Author: kincade

Kentucky v. Riccardo Vettraino

Posted on by kincade

Kentucky DPA approached me for a post-trial issue.   They needed a terminal ballistics expert and gunfight dynamics expert, and perhaps other skills.  The defendant, Mr. Ricardo Vettraino, a man of 1st generation Italian descent, from Detroit, Michigan; had been in Bowling Green, KY, seeking work as an electrician.  He was convicted and sentenced to life WPOP, for the alleged execution style murder of the trophy wife of a very prominent local building contractor/developer (and a very heavy contributor to police oriented benevolent funds and charities).

The record showed that the Prosecution’s case was mostly emotion and puffery; none of which was challenged by the original defense attorney.  It appeared that, when change of venue was denied, the defense attorney felt defeated and simply stumbled through the process.  Even worse, the original defense attorney did not secure the services of any sort of firearms expert.  The knucklehead thought he knew something about guns.

A hearing for a new trial had already been held before the trial judge, and I was summoned for a second hearing.  My prehearing work with the post-conviction appeals attorney at the DPA, Mr. Brian T. Ruff, gave him the “ammunition” to zero in on expanded and additional discovery.

I studied the drawings, evidence locations, bullet holes and all the other stuff in the incident scene drawings and evidence inventories.  As an expert in both gunfight dynamics and terminal ballistics, I told Brian that the only way this incident happened, was that two shooters were at the scene.  Vettraino’s weapon was a handgun in 9mm Luger.  As a firearms and ammunition design and manufacture expert; and based on my knowledge of the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturer’s Institute (SAAMI) standards, and the Commissione Internationale Permanente (CIP) standards, I told Brian that the other gun was a revolver in either .357 Magnum or .38 Special caliber.

The above standards set exactly the same rifling characteristics for those three calibers.  That means that the bore diameter, groove diameter, number of grooves, width of grooves, and twist are the same.  As an expert in ammunition manufacture, I knew that some ammunition factories used exactly the same bullets in the three different calibers of ammunition.  Therefore the bullets would not be distinguishable upon recovery.  Because only one manufacture of 9mm expended cartridge case had been recovered, that meant that the second handgun was a revolver, since the expended cartridge cases remain in a revolver until it is reloaded.

I briefed Bryan thoroughly on these issues and he strode into a deposition “loaded for bear”.   Lo and behold, as Bryan zeroed in on the state trooper first to arrive at the scene, the trooper admitted that there had been both a shotgun and a second handgun (a revolver in .38 Special caliber) at the shooting incident scene.  Both firearms were owned by the developer.  But his supervisor, who was the next to arrive on the scene, told him that those two guns were not important and to hide them.  The trooper complied with these orders.

Brian and I had worked before and Brian also knew my reputation from previous DPA cases.   Brian was not a table pounder; he was very sharp and very methodical.  He will run opposing counsel through with a verbal rapier before counsel knows what happened.

At the second hearing, the Prosecutor bitterly attacked me in every manner possible, even physically throwing a copy of my DD-214 Form at my face.  But he also showed his incredible ignorance of SAAMI and many other firearms issues.   With Brian’s adroit questioning, I was able to get the key defense points into the record.

First, more than one gun had been fired during the incident, thereby lending credence to the defendant’s claim that a gun had been pointed at him and he panicked, wildly returning fire.  Second,  there had not been a coup de grace shot fired as the deceased lay on the floor.  In fact, the autopsy showed that the trophy wife could have been, and most likely was, shot from two different directions, at the same time.  The Judge (who had helped “railroad” Vettraino before) began to soften as the hearing went on.  The hearing ended with decision pending.

The case went back and forth over some 12 months, complicated by politics (in Bowling Green, both the judges and the prosecutors were elected) and other issues.  Brian kept at it, flooding the Judge and prosecutor with Motions for hearings, exclusion of evidence, new trial, summary dismissal, vacation of conviction, and on, and on, and more.

The final was that Mr. Vettraino was transferred, for “humanitarian” reasons, to a prison in Michigan.  The authorities in Michigan immediately placed Vettraino on probation, plus probation credit for time already served.  Not a slam dunk, but at least Mr. Vettraino was free and able to rebuild something of his life.

I do not know the current whereabouts of Mr. Vettraino.

