Civilian Court-Martial Lawyers: Senior Military Officer and Commander Represented by Attorney Richard V. Stevens Cleared After Investigation

Military Defense Lawyer (Former JAG Attorney) News:

Recently, a senior retirement eligible military officer and commander at the level of Army Brigade, Marine Division, Air Force Wing, Navy Wing/Squadron/Task Group (for anonymity protection) was cleared after an investigation and will retain his command and continue to retirement.  The client was represented and defended by military law attorney Richard V. Stevens (Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.).

The officer client was accused of various alleged wrongs by a senior military member subordinate to the commander.  During the investigation process, two rebuttals were submitted.  Ultimately, after the investigation was complete and considered by command, the client was cleared and will retain his command.

Due to the nature of adverse administrative actions in the military, no further details about this case can be released.  While the defense was successful in this case, it is important to understand that every case has different facts, and success in some previous case(s) does not guarantee success in any particular future case.  No military lawyer or civilian defense lawyer, including those who specialize in military law, can guarantee the outcome of any military case. 

For more information on military investigations and the military justice system, please see our other blog posts and http://militaryadvocate.com/practice-areas/inspector-general-complaints-and-investigations/. 

Thank you. 

By: Attorney Richard V. Stevens
Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.
http://www.militaryadvocate.com

Blog postscript: Attorney Frank J. Spinner and I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) are former active duty military lawyers (JAG). Our perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon our experience as military defense lawyers and as civilian criminal defense lawyers practicing exclusively in the area of military law and military justice. This blog addresses issues in military law, military justice, military discipline, military defense, court-martial practice, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and other military and/or legal topics. Nothing posted in this blog should be substituted for legal advice in any particular case. If you seek legal advice for a particular case, please contact The Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens and The Law Office of Frank J. Spinner for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in Colorado Springs, Colorado and Northern Florida, but the military defense representation is worldwide – when necessary, the attorneys travel to wherever the client is stationed.

NAVY ADMIRAL (Ret.) WILLIAM McRAVEN AND REP. RYAN ZINKE EXPRESS PUBLIC SUPPORT FOR CLIENT - REAR ADMIRAL BRIAN LOSEY - AND THE PUBLIC DEBATE FINALLY BECOMES MORE BALANCED

As a former active duty military JAG officer and civilian defense attorney who exclusively handles military cases, I have had the great fortune to interact with some of the most remarkable military members who are not only deeply dedicated to our country, but who have served, and sacrificed for, our country with incredible distinction and honor.  One such individual is my client Navy SEAL Rear Admiral Brian Losey, who is about to complete his tour as Commander of the Naval Special Warfare Command (NSW, under which are the Navy SEALs).

[Official Biography:  http://www.navy.mil/navydata/bios/navybio.asp?bioID=532]

Any words I choose will likely fail to adequately capture the service of RDML Losey over the decades, and other current and former military members are coming forward to publicly rebut the recent negative public narrative about RDML Losey.  One of those individuals is Admiral (Ret.) William McRaven.  He, of course, is another of those remarkable military members, and his public support of RDML Losey is just one more example not only of what an exceptional officer and leader Admiral McRaven is/was, but how strong and independent military officers don’t blindly accept what is politically expedient.

First, some background and an explanation.  Normally, because this was an administrative matter, the details would not be publicly discussed.  However, because of the public statements and misinformation about it, particularly by Congress and some of the complainants in the case, I feel compelled to correct the public record.  

RDML Losey received the assignment promotion to NSW Commander at Naval Base Coronado after the saga of the case I represented him in, which included unjustified reprisal allegations and a slanted DoD IG investigation out of his previous command in SOFAFRICA.  The case arose after a baseless and anonymous complaint was made regarding the purchase of a plane ticket for RDML Losey’s daughter. 

That original anonymous IG complaint was immediately discredited, as the evidence clearly showed the ticket was privately purchased.  Trivial case closed.  The IG considers such an allegation, however, to be a “protected communication.”  And, commanders are prohibited from reprising against someone who they "suspect" made a “protected communication,” no matter how spurious the “protected communication” was.  As such, in order for there to be reprisal, there has to be a “protected communication” and the commander must “suspect” the "victim" of the alleged reprisal made that protected communication.  That is a very important predicate issue in this case.    

