ADDED: A personal word about mental illness, tribal loyalty, and the three inaugural research projects that I’ve selected
Objective: provide to members of the national security/defense /veterans policy crowds top-shelf research products that assist their efforts to make informed and intelligent decisions on matters that affect those who’ve served in the United States military as well as in the military services of U.S. allies, and these service members’ families
CRP principal researcher is Charles L. K. Bloeser, M.A., J.D., a researcher whose published and still cited works begin in 1992. He’s licensed to practice law by the Supreme Court of Tennessee, U.S.A. After first serving as an assistant district attorney in the State of Oklahoma, his career in the courts has been spent in criminal trial, appeal, and post-conviction cases in state and federal trial and appellate courts, including certiorari practice before the Supreme Court of the United States. Among the courts in which Charles has represented clients are the following:
U.S. District Court for Western District of Oklahoma
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee
United States Court of Appeal for the Fifth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeal for Ninth Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeal for the Tenth Circuit
Supreme Court of the United States
The following summary digital CV/bio of principal researcher is followed by an introduction to three inaugural applied research projects and an opportunity to examine in-depth two research products that have been recently published and released.
Principal researcher is a past president of the OKC chapter of the Federal Bar Association and has served in American Inns of Court in Tulsa, Oklahoma City, and Nashville. He’s a member of Phi Delta Phi, international legal fraternity, and served on law review during law school.
A few words about this lawyer and researcher:
“He has frequently been in my court handling matters by appointment under the Criminal Justice Act. He is always prepared, effective, and above reproach, ethically.”
– U.S. District Court Judge
“. . . Charles has always been an innovative, responsible and thorough advocate for his clients. We don’t often agree, but he is a thoughtful professional in his representation. I have found him to be particularly scrupulous in ethical matters.”
– Assistant U.S. Attorney
“Charles himself is also admirably dedicated to improving his own practice. This past year, Charles called me several times for consultation on petitions for certiorari to the Supreme Court. Although an excellent writer and advocate already, Charles solicited my insights as a former Supreme Court law clerk on how to make a compelling case for review. The result of Charles’ extra efforts were two petitions that made the best case for certiorari possible given the available facts and law, and that were better than many of the hundreds of petitions by regular Supreme Court practitioners that I have reviewed. Afterwards, at Charles’ request, we met to go over his petitions with an eye towards producing even stronger ones in the future.”
– Law Professor and former law clerk for two justices on SCOTUS
Among researcher’s published research are works re Libyan-supported Jihadi terrorism in the Western Hemisphere, civilian-military law enforcement relations, federal criminal law, and Federal court procedure. His research agenda includes national security/defense/ veterans issues, with special attention to those suffering from shell shock aka combat trauma aka PTS/PTSD and related challenges.
Praise for author’s recent research products:
“Excellent piece of writing. You have an excellent start for a book about Wheeler. I wish I would have had some of your material for two of the Veteran’s Day speeches I gave the past couple of days. I’ll use next year.” Rear Admiral, USN (Ret), personal email re Cherokee DELTA Operator: Invisible. Not Unseeable.” (Nov. 2017)
“Stunningly accurate piece of writing that will hit a chord with anybody who has served in any of the war-torn areas of the world.” Senior Operations Officer/Flight Commander, RAF (Ret), commenting on “Thank You for Your Service.” (Sept. 2017)
“I have read your article very carefully. It is a most thought-provoking piece of writing by an expert in the true meaning of the word. . ..” Command Officer, Royal Navy (Ret), personal message re “Writing Is About Turning Blood into Ink.” (June 2018)
Researcher’s role as a participant in America’s “foster-child system”
The author’s responsibilities in criminal and civil matters while serving as an assistant district attorney for the State of Oklahoma were, among others:
(a) reviewing child welfare reports to determine which warranted applications for judicial child removal orders and possible criminal prosecution;
(b) representing the State’s interests in civil “deprived child” actions arising from these cases, as well as in civil cases alleging actions by minors that, if done by an adult, would be criminal offenses and subject to prosecution;
(c) learning whether a crime committed against or by a child occurred on land and under circumstances that authorized the State of Oklahoma to act (the judicial district I served is a patchwork of jurisdictions that include a number of Indian tribes and in which the land that the State couldn’t touch might be no bigger than the lot where the crimes occurred);
(d) primary assistant D.A. on call to respond to ER, courthouse, or other locations in order to seek, if necessary, order from the judge authorizing the emergency commitment of persons deemed danger to self or others, an order which, in the absence of suitable family, resulted in kids going into foster care;
(e) took turns with other assistant D.A.’s on call to respond to scenes of suicide and other deaths when requested by law enforcement;
(f) on occasion, participating in case conferencing with other relevant actors re children placed in the custody of child services and perhaps housed in foster homes; and
(g) serving as the District Attorney’s representative at some of the informal foster parent gatherings held in that judicial district.
