If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The News & Observer (NC))   Two men have spent 1000+ days in jail for not getting off the lawn   (newsobserver.com) divider line 53
    More: Strange, United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, Licurtis Reels, jail  
•       •       •

9081 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Dec 2013 at 6:00 PM (17 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



53 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-15 06:04:18 PM
tl;dr.


/waiting for the Fark Legal Aid Squad to swoop in.
//And if threatened with "losing" land, my wife would totally go to jail in opposition.
 
2013-12-15 06:10:34 PM
What a story Mark..

This 'Torrens deed' is interesting. That could be the only thing that the judges are using to rule against these guys every time and it's a little shady sounding.
 
2013-12-15 06:10:38 PM
goddamn   what a clusterfark.... remind to stay far away from that county.
 
2013-12-15 06:11:08 PM
img.fark.net

Agrees that the judge is an idiot and sympathises.
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-12-15 06:11:51 PM
"...threats of violence and a tradition in rural Carteret of sometimes settling grudges by burning down unoccupied homes and boats."

ah.. hick justice...
 
2013-12-15 06:12:37 PM
exceptionally quick and dirty:
Court asks: "Whar paperwork of you two fellas family owning the land for a century?? WaHAR??". "Now get the f*ck off this mans land or stay in jail until you bendover and get off his land."
 
2013-12-15 06:12:38 PM
Irresistible force meets immovable object.
 
2013-12-15 06:14:17 PM
considering inflation the investment group hasn't spent all that much money in legal fees compared to the price of the property over almost 30 years. a real estate transaction should be treated like buying a used car. have money in your pocket in case the whole thing goes tits up and you don't have a working item unless you toss more money at it.
 
2013-12-15 06:15:36 PM
Can't fix stupid.
 
2013-12-15 06:15:57 PM
there's pigheaded and just plain to stupid to live. i'm leaning toward the latter.
 
2013-12-15 06:20:13 PM
13.5 acres of waterfront for 70K.  Yeah, nothing fishy about that, not at all.
 
2013-12-15 06:20:21 PM
"I ain't going off that land," Davis said.

Ummm.,... excuse me but you've been in jail for the last three years. I think that counts as "off that land".
 
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-12-15 06:21:45 PM
Somehow I think swearwords about Obama are included in the regular vocabulary of these two mental giants.
 
2013-12-15 06:23:41 PM
I want to hear more about this "tin-roofed nightclub". Is there a cover? What's the happy hour specials?
 
2013-12-15 06:24:13 PM

d23: Somehow I think swearwords about Obama are included in the regular vocabulary of these two mental giants.


Who are black.

Feel any mentally taller yet.
 
2013-12-15 06:26:22 PM
What a bunch of dumbasses.
 
2013-12-15 06:27:53 PM
Bulldoze the buildings on the property, and then treat it just like any other trespassing situation.  Pretty soon they'll escalate to something a lot more permanent than civil contempt.
 
2013-12-15 06:29:53 PM
so I read this and was told not to comment on  an article I read so I wont comment as its um MANLAW ? yes this comment is from something awhile back but does this mean I cant read articles ?
 
2013-12-15 06:48:58 PM

Idiot Stick Bearer: so I read this and was told not to comment on  an article I read so I wont comment as its um MANLAW ? yes this comment is from something awhile back but does this mean I cant read articles ?


sure you can, just take your meds first.
 
2013-12-15 06:51:09 PM

HairyNevus: I want to hear more about this "tin-roofed nightclub". Is there a cover? What's the happy hour specials?


TIN ROOF
... rusted
 
2013-12-15 06:51:54 PM

HairyNevus: I want to hear more about this "tin-roofed nightclub". Is there a cover? What's the happy hour specials?


i.imgur.com
 
2013-12-15 06:55:25 PM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-12-15 06:59:49 PM
Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.
 
2013-12-15 07:05:43 PM

Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.


Sounds like the land belonged to his family for generations and now a company is trying to use dirty legal tricks to steal it
 
2013-12-15 07:05:52 PM
Not an unusual situation in the Carolinas.  Most of the developed islands were stolen from their Gullah ancestors this way.
 
2013-12-15 07:07:04 PM

Warlordtrooper: Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.

Sounds like the land belonged to his family for generations and now a company is trying to use dirty legal tricks to steal it


Not quite.  The dirty tricks were done by relatives looking to cash out.  The partnership is just left holding the bag.
 