Although there was a limited population of individuals who would have known of his daughter's travel, that simply narrowed down who might have made the complaint. But the law of mathematical averages about "could haves and maybes" does not equate to the legal term of "suspecting" a particular individual.  

RDML Losey did not "suspect" any of the individual “whistleblowers” (as they’re being called in various press stories and Congress) who made the baseless protected communication.  These individuals were a clique of unit members who were disgruntled over the performance expectations and scrutiny of the new commander. Whoever made the original anonymous complaint (protected communication) had to be sufficiently ignorant to make not only a patently false allegation, but one so quickly and easily refuted by simple proof of purchase. Our best guess was it was someone other than those in the clique of complainants in this case and, according to reporting, it apparently was someone other than those in the clique of complainants in this case.  

Because the information available to RDML Losey did not rise to the level of "suspecting" any of the reprisal complainants of having made the ridiculous protected communication, the reprisal allegations should have been unfounded from the beginning.  But, the IG had their own interpretations, and they ignored the credibility and motive issues of the complainants.  Then, when RDML Losey took legitimate actions as commander to address performance and conduct issues of those within the clique of complainants, those actions were incorrectly construed by the IG as reprisal. 

The Navy did not blindly accept the conclusions of the DoD IG’s investigators, however, and justifiably assigned RDML Losey to his next important command of NSW at Coronado, and he was nominated for his second star.  For this, the Navy received unfair public criticism, to include by politicians who seem to take sport in publicly condemning any military commander or action they don’t agree with or that doesn’t serve their political agenda (see, for example, USAF Lt Generals Susan Helms and Craig Franklin).  The political noise then drowns out the truth.  Ultimately, the politics of RDML Losey’s case have resulted in his promotion to a second star being lost because politicians in Congress have promised not to confirm his nomination.     

As RDML Losey’s service as NSW Commander comes to a close, his case remains a topic of political rancor…but a more balanced public debate is finally surfacing.  Here is a link to an earlier Stars and Stripes article on the case:

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/admiral-punished-suspected-whistleblowers-is-still-poised-for-promotion-1.374334

In that article, they at least note that my rebuttal to the DoD IG “accused the inspector general of ‘investigative improprieties’ and being ‘fatally tainted by bias.’”

In response to a recent press inquiry, I provided the following on-the-record statement about RDML Losey and his case:

“RDML Losey has had a long and distinguished military career marked by his dedication to his units and their missions. As a commander, RDML Losey has always taken seriously his duties and responsibilities to do just that – command. In that vein, the actions at issue that RDML Losey took as a commander were based on his duty as a commander to hold members of that command accountable for their performance and conduct.

I will not go into specifics regarding the situation and I cannot speak to what actions the Navy has taken in response to this case, or their reasoning. However, in response to the slanted political narrative in this case, I will say the following…

I took strong issue in this case with the manner in which the IG investigations were conducted, to include my belief that there was a predetermined outcome that information was being gathered and/or interpreted to support. I also took issue with the motives and credibility issues of those witnesses I believed to be involved in making these claims. I maintain my belief that their baseless claims were made to shield themselves from accountability for their performance and conduct issues, and to attack a commander who was holding them accountable.

Politicians sometimes make highly charged agenda-driven statements that are based on incomplete or inaccurate information, or slanted interpretations that fit a certain narrative. For example, we see such slanted and inaccurate political statements about sexual assault allegations in the military justice system, and the impact of these political statements is literally destroying the military system as a system of justice and fairness.

Similarly, in RDML Losey’s case, there is a slanted and inaccurate political narrative that seems to ignore the facts and common sense interpretations. This includes ignoring the credibility and motive issues of those making claims against RDML Losey, and ignoring RDML Losey’s duty to command the previous unit at issue.”