In 2016, Mr. Brian T. Ruff crossed over the river and now rests in the shade of the trees in Louisville.

Minnesota v. Melvin Holmes

Posted on by kincade

In this case, I was contacted by Mr. Luis Rangel Morales of the Neighborhood Justice Center, Inc. of St. Paul, MN.  He was in need of a Firearms Expert and an Ammunition Expert.

The State of Minnesota, using the IBIS system, was alleging that fired cartridge cases from a series of shooting incidents (over an 18 month period of time) were fired from the same handgun and that this linkage implicated Mr. Holmes as a murderer.

The homicide in question was interesting.  A young lady was “entertaining” an indeterminate, but substantial, number of “gentlemen” on a park bench at approximately 0200 one morning.  A fight broke out in the waiting line and a man was shot once in the chest.  This poor fellow ran some 100 yards and then collapsed.  Someone then stood over him and delivered a finishing shot to the brain.

By the time the police arrived, the “gentlemen” had dispersed and the police had only the deceased, two fired cartridge cases, and the young lady.  Under questioning, the young lady could not identify Mr. Holmes as being present at the “entertainment” venue.

DNA testing of the young lady, her clothing, and the park bench; identified Mr. Holmes, but also at least 11 other individual distinct males, plus some number of other nonspecific males.

The state claimed that the markings on the primers of the two recovered fired cartridge cases proved that they came from the same handgun.  And further, that this was the same handgun which had been fired in two other incidents, one of which had an eye witness who identified Mr. Holmes as being the shooter.  However, the handgun was never recovered.

To the cynical, it would appear that Mr. Holmes’s primary transgressions were that he was black, and that he had been disrespectful of police (including a pigs tattoo) in the past.

I examined some 300 pages of initial discovery produced by the State.  My first report discounted any actual link between the cartridge cases and the mystery handgun.

The State countered with a new examination of the cartridge cases by a new “scientist” with a slightly better CV.  My subsequent report conclusively stated that there was no actual link between the cartridge cases themselves and any alleged gun.  Further, I argued that the science and method of the State was so flawed as to render their reports useless.

Mr. Morales and Mr. Smith, lions in the defense, had been demanding an evidentiary hearing on the firearms evidence.  Using the time required for the “new” testing as an excuse, the

State successfully postponed the evidentiary hearing 3 times.  Finally, on the eve of the 4th hearing date, and after my second, subsequent report, the Judge verbally canceled the hearing and excluded all firearms and related evidence or testimony.

Faced with no eye witness, and only the laughable DNA “evidence”, the State dismissed all charges.

This case is very instructive in that Mr. Luis Rangel Morales and Mr. Colin Smith of the Justice Center did a superb job.  Not only from the legal standpoint but also in visiting Mr. Holmes during his long period of pre-trial confinement and keeping his morale up.  Hats off to the Justice Center.

Mr. Holmes walks free today, though he must always look over his shoulder as he knows that the State would love to pursue him again.

Mr. Smith now heads the Justice Center and Mr. Rangel Morales is still on staff.

Kentucky v. Jerry Wayne Dean

Posted on by kincade

The attorney for the Defendant, Mr. A. Douglas Reece, got my name on a referral from the KY – DPA.  He called, we talked a little, and he drove up to my factory in Bedford, KY: to discuss the case in more detail.  He brought the autopsy report and a few photographs.  This case needed a terminal ballistics expert along with expertise in firearms design, ammunition design and firearms manufacture.

The prosecution claimed that the murder weapon was a .30-06 hunting rifle owned by the defendant.  They also had possession of unwanted love and mash notes that the defendant (who was also the County Clerk) had sent to the deceased (a young and attractive female employee of the Clerk’s office).  Further, the defendant’s step son claimed to have seen the defendant disposing of rifle parts and a rifle stock.  The stock was recovered from a creek.

Mr. Reece’s theory was that the murder weapon was a pistol.  In reviewing documents, I showed Mr. Reece where his theory had deficiencies.  First, the autopsy report said that two vertebrae had been “liquified”.  A pistol does not have the kinetic energy to do this.

Second, the autopsy report said, and photographs clearly showed, that the bullet exit from the body of the deceased was perfectly oblong, even showing the spitzer shape of the bullet nose.  This bullet did not come from a pistol, it came from a rifle.  Military rifle ammunition in a .30-06 is still of US design and manufacture, and the bullets (as is the norm for Free World countries) are designed for stability in free flight.