2013-12-15 07:12:07 PM
If he owns the land, can't he just bulldoze whatever's already there?
 
2013-12-15 07:15:51 PM

Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.


That doesn't match my reading of the situations. Here's what it sounds like to me:

1. First guy (Elijah) buys land in 1911, lives on it.
2. He loses the land in 1944 from failure to pay taxes.
3. His son (Mitchell) buys the land from the county immediately.
4. Mitchell dies with no clear will in 1971. There are competing claims to the land.
5. One of his sons, Shedrick, claims ownership of the land using Torren's law. He wins in court and gets a Torrens deed.
6. In 1984, Shedrick legally ejects Davis from the land. Davis signs an agreement not to return (he says his signature was forged).
7. In 1985, Shedrick sells the land to some developers.
8. At some point later than that, those developers sold it to Brown's partnership.

I read up on Torrens deeds a bit, and they're pretty ironclad. Once Shedrick had one, his ownership was pretty much legally incontestable. So Brown legitimately owns the land and is going to win in pretty much any court anywhere, although it's probably just a waste of time as this point.
 
2013-12-15 07:16:08 PM
Ftfa: Torrens deeds are rare in North Carolina, in part because they require court action, and are used almost solely for large tracts such as timber land, said Charles Szypszak. That's easy for you to say.
 
2013-12-15 07:19:27 PM

evil saltine: If he owns the land, can't he just bulldoze whatever's already there?


Yes, except for the fact that the same clan that's causing all the trouble apparently still owns a bunch of land in the area, including land that controls the road in and out of the property in question. Brown seems to realize that he still has to live with the neighbors, and these neighbors have a track record of arson if you offend them, so bulldozing the blood relatives' property might not sit well, and might escalate the problem.
 
2013-12-15 07:22:37 PM

Idiot Stick Bearer: so I read this and was told not to comment on  an article I read so I wont comment as its um MANLAW ? yes this comment is from something awhile back but does this mean I cant read articles ?


Manlaw?  Is that anything like Brocode?
 
2013-12-15 07:40:37 PM

Warlordtrooper: Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.

Sounds like the land belonged to his family for generations and now a company is trying to use dirty legal tricks to steal it


That is how it looks to me.
 
2013-12-15 07:47:14 PM
So they were not too wealthy to go to jail.  No affluenza in their systems, so to speak.

/that's how it works in Murica
 
2013-12-15 07:54:41 PM

Mitrovarr: Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.

That doesn't match my reading of the situations. Here's what it sounds like to me:

1. First guy (Elijah) buys land in 1911, lives on it.
2. He loses the land in 1944 from failure to pay taxes.
3. His son (Mitchell) buys the land from the county immediately.
4. Mitchell dies with no clear will in 1971. There are competing claims to the land.
5. One of his sons, Shedrick, claims ownership of t ...


Yeah, I'm not seeing how the developers are trying to or have done anything shady. Shedrick had clear title to the land when he sold it, not the two guys in jail.
 
2013-12-15 08:01:25 PM

bigwf2007: Yeah, I'm not seeing how the developers are trying to or have done anything shady. Shedrick had clear title to the land when he sold it, not the two guys in jail.


Yes, of all the actors in this play, Shedrick seems like the shady one. Of course, he used carpetbagger tactics, and that's always shady, so...
 
2013-12-15 08:06:35 PM

Mitrovarr: Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.

That doesn't match my reading of the situations. Here's what it sounds like to me:

1. First guy (Elijah) buys land in 1911, lives on it.
2. He loses the land in 1944 from failure to pay taxes.
3. His son (Mitchell) buys the land from the county immediately.
4. Mitchell dies with no clear will in 1971. There are competing claims to the land.
5. One of his sons, Shedrick, claims ownership of t ...


If that is what you think you read, I would try again.  Mitchell and Shedrick are brothers.
 
2013-12-15 08:15:24 PM

Shotgun Justice: If that is what you think you read, I would try again. Mitchell and Shedrick are brothers.


Yeah, I saw that after I'd posted. Still, I think that's a closer assessment than any others that have been posted here yet (and it's not exactly the most clearly written article in the world).
 
2013-12-15 09:07:48 PM

Shotgun Justice: Mitrovarr: Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.

That doesn't match my reading of the situations. Here's what it sounds like to me:

1. First guy (Elijah) buys land in 1911, lives on it.
2. He loses the land in 1944 from failure to pay taxes.
3. His son (Mitchell) buys the land from the county immediately.
4. Mitchell dies with no clear will in 1971. There are competing claims to the land.
5. One of his sons, Shedrick, claims ownership of t ...