Admiral McRaven’s defense and support of RDML Losey has been unwavering and powerful. His comments appear, for example, in the following articles:

http://www.tbo.com/list/news-opinion-commentary/william-mcraven-a-warriors-career-sacrificed-for-politics-20160424/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/04/25/commander-of-bin-laden-raid-blasts-senate-for-disrespecting-military-leaders/


In discussing political attacks on the military, Admiral McRaven first described RDML Losey, in part, as follows:

“…I have known Losey for more than 30 years. He is without a doubt one of the finest officers with whom I have ever served. Over the past 15 years no officer I know in the SEAL Teams has given more to this country than Brian. None. As a young officer he was constantly deployed away from his family. After 9/11, he was sent to Afghanistan in the early days to help fight the Taliban. From there, Losey participated in the final march to Baghdad and then stayed in country as a SEAL Task Unit Commander. Afterward he served as the deputy and then the commanding officer of SEAL Team Six during more tough fighting in Afghanistan.

Later he was posted to the White House in the Office of Combating Terrorism. He made rear admiral in 2009 while at the White House. He was subsequently sent back overseas to Djibouti, Africa, to do a 15-month month isolated tour as the commander of all U.S. forces in the Horn of Africa. As a result of that successful tour, he was given command of Special Operations Command, Africa (SOCAFRICA)…”

Later, Admiral McRaven makes the following crucial observation:

“…Although we in the military understand the absolute necessity to serve and respect our civilian leaders — and every good leader understands and appreciates the value of anonymous complaints to ferret out bad leadership — we also need civilians to understand that a strong military, particularly an all-volunteer one, needs the support of our civilian leaders, not the constant refrain of disrespect that seems so common in today’s political narrative.

Last month, after the decision to rescind Rear Adm. Brian Losey’s promotion recommendation became public, Losey addressed his junior officers. Instead of being angry and bitter over the outcome, Losey had nothing but praise for the Navy and the nation for which he has served so long. He encouraged the young officers not to get discouraged about the ruling against him, but to recognize that this is the greatest military in the world and we are fortunate to be part of it.

I would echo Losey’s sentiments. But to keep this the greatest military in the world, to preserve the strong civilian-military relations we have so long enjoyed, we must recognize that respect works both ways. Every time an individual lawmaker’s political agenda undermines the integrity of the men and women in the military, we weaken the fabric of the uniform…”

Now, an article has been published by Kim Dozier with The Daily Beast, that sheds more public light on the case, and provides more balanced details:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/05/13/inside-the-takedown-of-the-top-navy-seal.html

The Daily Beast details include describing some of the complainants’ credibility and performance issues. These were issues RDML Losey was attempting to address in SOFAFRICA, but which the IG incorrectly deemed reprisal – in what largely seemed like an attempt by the DoD IG to hang another high ranking trophy head on their wall. When Vice Chief of the Navy, Admiral Michelle Howard, reviewed the case, she apparently found that RDML Losey had taken appropriate action against the complainants. Her opinion is one of many that is ignored in the agenda-driven vitriol of politicians.

Finally, in rebuttal to the slanted political narrative that existed to date, Montana Congressman and retired 23-year U.S. Navy SEAL Commander Ryan Zinke defended RDML Losey on the floor of the House today:

Video of Rep. Zinke’s speech: https://youtu.be/nFP_UJ3oB7o

TRANSCRIPT OF REP. ZINKE’S SPEECH

I rise today in support of Admiral Brian Losey, the current Commander of Special Warfare Command, our nation's top U.S. SEAL. He's entrusted with the honor of commanding all SEALs, all special boat units, and all support staff across this great country and across many theaters.

I’ve had the privilege of serving with Brian Losey at SEAL Team Six, Red Team. I can tell you, Brian is an outstanding officer, but it's the obligation of every officer to take action when he sees wrong; and Brian Losey did just that. He saw a problem and took action. He took decisive action because he knew the actions of others around him were wrong. Once again an entrusted, entrenched bureaucracy was allowed to hide behind threats, hide behind whistleblower, hide behind rules that were intended to protect command and not to erode it.