As an expert in ammunition design, I theorized that the murder weapon was, indeed, a rifle but that it was Soviet or Russian.  The Soviet’s traditionally designed their bullets for their main battle rifle cartridge with a longitudinal imbalance so that they would have a greater percentage chance of “tumbling”, end over end, after entry into a human target.  The exit wound meant the bullet tumbled and that the bullet was a non-expanding, spitzer type, military bullet.

Mr. Reece agreed with my analysis and we began to form a great operational team.  I went to the State Police evidence room and examined what the prosecution claimed was the death bullet.  It was an expanded .30 caliber hunting bullet.  But there was zero human tissue trapped under the expansion petals.  The only trapping was bits of dry-wall.  This clearly was not the death bullet.  This conclusion being shown not only from the trapping, but from the fact that the exit wound showed an undeformed bullet.

We prepared for trial.  Luckily, I had the photography and machine shop skills to prepare visual aids.  I did a number of photographs and drawings, and a 10x size sample bullet.  In this way, I could educate the jury so that they could see the exterior ballistics and the terminal ballistics aspects of the case through my eyes.

The case had gained some notoriety and a national court TV film crew was present for the trial.  I was separated during the prosecution phase.  However, Mr. Reece ensured that I was kept informed of all testimony and exhibits of the prosecution’s case in chief.

As Mr. Reece was conducting his defense, the prosecution so bitterly objected to my appearance that the Judge sent the jury out and did voir dire himself.  I presented all of my testimony before the Judge, suffering violent interruption by the prosecution (the DA was very heavily politically invested in the case).

The Judge enumerated what specific parts of my testimony would be admissible before the jury.  The Judge then put in the record that of all the experts he had seen, in all disciplines, I was the best expert to ever appear before him.

When the jury came back in, Mr. Reece became a raging tyrannosaur in the defense.  He goaded the prosecution so severely (wonderfully ??) that they themselves brought in almost everything in my testimony that the Judge had been willing to exclude.  Mr. Reece brought in an exemplar rifle (in .264 Winchester caliber) and a tool kit.  As a firearms design expert, I was able to switch out, on the stand, parts between the exemplar rifle and the prosecution’s recovered stock from the alleged death rifle.  This demonstration destroyed the step son’s testimony, because the recovered stock could have come from literally millions of other Winchester Model 70 rifles.

Lo and behold, the prosecution, in a foolish attempt to discredit Mr. Reece and myself, belatedly disclosed a photograph of the gun rack of the deceased’s ex-boyfriend.  There, sitting in the rack, was a Moisin-Nagant M-1891 Russian rifle, chambered for the 7.62 x 54mm Russian Rimmed cartridge.  And the ammunition with it was exactly of the Soviet military type, which was designed for the bullet to tumble upon entry into a mammalian target.

Mr. Reece delivered a masterful closing.  In conference before instructions, the defendant, Mr. Dean, took the risk and decided that there would not be any lesser included offenses in the instructions; it would be 2nd degree murder or nothing.

After 54 minutes of deliberation, the jury returned a resounding “Not Guilty”.

Mr. Dean walked as a free man for years.  In 2013, demonstrating that small towns can breed everlasting feuds for revenge; Mr. Dean was found with a single oxycontin pill in his pocket, but without the prescription container.  Parole still hangs over his head.

Less than two years after the trial, the defense attorney, Mr. A. Douglas Reece was called home by the King.

Ammunition

Posted on by kincade

Ammunition Function

This closely parallels interior ballistics but expands upon that by including the condition of the cartridge case in obturating the propellant gases. and clearing the firearm in ejection; and the condition of the projectile in terms of such things as structural integrity, and sabot petal discard.

LTC Alphin has done some very important work in this area.  Among other things, this work focused on the differences in the A-131 and the A-129 call-out on 7.62x51mm NATO ammunition.  Some ICB (Idiot Civilian Bureaucrat) decided that some money could be saved by thinning out the cartridge case wall on the ammunition because the M-60 machine had a “soft” cycling stroke.  But the M-73 family of co-axial machine guns for the M-60 tank family had a more abrupt cycle and the ammunition failures damaged guns and made them useless.  LTC Alphin created a work around that allowed the ammunition to be consumed in training.  Ammunition function also addresses the cartridge in charging the magazine (in repeating firearms) and feeding from the magazine into the chamber.

