I realized that he is going to miss out of $3,750 between re-enlisting on his anniversary (January 2019) and re-enlisting in the tax free zone during the month of June. Since AO2 Washington (1st Termer), made the innocent mistake and I hate for him to miss out from receiving additional money. I feel compelled to inform you of this issue affecting one of our troops. SOLUTION: According to the CCC, there is only one way for me to help AO2 Washington re-enlist in the tax free zone and take advantage of the SRB tax free money and that is for me to take the blame for misplacing his paperwork. I have a hard time taking the blame here, but at the end it is about correcting the mistake AO2 Washington made and to demonstrate this Sailor that we take care of our own. That said, it means that I will have to draft and submit a memo for your signature (from HST CO) - (to OPNAV N13) saying something like this "The SRB request of AO2 Washington was not submitted due to the request being misplaced in the departmental routing process." Then, your letter has to be endorsed by RDML Black to (OPNAV N13). I have attached what these painful letters should say. Sir, I hate to bring this issue to your attention, but I also know how much you care about our Sailors for me not to bring it up, especially when I have witnessed day in and day out your selfless act of kindness and generosity towards our Sailors. I am standing by for any question(s) you may have and to support any decision you make here.
The 23rd RCT received the mission to defend Chipyong-Ni in an attempt to bait the CCF to attack with a large force that could be defeated, but the RCT was at 70% strength following the battle at Twin Tunnels (some units were at 60%). The RCT received intelligence reports of multiple CCF Divisions marching towards Chipyong-Ni. COL Freeman requested the RCT be allowed to pull back 15 miles to prevent encirclement and was approved by MG Almond, but was overturned by LTG Ridgway. LTG Ridgway, the newly assigned Eighth Army Commander, did not allow retreat and always wanted to make contact with the enemy. He relieved his G-3 on the spot for giving him retreat contingency plans.
March 30, 1981 was a peaceful day. President Ronald Reagan was walking outside enjoying the fresh air when suddenly shots were fired. Six shots were fired in total, but only one shot hit Reagan due to a bullet that ricocheted. Luckily, Reagan was hit in the abdomen; therefore, he survived. The “mastermind” behind the attempted assassination was a man named John Hinckley. Hinckley believed by going through with this assassination it would be a romantic scenario for himself to confess his undying love for the actress Jodie Foster. Before long it was time for the Hinckley trial and after hearing his side of the story, the jury came to the conclusion that he was crazy. Hinckley was later found not guilty by reason of insanity and admitted to
There is no dispute that Mr.Nanokeesic showed an attempt to prevent the police from finding the weapon, when he ran from the police and discarded his backpack. The backpack was found by the police and searched, without a warrant.
Adair v. U.S. and Coppage v. Kansas became two defining cases in the Lochner era, a period defined after the Supreme Court’s decision in Lochner v New York, where the court adopted a broad understanding of the due process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment. In these cases the court used the substantive due process principle to determine whether a state statute or state’s policing power violated an individual’s freedom of contract. To gain a better understanding of the court’s reasoning it is essential to understand what they disregarded and how the rulings relate to the rulings in Plessy v. Ferguson, Lochner v. New York and Muller v. Oregon.
General education high school teacher, Michael Withers, failed to comply with his student’s Individual Education Plan (IEP). D.D. Doe’s IEP required tests to be read orally. Despite knowledge of this IEP and being instructed to follow the IEP by the superintendent, school principal, special education director, and special education teacher, Withers still refused to make the accommodations for D.D.’s handicapping condition. As a result, D.D. failed the history class. His parents filed charges against Withers, arguing that D.D was not afforded the right to a Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) promised to all students by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). They also filed a claim for injuctive relief against the Taylor County Board of Education to enforce the laws that protect handicapped students.