And yet those accusations discredited a great officer and the head of the United States Navy SEALs. I understand these [whistleblower] protections are important and they are necessary. But we cannot allow such protections to go against accountability and against the sanctity of command. In this case, the Navy reviewed the investigation on Admiral Brian Losey. They found him to be innocent and wrongly accused. I’ve seen the evidence and went through line by line. I fully support the Navy's conclusion and believe they were properly reviewed in this case. The DoD had different conclusions, and I believe those DoD conclusions from the IG are flawed and are cherry-picked.

Admiral Losey is highly regarded by his subordinates of all Special Navy Warfare community, and all SEALs who have served with him and under his command. This includes the Navy SEAL standing before you. I’ve known this man and his family for 30 years. Let me just give you a snapshot of Admiral Losey’s leadership, under his command of Navy Special Warfare.

The SEALs and those under his command have:

· Executed 654 total missions, have killed 461 high-value targets. every one of those targets, if given a chance, would do grievous harm to our nation.

· Have captured 60

· Wounded 32

· Rescued an American hostage

· Deployed an average of 250 days of a year

In 2015 alone in Iraq, Navy Special Warfare and its components were responsible for killing or capturing over 3,000 enemy combatants.

Admiral Losey personally deployed to Operation Inherent Resolve, Operation Enduring Freedom, and the 30 countries -- and deployed to 30 countries. Forces under his command are deployed to 70 countries across this great globe. They advance security capability, train over 6,000 of our allies.

Mr. Speaker, America, our men, women, and children, both at home and abroad, are able to sleep at night due to the leadership of Admiral Losey and those forces he commands. Admiral Brian Losey, I thank you for your dedication to command. I thank you for all you have done for the community, for the United States Navy, and for our grateful nation.”

I wholeheartedly second the statements of Rep. Zinke and Admiral McRaven. Thank you, RDML Brian Losey, for your exceptional service to, and sacrifice for, our country over several decades. Thank you Admiral McRaven and Rep. Zinke for your exceptional military and public service and for your public support of RDML Losey.

The shame of it all is not simply that an extraordinary Navy officer’s promotion has been lost and his reputation has been unjustly attacked, but that politicians have once again damaged the military with statements and actions that were, at best, ill-informed/considered and, at worst, intentionally slanted and agenda-driven.

By: Attorney Richard V. Stevens

Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.
http://www.militaryadvocate.com

Blog postscript: Attorney Frank J. Spinner and I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) are former active duty military lawyers (JAG). Our perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon our experience as military defense lawyers and as civilian criminal defense lawyers practicing exclusively in the area of military law and military justice. This blog addresses issues in military law, military justice, military discipline, military defense, court-martial practice, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and other military and/or legal topics. Nothing posted in this blog should be substituted for legal advice in any particular case. If you seek legal advice for a particular case, please contact The Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens and The Law Office of Frank J. Spinner for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in Northern Florida (Pensacola, Ft Walton, Destin, Eglin AFB, Hurlburt Field, Duke Field, Panama City, Tyndall AFB areas) and Colorado Springs, Colorado (FT Carson, Peterson AFB, Air Force Academy, Schriever AFB, Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station, Buckley AFB areas), but our military defense law practices are worldwide – we travel to wherever our clients are stationed or serving and need us.

CHILLING Reminder! – Must See “Fantastic Lies” 30 for 30 on ESPN

Last night I watched the ESPN 30 for 30 program “Fantastic Lies” about the impact of a false rape allegation on three innocent young men and their families, the Duke Lacrosse team, the Duke University campus, the Durham community, and the criminal justice system.  In a word, it was chilling and it’s a must see.  

It was not just chilling to consider it in isolation – all the injustices in that particular case.  It was chilling to be reminded of the case and to consider what happened in that Duke case when looking at the current military justice system, and how rape and sexual assault allegations are being handled in the military justice system.

One of the quotes from last night’s program that was particularly impactful when considering the parallels, was that the rape claim in the Duke case “Fed a narrative for people predisposed to believe that narrative.”

What narratives are we seeing from politicians, military leaders, advocates, the press, and the public when it comes to rape and sexual assault (UCMJ Article 120) allegations in the military justice system today?