If that is what you think you read, I would try again.  Mitchell and Shedrick are brothers.


Why have they been in jail for 3 years, what was considered contempt of court?
 
2013-12-15 09:18:44 PM

drgloryboy: Shotgun Justice: Mitrovarr: Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.

That doesn't match my reading of the situations. Here's what it sounds like to me:

1. First guy (Elijah) buys land in 1911, lives on it.
2. He loses the land in 1944 from failure to pay taxes.
3. His son (Mitchell) buys the land from the county immediately.
4. Mitchell dies with no clear will in 1971. There are competing claims to the land.
5. One of his sons, She ...

They've refused to remove the structures they've built on the land and agree they'll never ste foot on it again.
 
2013-12-15 09:19:03 PM

drgloryboy: Why have they been in jail for 3 years, what was considered contempt of court?


Melvin and Licurtis have refused to remove their homes from the property and will not sign an agreement not to return. But more generally they're refusing to accept the long-standing judgement (from ~1971) that the land is no longer theirs.
 
2013-12-15 09:19:30 PM
drgloryboy:
Why have they been in jail for 3 years, what was considered contempt of court?

Because they refuse to abide by any decision any court has made by continuing to trespass and refusing to tear down their structures. So they sit in jail.
 
2013-12-15 10:10:30 PM
Git off my land!
blogs.roanoke.com
My land. Git of it!

/the 'cuss pack FTW!
 
2013-12-15 10:30:00 PM
www.adrianwagner.com
 
2013-12-15 10:59:01 PM

phrawgh: Git off my land!
[blogs.roanoke.com image 720x450]
My land. Git of it!

/the 'cuss pack FTW!

 Except these guys are black.
 
2013-12-15 11:23:56 PM
Here's an idea: Someone needs to sneak in in the dead of night with a big dredge and scoop out the entire thing--move the shoreline back like 50 feet. No property, no problem.

It's a bad idea, true, but it would solve the problem.
 
2013-12-15 11:27:21 PM
Far as I can tell the developer is in the right here. The relative got legal possession of the property via the Torrens Claim and legally sold it to a real estate group who later sold it to the developer. The two guys in jail are just being stubborn because one of their relatives sold "their" land and they don't have a say in the matter.

I feel sorry for the developer actually, I doubt he knew he was lighting a family feud powder keg when he purchased it. Legally the land is his and every court is going to agree with that. But it may not be worth it to develop if these guys are going to be trying to block everything he does.
 
2013-12-16 02:02:43 AM
Cool thread.
 
2013-12-16 05:49:25 AM
They still have a way before they reach H. Beatty Chadwick territory.
 
2013-12-16 01:28:32 PM
A good reminder - especially in the current popularity of movements limiting or prohibiting eviction actions or sheriffs refusing to perform them - that there is a very useful purpose served by legal eviction, and that when it is not an available option for a land-owner, things go to shiat pretty fast.
 
2013-12-16 02:37:09 PM

Gyrfalcon: Situation in a nutshell:

1. Old man buys property, does not pay taxes, county seizes property.
2. Son buys property back, dies intestate (FIRST ISSUE: Always leave your property to somebody!!)
3. Another son, Shedrick, files a Torrens claim, claiming he has possession by use and by deed. (A "Torrens" title means that the property holder entered all the information about the property in the county register and received a Certificate of Title. Torrens law is used for large tracts of previously undeeded land and avoids the need to prove title by a chain of deed transfer) (SECOND ISSUE: If you own property, get a deed, even if you have to go to court for quiet title!)
4. After a nasty family argument over the title, Davis and Reels claimed ownership via the Torrens claim.
5. The development group then attempted to purchase the property, based on lack of clear title.
6. And that's where we are today.

At this point, NOBODY has clear title to the land, since the brothers seem never to have gotten a proper deed to the property; of course, Brown and the development group cannot get a deed, since the brothers will not sell it. (The term of art is "a cloud on the title.") Since the only way the brothers will give up is if a judge says "You're right, it's your property," it seems unlikely they will ever surrender. And since the developer has sunk hundreds of thousands of dollars into this mess, he has too much to lose by backing off--he needs the land to recoup his losses.

Moral: Get clear title and a deed. Then get a will. No matter how much you hate lawyers, get them both.


many thanks!
 
Displayed 50 of 53 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report