In Tim Seibles' poem, The Case, he reviews the problematic situations of how white people are naturally born with an unfair privilege. Throughout the poem, he goes into detail about how colored people become uncomfortable when they realize that their skin color is different. Not only does it affect them in an everyday aspect, but also in emotional ways as well. He starts off with stating how white people are beautiful and continues on with how people enjoy their presence. Then he transitions into how people of color actually feel when they encounter a white person. After, he ends with the accusation of the white people in today's world that are still racist and hateful towards people of color.
The Dread Scott decision exacerbated the debate over slavery by declaring that blacks cannot be citizens and that Congress does not have the power to prohibit slavery in the territories, which further divided the North and the South. The decision also deeply affected politics, and was one of the causes of the Civil War.
The question of quitting rings loudly in my mind. The year is 1777-1778 at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania in the middle of the deadly winter. Many men are dying because of diseases, the climate, and even starvation. I know what I need to do, nobody said it would be easy, I need to re-enlist. General George Washington is asking all of the men that same question: Would you re-enlist?, and I can’t believe that some of them will not even consider it. Why would you quit when you still have so much to fight for? My country deserves their freedom, and why would I quit when I’m still healthy? After all, George Washington is a great leader, and is an agreeable man, he would fight with us to the very end.
Dred Scott v. Stanford was the most fundamental case in American history dealing with the rights of African Americans. This case tested the Missouri Compromise and challenged the issues of slavery and national citizenship. Dred Scott was a slave owned by Dr. John Emerson, who constantly traveled in and out of free and slave states with Scott. Originally Emerson had Scott in Missouri, a slave state, and then moved over to Illinois, a free state, and lastly to Wisconsin territory, also free. While in the Wisconsin territory, Scott married and had two daughters, which was unique due to the fact that slaves in the south were prohibited from being married legally, further validating Scott's implicit freedom. Eventually Emerson moves Scott and his
A group of investors (Arundel group) is looking into the idea of purchasing the sequel rights associated with films produced by one or more major movie studios. Movie rights are to be purchased prior to films being made. Arundel wants to come up with a decision to either purchase all the sequel rights for a studio's entire production during a specified period of time or purchase a specified number of major films. Arundel's profitability is dependent upon the price it pays for a portfolio of sequel rights. Our analysis of Arundel's proposal includes a net present value calculation of each movie production company. In order to decide whether Arundel can make money buying movie sequel rights depends on whether the net present value of the production company's movies is higher than the estimated 2M per film required to purchase the rights.
While the commission has significant discretion to form sentencing guidelines, the Act provides for more than just an “intelligible principle” or minimal standards. Congress is not restricted to the amount of its delegative abilities.
Defendants who want to die, or “volunteers”, as they are frequently named, pose unique difficulties for the criminal justice system. The first person put to death in the post Furman era, Gary Gilmore, was a volunteer. At Gilmore’s trial, adversary proceeding were conducted in both the guilt and punishment stages. At the appellate level, however, Gilmore insisted that he did not want to appeal to the Utah Supreme Court and desired to be put to death instantly. Many other volunteers have followed this since Gilmore’s death was carried out. Some have attempted to forgo court procedures at the appellate court level, like
This is a petition for post-conviction relief filed by Petitioner, Mr. Douglas W. Curtis (“Petitioner”), on January 24, 2018, and opposed by Respondent, the State of Tennessee (“the State”). The Court heard the Petition on May 22, 2018, taking the matter under advisement. Mr. Curtis alleges that he received ineffective assistance of counsel in his trial and is, accordingly, entitled to post-conviction relief.
The petition charged McClellan with incompetence, as evidenced by the failure of his campaigns and their heavy losses, “And also because by recent disobedience to superior orders and inactivity he has twice imperiled the army commanded by General Pope, and while he continues to command will daily hazard the f...
Following my latest installment which ranked the top 11 players on the Notre Dame defense, the response was near unanimous: the defense is in big trouble. Writing it I hadn't quite thought of it that way, it was more about the process of selecting who Notre Dame's best players were on that side of the ball; the overall implications to the defense weren't really considered. But, when person after person responded the same way, I went back and looked at the list a whole and thought, "yikes, this does look a little scary."