“If a rape or sexual assault allegation has been made, it must be believed.”

“Investigating an alleged victim or her story re-victimizes her and should be drastically curtailed.”

“Confronting and defending against an alleged victim and her story re-victimizes her and the defense’s opportunity to do so should be severely limited.” 

These are the false and dangerous narratives that have motived terrible changes to the military justice system and the drum beat for predetermined outcomes in these military cases is as loud as the crowds that gathered in Durham to call for the heads of the innocent young men who were falsely accused of rape in that Duke Lacrosse case. 

This is not the first time I have posted about the Duke Lacrosse case; you can see some of my other posts at:

http://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2007/04/rape-and-sexual-assault-allegations-in.html

http://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2007/04/how-can-you-defend-them-duke-lacrosse.html

http://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2007/04/district-attorney-in-duke-university.html

http://militaryadvocate.blogspot.com/2007/06/cost-of-overzealous-prosecution.html

How the 30 for 30 presented the case just brought it all back, particularly how the public, the press, and the prosecutor in that Duke Lacrosse case got swept up in the narrative that the crime must have happened and guilt must be presumed and harshly punished. 

When the Duke Lacrosse case was over, the State Attorney General declared the young men to be innocent.  At least one reporter publicly apologized for her newspaper articles that condemned the young men and the lacrosse team.  The prosecutor was jailed and disbarred.  Lawsuits by the falsely accused young men were settled.  The complainant is now in prison for having murdered her boyfriend. 

Unfortunately, the lessons of the rush to convict these innocent young men in the court of public opinion and the court of law were either forgotten or ignored by all of those who now attack the military justice system and call for changes detrimental to the accused’s right to defend himself against military rape and sexual assault claims. 

This ESPN 30 for 30 comes on the heels of some very interesting military appellate cases that tell stories with disturbing parallels to the Duke case.  Take for example the Air Force case of United States v. Airman Basic Jane M. Neubauer.  The appellate opinion in that case appears here:

http://afcca.law.af.mil/content/afcca_opinions/cp/neubauer-s32308.u.pdf

Airman Neubauer was a troubled young female airman who was working as a confidential informant for the Air Force OSI, while herself engaging in various misconduct.  Ultimately, she made a false sexual assault claim which she has now pled guilty to and admitted, under oath, in court, was UNTRUE. 

Before finally pleading guilty and admitting her sexual assault claims were false, however, a long story ran in the Daily Beast in which Neubauer was described as a sexual assault victim and the article states that her case “sheds light” on a “disturbing trend” that the “Pentagon would rather keep quiet”…“a pattern of sexual assaults that lead to retaliation against the victim.”  Here is their story which was written and published before Neubauer’s admission to her own “Fantastic Lies:”

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/03/04/she-says-she-was-raped-working-undercover-as-an-air-force-informant.html

As we consider the actions of the Durham DA in the Duke case, and how he was clearly swept up in the push to convict those innocent lacrosse players, we can also look at recent military cases such as United States v. Stellato and United States v. Bowser, which are just two examples of alleged sexual assault cases in the military in which the prosecutors seemed to get swept up in the drum beat to convict at all costs. 

Here are discussions of those cases with embedded links to the relevant appellate opinions:

http://www.caaflog.com/2015/08/21/opinion-analysis-finding-deeply-troubling-conduct-by-trial-counsel-caaf-affirms-dismissal-with-prejudice-in-united-states-v-stellato-no-15-0315ar/

http://www.caaflog.com/2015/03/26/caaf-affirms-dismissal-with-prejudice-in-bowser/

http://www.caaflog.com/2014/10/07/afcca-denies-government-appeal-of-the-dismissal-of-rape-charges-after-the-government-refused-to-produce-witness-notes/

Unfortunately, military cases such as Neubauer, Stellato, and Bowser don’t get mentioned by the politicians who seek military justice reform that disadvantages military members accused of these offenses.  Cases such as these don’t get widespread press or public interest either.  Why?  Because they don’t fit the narratives described above. 