LTC Alphin’s skills as an Ammunition Function Expert, coupled with skills as a Firearms Manufacture Expert, directly led to the exclusion of bogus firearms ammunition “evidence” and the resulting dismissal of all charges in the Holmes case.  During his time running the testing at Jefferson Proving Ground, LTC Alphin’s ammunition function expertise led not only to improved data capture and increased through-put (a nine fold increase of volume) but also led to the solution of the 4.2 Inch Mortar crisis.

Ammunition Design

Ammunition design encompasses those features in design such that the round of ammunition fits and fires safely in the firearm.  This includes accommodating the headspace datum, flash-hole size, web, chemical constituents and shape of the propellant, bullet retention and release, and other issues.

LTC Alphin’s work as an Ammunition Design Expert led to the new A-Square family of cartridges within SAAMI (Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturer’s Institute).  This family was copied by Remington, Winchester, Federal and Nosler in creating new cartridge designs with improved capabilities but which worked through existing firearm mechanism designs.  This ammunition design was of great benefit to the shooting public.

Ammunition Manufacture

The ammunition manufacture discipline addresses how each cartridge case is manufactured, from its starting point as a coin, along with how the projectile is manufactured (which could start as a coin or a bar), how the primer is manufactured, and how the propellant is manufactured.  For shotguns, ammunition manufacture would also deal with the shot pellets and the wads.  Each of these includes a large number of steps, and different machinery, as the part wends its way through the process.

These separate parts are then assembled into a cartridge, which is its own manufacturing discipline.  This includes the constant quality control testing and evaluation during ammunition manufacture and, upon completion, the testing for final approval to place the cartridges into the stream of commerce.

Of necessity, this includes the DOT (Department of Transportation) requirements for the movement of propellant and the NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) Code requirements for the storage and use of the propellant.  Upon completion, this includes the packaging of the cartridges and the other issues for safe shipping of the ammunition by land (DOT), by sea (United States Coast Guard) and by air (International Air Transportation Association).

Metallurgy of Ammunition

Metallurgy of Ammunition encompasses the exact alloys of brass, lead, and other materials which are used in ammunition and how each one is selected to give the correct properties necessary for a round of ammunition.  This includes gradient of anneal and other issues which lead to a final end-use item that functions correctly.

LTC Alphin’s skill as a Metallurgy of Ammunition Expert led to successful outcomes in many civil cases.  For example, there was one case in California (1) where in the shooter lost his eye and sued.  The Plaintiff “expert” had a fantastical computer “simulation” which theorized a case rupture, which allowed a cartridge case fragment to exit the weapon and strike the shooter’s eye.  LTC Alphin’s deposition destroyed this contention and the Plaintiff settled for some medical insurance deductibles.

(1) San Diego Shooter v. Everybody

Firearms

Posted on by kincade

Firearms Function

This discipline involves the action and interaction of each and every part, both moving and stationary, within the firearm.  Most hobbyists are limited to a familiarity with the difference between a bolt action and a lever action.  However, in reality, the subject of firearms function is far more involved.  It also includes the manufacturing tolerances of each part and how that affects the function.  Since function of a firearm is post-manufacture activity, this also involves how a particular firearm functioned, or failed to function, in any given incident.

These skills are particularly important in cases wherein after-market work may have been done on a firearm.  This proved of particular value in the Fred Paez case.

Firearms Design

This discipline covers the basic design features such as the trade-off between short recoil operation and gas operation of a semi-automatic firearm.  Beyond that, this discipline includes all features of design and how that all adds up to a safely functioning firearm.  It even includes such uncommonly understood, but vitally important features as a two piece firing pin.  Or how a bolt notch above a two-stage trigger, serves double duty as a disconnector safety.

This issue of firearms design also includes the many safeties designed into a firearm; such as the positive safety, the trigger safety, the grip safety, the disconnector safety and many others.  This category also includes proper machining techniques as called out in the manufacturing drawings, proper metallurgy, and all else in the design; as the engineer prepares and calls out the manufacturing drawings.  LTC Alphin’s skills in firearms design was of particular use in the designer’s failure to ensure proper barrel steel in the Gellatly case.   And the designer’s failure to have a firing pin retention device (ensuring that the  firing pin cannot be blown out of the weapon) in the Mason case.  These failures cost Mr. Gellatly his right hand and cost Mr. Mason his right eye.  LTC Alphin was not only able to help get cash justice for these two men but also to force change which has avoided similar injuries for other people.