Regardless of which side I’ve represented over the years, America’s foster system has always insisted on showing up, either openly or by lurking in the shadows in cases involving:
(a) criminal defendants, appellants, and petition6ers who had been removed from their homes as children due to abuse, neglect or a parent’s inability to keep them housed, fed, and in school;
(b) clients whose children had been removed for any or all of the same reasons and who had not been reunited with their kids;
(c) persons arrested, charged and sometimes previously convicted for committing crimes against children, including sex crimes, assault, criminal neglect, and homicide; and
(d) persons who insisted on pleading guilty to crimes they didn’t commit or which the State couldn’t have proven at trial, under threat that child services would be sent into the home to remove their children if they did not plead guilty.
Citing this author’s research and writing: some examples and pinpoint cites
** “Combat Translation Project”
“Combat Translation Project”: ongoing multi-product “research +” activity in support of bridging – among members of relevant policy crowds – an existing chasm in experience, knowledge, and understanding which divides the 93% of persons who’ve never served in the Armed Forces from the seven percent who have (U.S. data).
[Here’s an excerpt from researcher’s essay “Owned Lock, Stock, and Barrel.”]
“But here’s where grandad has a lesson for those of us who have never served. Had he known earlier what the intel really showed – that Communist China cared a great deal about what happened the other side of the Yalu river – it wouldn’t have mattered. It must not be allowed to matter.
“Like all who serve, grandad was owned by the United States lock, stock, and barrel, to be used as his nation deemed necessary. Even if ordered to march into Hell itself.”
*** Foster kids / military family applied research project:
2 components – new research article and proposed model legislative language
Child welfare services across the United States remove children from their homes after state authorities conclude that one or more children is in immediate danger of harm. “Harm” is generally defined as abuse or neglect. A recent report from the National Conference of State Legislatures reports that “just over 415,000 children and youth in the U.S. currently reside in foster care.”
Child welfare workers are not generally required to place children from military families with military foster families.
While, generally speaking, child welfare agencies prefer to place children with suitable family members nearby, that’s seldom possible when children are removed from military families stationed far from home.
Researcher has completed a substantive new research product that examines challenges and successes of foster kids who enter military service, as well as the threats to keeping military families together, especially during and after deployments.
Pursuant to discussions with legislative experts who’ve repeatedly demonstrated success in getting the states to adopt proposed model legislation, researcher will draft for their consideration proposed state and federal legislative language intended to keep military children clothed, fed, sheltered, and safe while increasing the likelihood that state child welfare authorities and the courts will reunite military children with their past and present service member parents.
*** Veteran staffed + veteran occupied civilian sector lock-up facilities
“Veterans Serving Veterans” [working title] applied multi-product research project. Initial pre-project research underway. Project objective: if comprehensive research activity confirms pre-project research findings, then project seeks to contribute applicable information and relevant facts necessary for public policy communities to make informed decisions re establishment of lock-up units for military veterans who are held pre-judgment or incarcerated following criminal conviction, with such facilities to be characterized by four attributes:
(a) both staff and population are comprised solely of military veterans;
(b) facility policies, procedures, and practices are informed by current science re specialized needs of this highly specialized population with an eye toward avoiding population management practices that trigger combat-trauma associated symptomology;
(c) the provision of expert individualized evaluation and treatment for detainees or inmates suffering from internal and external trauma, whether acquired in combat or otherwise; and
(d) for veterans serving term of imprisonment by judgment, the provision of pre- and post-release transition/re-entry services designed to seek solutions for veterans who face especially difficult challenges securing sufficient income, housing, and services due to felony convictions, “bad paper” discharges, loss of or ineligibility for VA and other federal benefits or professional licenses, or whose continued injuries restrict available work options.
** Discussions with experts who’ve seen their proposed model legislation passed into law by state legislatures should encourage not just protections for military families whose children are taken into emergency custody by state officials; it’s reasonable to expect that these nascent relationships can also contribute to legislative support for further experimentation, and the establishment of, vet-focused jails, prisons, and tenant institutions within existing facilities.
Here are a few of the research questions I’ve identified so far:
• what’s needed for specific vet-dedicated environments to work;
• determination of what aspects of existing correctional environments must be included or excluded;
• whether and how to establish pilot programs under the auspices of state-level departments of correction, within the Federal Bureau of Prisons, perhaps in one of 6 BOP regions; determine accuracy of assumption that DOD-administered, land-based brig facilities are already all vet and thus not applicable for this research project.