It has almost become a national pastime to rush to judge and convict rather than investigating, asking questions, and honoring concepts such as the presumption of innocence, the right to due process, the right to present a defense case, the right to a fair trial, the right to exculpatory evidence, the right to confront your accuser…

I encourage everyone to watch the ESPN 30 for 30 “Fantastic Lies” and don’t just confine your outrage to that particular case, direct your outrage also toward the narratives and the political movements that fan the flames that burn those like the innocent Duke Lacrosse players.

For more information about the military justice system, particularly cases alleging rape and/or sexual assault in violation of UCMJ Article 120, type “rape” or “sexual assault” into the search bar above the blog posts.  Also, see:

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in.  Just call us.

Thank you.    

By: Attorney Richard V. Stevens
Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.
http://www.militaryadvocate.com

Blog postscript: Attorney Frank J. Spinner and I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) are former active duty military lawyers (JAG). Our perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon our experience as military defense lawyers and as civilian criminal defense lawyers practicing exclusively in the area of military law and military justice. This blog addresses issues in military law, military justice, military discipline, military defense, court-martial practice, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and other military and/or legal topics. Nothing posted in this blog should be substituted for legal advice in any particular case. If you seek legal advice for a particular case, please contact The Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens and The Law Office of Frank J. Spinner for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in Northern Florida (Pensacola, Ft Walton, Destin, Eglin AFB, Hurlburt Field, Duke Field, Panama City, Tyndall AFB areas) and Colorado Springs, Colorado (FT Carson, Peterson AFB, Air Force Academy, Schriever AFB, Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station, Buckley AFB areas), but our military defense law practices are worldwide – we travel to wherever our clients are stationed or serving and need us.

Convictions of the Innocent Reach All Time High - CNN

According to this CNN article, in 2015 there were 149 exonerations of innocent people convicted of crimes they didn't commit:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/03/us/exonerations-record-number/index.html  

Even more troubling is the conclusion of the report that these exonerations are just the cases that have been caught and corrected.  But that:

"By any reasonable accounting, there are tens of thousands of false convictions each year across the country, and many more that have accumulated over the decades"

When considering this report in the context of the recent outcome-seeking changes to the military justice system - in which politicians from both parties, and the President, have sacrificed the goal of fairness for improved prosecution statistics - you have to believe that innocent military members caught up in this system have been convicted, jailed, and had their futures ruined in the name of political correctness.  After all, who cares about fairness for an accused?  If an allegation has been made, it must be true...right? 

For more information about the military justice system, particularly cases alleging rape and/or sexual assault in violation of UCMJ Article 120, type “rape” or “sexual assault” into the search bar above the blog posts.  Also, see:

http://militaryadvocate.com/military-offenses/rape-sexual-assault-sodomy/

We offer free consultations for a case you may be involved in.  Just call us.

Thank you.    

By: Attorney Richard V. Stevens
Civilian criminal defense lawyer and military defense lawyer
Military Defense Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens, P.C.
http://www.militaryadvocate.com

Blog postscript: Attorney Frank J. Spinner and I (attorney Richard V. Stevens) are former active duty military lawyers (JAG). Our perspectives and advice, therefore, are based upon our experience as military defense lawyers and as civilian criminal defense lawyers practicing exclusively in the area of military law and military justice. This blog addresses issues in military law, military justice, military discipline, military defense, court-martial practice, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and other military and/or legal topics. Nothing posted in this blog should be substituted for legal advice in any particular case. If you seek legal advice for a particular case, please contact The Law Offices of Richard V. Stevens and The Law Office of Frank J. Spinner for a free consultation. These military defense law offices are located in Northern Florida (Pensacola, Ft Walton, Destin, Eglin AFB, Hurlburt Field, Duke Field, Panama City, Tyndall AFB areas) and Colorado Springs, Colorado (FT Carson, Peterson AFB, Air Force Academy, Schriever AFB, Cheyenne Mountain Air Force Station, Buckley AFB areas), but our military defense law practices are worldwide – we travel to wherever our clients are stationed or serving and need us.