Firearms Manufacture

The firearms manufacture discipline addresses how each part of the firearm is manufactured after it is designed.  It includes the starting point for each part, such as a billet or a forging; and then the fixturing, workholding, and tooling in order to make each cut which leads to a finished part.  Also included are the abrasive operations which clean up the part and the quality control operations to determine if the parts are usable.  Lastly, this includes the final assembly, quality control and proofing operations done before the firearm is placed in the stream of commerce.

As a firearms designer and manufacturer, LTC Alphin created the not only the A-Square Hannibal Model rifle, but also the machinery, fixtures and procedures to manufacture it.  This expertise has come in handy in many cases.  Not only the Holmes case cited above but in cases such as Jenkins.  In this case, the prosecution so feared the testimony  of LTC Alphin that they stipulated an agreement where they would not present firearms and ammunition “evidence” if the defense did not put him on the stand.  The trial went on and Mr. Jenkins was found Not Guilty.

Metallurgy of Firearms

This area of endeavor addresses the exact metallurgical composition of each and every part of the firearm.  Parts may be optimized for their function by changing the alloy and hardness.   This further branches out into the use of polymers and other man made materials for use in firearms.

As an expert in this area, LTC Alphin submitted change improvements in the M-85 caliber .50 machine gun mounted in the M-60 family of tanks.  Specifically, there is a part in the gun called the “Jesus” pin because “…if this thing breaks, by Jesus, this gun won’t work…”.  LTC Alphin’s recommendation went to a different alloy and double heat treatment process which retained the strength of the pin but led to greatly decreased breakage.

Training for use of Firearms and Ammunition

Firearms and ammunition training includes not only methods of instruction but also imparting to the user/shooter enough information to enable safe use of the firearm.  This leads to advanced training of the shooter such he can extract the maximum capabilities in terms of range, volume of fire, and terminal effect.  Included within this is training for specific disciplines, such as skeet shooting at the Olympics, but also for correct reaction in a crisis situation.

Training includes not only the use of the firearm, but also the training to keep a weapons system in proper condition to safely fulfill its role.  LTC Alphin’s skill as a Firearms and Ammunition Training Expert came into play as part of the 4 Sailors case.  This skill also contributed to major changes concerning the 105mm L/52,  M-68 gun mounted on the M-60 family of tanks (see below).

Capabilities of Firearms and Ammunition

This extends exterior and terminal ballistics into the field of what the firearm and ammunition can actually do.  This is necessary not only for training but also for improvement in firearms and unit organization, for shooting incident scene reconstruction and for explaining scenes to a jury.  This area of expertise had application in the evaluation of the Dean case, and the Ragland case.

As an expert in this area, LTC Alphin got an interesting compliment.  Alphin created procedures and crew training which tripled the effective usable range of the 105mm tank gun on the M-60 tank (we cannot discuss specifics other than this became common in US tank divisions stationed in Germany, facing the Soviets).   Later, LTC Alphin was the Chief of the Armor Test Division of the Armor Engineer Board.  At a classified briefing, a briefer mentioned putting a face to Alphin’s name.  When queried, the briefer replied  “We see your name a lot.  The guys on the other side know who you are.”

 

Ballistics

Posted on by kincade

Interior Ballistics

This discipline of the area of firearms expertise concerns that which occurs from the instant the firing pin touches the primer until the projectile exits the muzzle and the pressure in the barrel drops to one atmosphere.  This includes such issues as firing pin embedment into the primer, the transfer of machining marks onto the surface of the primer, the generation of the propellant gases within the firearm, engravement of the rifling, and all else contained within the definition of interior ballistics.

In particular, LTC Alphin’s skills as an Interior Ballistics Expert enabled him to correctly evaluate the dynamics of firing pin embedment.  This, in turn, has led to debunking attempts by prosecution “experts” to link certain expended cartridge cases to a certain firearm.   This was a factor in both the Jenkins and Holmes cases.   In initial consultation on other cases, just this knowledge alone has helped defending attorneys shape their theory of the case.

