SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network

SOCNET: The Special Operations Community Network (http://www.socnet.com/index.php)
-   Veterans Issues (http://www.socnet.com/forumdisplay.php?f=290)
-   -   Need assistance getting records (http://www.socnet.com/showthread.php?t=132546)

ramzmedic 8 June 2018 13:02

Need assistance getting records
 
I am trying to get criminal records on 2 individuals. I prefer to go in to deep details in PM. The crime happened on a military base in 1991. One troop got time at Ft. Knox, the other, Leavenworth.

I've checked Army NCRC and they claim they have no record of it (total bullshit!).

Any help/advice on obtaining these records is greatly appreciated.

One last question: Is it legal for someone with NCIC acess to get a record and give to someone without access?

Massgrunt 8 June 2018 20:27

Military discipline is not typically in NCIC as far as I know. Even when it really should be.

ramzmedic 8 June 2018 20:48

Thanks Mass

Fu King Lawyer 9 June 2018 20:08

1 Attachment(s)
There is a big problem out there.
First of all, fingerprints are sent to the FBI following convictions or resignations in lieu. Secondly, FBI is linked to the military crime records.

A strange coincidence, we have a monthly SF/Ranger breakfast, where one of the Brothers was talking about a buddy of his that was (supposedly) nominated for the MoH but it was (according to the BS) downgraded to the DSC. Comparing notes, it was the name of a poser who I supervised the Courts-Martial of the poser. He had falsified records to get promoted to LTC in the Army Reserve, had "inserted" phony SS, multiple BSMs (w/ "v") PH, SF Bn Cdr time, etc., into his records. Had a facebook page indicating SAS and Delta service. Total BS.

Army records center gave up his service records. I called my Captain who was the trial counsel, and got the CID report number. The retiree who heard the BS made a FOIA. CID would neither confirm or deny the investigation citing the privacy act.

I knew that his fingerprints were submitted when he resigned in lieu. Here's what I got from FBI.

The system is failing us.

Fu King Lawyer 9 June 2018 20:19

Raz,
Anyone with authorized access to LE data bases including NCIC, will likely get terminated for accessing the data, unless it is for LE purposes. Feds enforce the policy by telling the agency of the offending employee to discipline them, or the agency will lose access for failing to supervise the employee.
I suspect the only way you will get that which you seek, is to have them sign a background waiver form, or something similar. Good luck.
v/r
fkl

ramzmedic 9 June 2018 20:46

Roger that re NCIC. A friend has access to Lexus/Nexus an is going to search for an article about the incident when he returns from camping net week.

CB 11 June 2018 12:39

Both convictions affirmed on appeal.
 
2 Attachment(s)
Here's the reported decisions from the Court of Military review.

KINZER:
Pursuant to his pleas, the appellant was found guilty, by a military judge sitting as a general court-martial, of conspiracy, larceny, and solicitation of another to commit an offense in violation of Articles 81, 121, and 134, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 881, 921, and 934 (1988) [hereinafter UCMJ]. The appellant was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge, confinement for seven years, and reduction to Private E1. In compliance with the terms of a pretrial agreement, the convening authority suspended for two years that part of the sentence extending to confinement in excess of six years, but otherwise approved the sentence as adjudged.

HUBBLE:
The appellant was convicted, contrary to his pleas, by a general court-martial composed of officer members on 23 August 1991, of conspiracy to commit armed robbery and larceny in violation of Articles 81 and 121, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. 881 and 921 (1982) [hereinafter UCMJ]. The convening authority approved the adjudged sentence of a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for two years, and reduction to Private E1.
On appeal, the appellant asserts six assignments of error, the first two of which contend that: (1) the finding of guilty of conspiracy to commit armed robbery is incorrect in law and fact, and (2) the finding of guilty of larceny is incorrect in law and fact. We disagree and affirm the findings of guilty and the sentence.


==============

So that much is confirmed.

These are public records.





ramzmedic 11 June 2018 15:16

Thank you CB. PM inbound,

Fu King Lawyer 11 June 2018 19:58

CB,
Well done, Brother, well done.
v/r
fkl


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:06.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Socnet.com All Rights Reserved