Renee Thrulow /Ms Cox Letter Research letter

Renee Thrulow /Ms Cox Letter Research letter

Subj: Fwd: Feres Doctrine Research and Questions
Date: 4/11/2004 7:50:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: Srthurlow
To: Pdsmscox
Cc: VOICEFORVETERANS

Dear Ms Cox,
Thank you for choosing to do your paper on a VERY important topic. The more people who are aware of this horrific dortrine and questioning the legitimacy of it--the better chance, we as a nation, have of abolishing the doctrine. This doctrine allows Gross negligence and Criminal abuses to go on in the military against our loved ones and NO one to be held accountable.

That is what we are about. Checks and balances and accountability MUST have a place in the military/government system. Without it "we the people" means absolutely nothing.

Verpa's position is that we fight to abolish the law that allows many abuses that happen incident to service while NOT in a combat situation. The abuses listed by John McCarthy, Chairman of the Board for Verpa, was spelled out VERY thoroughly. Meaning the list is long and these abuses have been going on forever with NO accountabilty for the people who have abused their positions. Mr McCarthy spelled everything out very well.

Have you read all of the different cases on the www.verpa.org website? There is much information there to help you (in case you did not read all of the way through). Please sign the petition. That is just one step in helping the son you love.

My son died in the USMC boot camp. We (VERPA) all have different stories. Mine would be the one to relate to you, mother to mother, do not pass up an opportune time to help keep him as safe as possible. Pass the VERPA website to everyone you know and have them sign it too. It is the best gift you can give to your son and any future generations of yours that may serve this Country one day.

Thank your son for his service. It is very much appreciated.

Good Luck with your paper,
Renee Thurlow
PR Coordinator/Verpa
www.verpa.org
Founder/The Justin Haase Foundation
www.justinhaasefoundation.com
*****sorry for the first "unfinished" email. I hit a wrong button and it sent before I finished it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subj: Re: Feres Doctrine Research and Questions
Date: 4/11/2004 3:01:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time
From: "John McCarthy" <jmac1369@earthlink.net>
To: <Pdsmscox@aol.com>
Cc: "jeff trueman" <verpaphila1@aol.com>, <Verpalegislative@aol.com>,"Susan j Bauer" <gr8gazoo@comcast.net>,"mark zeller" <dcat229@aol.com>, <srthurlow@aol.com>,<voICEFORVETERANS@aol.com>, <wllmMrylaw@aol.com>

Dear Ms. Cox,

First, Thank you for contacting VERPA.

The Feres Doctrine came into existence as a result of a law suit filed by the parents of a man who was killed in a barracks fire in New Jersey in the late forties. The suit was based upon negligence.

The author of the Feres Doctrine was a Supreme Court Justice who was appointed as the Chief Judge at the Nuremberg Trials. For someone who had first hand knowledge of the crimes against humanity by the German's in WWII, it seems ironic that this person would create law that stripped every American Veteran of the right to seek redress for ANY grievance, "incidental to service". Under Feres, a law no one is advised of at time of enlistment, a service member dons his countries uniform to kill or be killed or wounded in combat to protect the very Constitution of The United States while giving up his/her Right under the First Amendment to seek redress for ANY reason other than death or wounds suffered as a result of combat.

The Government has hid behind the umbrella of Feres to deny ANY legal action in ANY court of law in the land for ANY abuse suffered "incidental to service".

Current Supreme Court Justices had opined that Feres is "bad law", and that Congress has the ability to abolish it.

VERPA has prepared information for a Bill to be presented to the Senate Judiciary in the near future for the abolition of Feres. We intend to present and speak on a number of cases compiled over the fifty four year abuse of Feres.

VERPA's position is that negligence, intentional and planned abuses should not be applicable to Feres. We do not seek to abolish Feres with respect to wounds or death resulting from combat. The standards of negligence and intentional abuse should be the same as the standard in civilian courts. Decisions by a jury, without command influence, is the standard we fight and die for.

We are concerned with medical malpractice, negligence, intentional abuses such as medical, nuclear, biological experimentation, murder, rape, assault, conspiracy to obstruct justice, witness tampering, witness intimidation, illegal and unjust prosecution, unjust conviction, false imprisonment, withholding of exculpatory evidence, perjury, and unjust administrative action designed to slander and libel veterans and violations of attorney client relationships.

When we acquired the soldier, we did not lose a citizen.

I am sure other members of VERPA will offer additional information.

Best regards,

John McCarthy
Chairman of The Board of VERPA
Veterans Equal Rights Protection Advocacy
www.verpa.org
Blog: http://www.jenmartinez.com/vetsturn
----- Original Message -----
From: Pdsmscox@aol.com
To: jmac1369@earthlink.com ; BarbCrag@aol.com ; VOICEFORVETERANS@aol.com ; DCAT229@aol.com ; gr8gazoo@comcast.net ; WllmMrylaw@aol.com ; STAR2012@aol.com ; Srthurlow@aol.com ; Verpaphila1@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, April 11, 2004 9:19 AM
Subject: Feres Doctrine Research and Questions

Dear VERPA Board Members and Officers,

I am a paralegal student at Milwaukee Area Technical College and also the mother of a Marine. For my class in Interviewing and Investigation, our final project is to write a research and investigative paper on any topic of law which interests us. I chose to research the Feres Doctrine and present a case for abolishing this rule of law.

I have collected a good amount of research, but your views would add tremendous credibility to my case. If you would be so kind as to answer a few questions, I would appreciate it as it would help me to deal with some dilemmas I am having in presenting my issue.

In addressing the issue, I must also look at the other side of the question. This is where I need to define the limits of citizens to sue the government. Specifically, where does the slippery slope begin and end? When do we open the door for suits by those killed in combat in an unpopular war? How do we define intentional inflictment? What standard of negligence to we use to determine this standard? How is combat defined?

Having a son in the Marines, this is not just a college project for me. I wholeheartedly believe in your mission. It has always seemed wrong to me that there is no redress for military members and their families in cases where the wrongs committed by the military are unmistakably clear and would be adjudicated fairly had they been perpetrated by a civilian agency.

Once again, I know that this is asking a lot of a group of very busy people, but any information you can provide to me would be helpful in presenting my case.

Thank you,

Patricia Cox