Exterior Ballistics

This discipline concerns that which occurs from the instant of projectile muzzle exit until the projectile touches the target. This also includes the muzzle ejecta, which is the remains of the combusted propellant powder and the microscopic bits debrided from the projectile.  This is necessary for distance from muzzle to target and for helping with orientation of firearm to target at the moment of the shot.  This definition also includes stability of the projectile in free flight, deceleration of the projectile, and all else contained within the definition.

These skills combine with such things as the Griess Test and the Sodium Rhodizonate Test.  These tests, among others, can be used for determination of distance from muzzle to target at the moment of discharge, and for determination of the orientation of the firearm to the target.  As an Exterior Ballistician, LTC Alphin has used these skills to solve many complex shooting incident scene issues, such as the Cobb v. Burke civil suit over an estate, and the innocence of a wrongly accused man in the Coca Cola Handler case.

Terminal Ballistics

Terminal ballistics concerns that which occurs from the instant the projectile touches the target until both the projectile and the target come to rest.  This includes both Kinetic Energy and Chemical Energy projectiles.  The inert projectiles used in small arms ammunition fall into the kinetic category.

Terminal ballistics skills are far different and more inclusive than what Medical Examiners provide.  The ME is more a toxicologist and is normally not qualified as a terminal ballistician.  For example, ME’s are taught that bullets travel in straight lines through mammalian targets.  In fact, they most certainly do not.  Proper examination of the tell-tale damage along the path of a penetrating projectile; along with knowledge of the precessional velocity and other instability issues for spin stabilized, kinetic energy, projectiles in free flight (which is a bullet from a small arm) is necessary.  If done properly, the terminal ballistician can show the actual path of the bullet, and the actual orientation of target and bullet in three dimensional space, at the instant of bullet impact.

Medical Examiners are taught to use the “Y” incision in an autopsy.  This is a valid procedure for toxicology and for determining the cause of death in a disease case.  For use in a shooting incident case, these techniques are not valid and actually destroy usable evidence.  As a terminal ballistician, LTC Alphin uses techniques specifically designed for a terminal ballistics post-mortem.  These techniques were derived from the Col. Benjamin Huger tests of 1854, The Thompson-LaGarde tests of 1921-22, the activities during the unpleasantness of 1946 to 1990, plus the definitive work done by Col. Dr. Martin L. Fackler and LTC Arthur B. Alphin in the modern era.

LTC Alphin used these skills and techniques to great effect in the Mays case, the Wilhelm case, the Tamme case (in alliance with a forensic anthropologist), and many other cases.

This is the entry wound on a wildebeeste caused by a soft point bullet fired from a .375 Weatherby Magnum. Note that the entry is mostly circular, indicating that the long axis of the bullet was nearly perpendicular to this part of the animal’s hide at the moment of impact. Also note that the skin stretched and some hair was burned off by the passage of the bullet. Lastly, note that there is zero blood or flesh coming back out through the entry. This is normal due to the stretching and shifting of the skin, of the subcutaneous fat layer and of the various layers of musculature. This bullet went through the rib cage and into the left lung. The animal bled heavily out the nose and mouth but still nothing in the entry wound.
This is the entry wound on a wildebeeste caused by a soft point bullet fired from a .375 Weatherby Magnum. Note that the entry is mostly circular, indicating that the long axis of the bullet was nearly perpendicular to this part of the animal’s hide at the moment of impact. Also note that the skin stretched and some hair was burned off by the passage of the bullet. Lastly, note that there is zero blood or flesh coming back out through the entry. This is normal due to the stretching and shifting of the skin, of the subcutaneous fat layer and of the various layers of musculature. This bullet went through the rib cage and into the left lung. The animal bled heavily out the nose and mouth but still nothing in the entry wound.

Shooting Incident Scene Analysis

Posted on by kincade

This involves discerning how the man-weapon interface plays out, and interacts, when in crisis or emergency situations. LTC Alphin’s skills in this area allowed him to precisely re-construct a fight over disputed property (see case of Tennessee vs. Pallet Handler). He also precisely interpreted the scene and the remains of a professional hunter whose rifle failed and who was subsequently impaled and stomped to death by an elephant.

Ballistics Expert

Contact Us

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.