[Given the patchwork of correctional environments across the
country, research for a project like this won’t be complete without looking at the private prison issue, even though I expect that I’ll find that the private prison industry would offer choices that would prove unhospitable and counterproductive for vets-dedicated units or institutions.]
• veteran inmate population considerations such mental and physical healthcare needs; considerations re applicable officer-enlisted considerations; analysis whether inmates to be managed only by other veterans or a vet-civ mix; prison gang considerations, including ethnic and otherwise;
• analysis of preferred means to facilitate communication and interaction with internal and external professionals re combat trauma issues;
• examination of viable options to encourage success for inmates as they transition from incarceration to non-incarceration and from military to civilian life;
• determination of how vet-dedicated facility to be designated / classified for purposes of institutional and inmate administration, for example, if facility designated under U.S. BOP, then inmates from USPs likely wouldn’t be allowed into the program but perhaps some from FCIs, dependent on offense of conviction, inmate disciplinary record, but most likely from lower-level correctional environments such as camps;
• all relevant dietary/food safety issues relevant to inmate population;
• consideration of inmate disciplinary options and the extent to which these can be applied given a veteran’s particular mental and physical health considerations including, e.g., PTSD, blunt-force and explosive-blast-induced traumatic brain injury; absence or limitation of function with human limbs;
• whether and how best to create correctional environment in which the large percentage of inmates suffering from combat-based and other PTSD can interact with corrections officers who, themselves report PTSD symptoms in greater percentages than among current veteran population;
• consideration of internal inmate disciplinary measures and procedures as well as circumstances under which an inmate is charged and prosecuted for new criminal offense(s) committed within the vet-dedicated correctional environment;•
* examination of protections that need to be put in place for the protection of veterans who are not only inmates but also witnesses to crimes and other events for which they will be called to testify, including when an inmate is called to answer questions and/or testify in a criminal case against another inmate in the same facility;
• if applicable, review differences between and among required accommodations and clothing dependent on state court/fed court/military courts conviction;
• determinations based on whether institution is all-veteran or vet-dedicated within a larger, mixed veteran-civilian population and, if the latter;
• inmate safety considerations associated with transfer between vet-dedicated unit and general inmate population;
• related to that: just as analysis must be made as to composition of inmate population, consideration must be given to the necessary and desirable characteristics for the corrections officers and other personnel with whom inmates will interact; examinations of possibly unecessary legislative changes to allow such a program to happen;
• determination of how to measure success;
• what’s already being tried in the U.S. and in U.S. allies who have similar circumstances and needs to ours;
• who are the top-tier experts whose input is necessary for success (of course, defining “success” is part of this research, too);
• analysis of the various legal environments within which a
vet-dedicated facility would operate – this includes a bunch of
issues, incl state and federal constitutional requirements; process for redress and civil rights liability issues; professional licensing matters; applicable employment and contract law; applicability of statutory and DEA regulatory provisions concerning psychotropic drugs and their administration;
• examination of existing or needed facilities for emergency medical treatment as well as those necessary for longer-term care if required;
• internal inmate-inmate, inmate-guard, guard-guard communications as well as communications between inmates and their attorneys and investigators, as well as with internal affairs and law enforcement investigators and persons outside the facility with whom inmates have familial relationships;
• search for alternatives to exorbitant prison phone call rates and other practices and procedures that sever, often permanently, inmates from their families, resulting in increased vulnerability to health challenges, inability to access medical care and necessary medications, and homelessness;
• for inmates who had or have one or more security clearances upon entering, how best to eliminate potential national security risks associated with the experience of incarceration;
• jurisdictional considerations associated with offense of conviction, e.g., convictions from state court, federal court, military tribunal;
• issues related to transmission of disease and other medical conditions including potential biological, chemical, and related threats to inmates and corrections personnel;
• examination of nature and extent of attorney client privilege and relationship with branch of service
• procedures for protection of inmate property and documents;
• determination of circumstances upon which inmate conduct will be reported to branch of service, if applicable;
• research re: whether and extent to which “good time” and other credits must be or may be allowed inmates;
• consideration of required, necessary, and beneficial relationships between facility and branch of service, DoD, etc;
• review extent to which WIT-SEC procedures can or must be employed for inmates at high risk of inside or external manipulation and threat by foreign governments, terror networks, and other threats to the safety of inmates and KSAs they possess;
• determination of necessary operational procedures, including those for security threats and breaches;
• analysis of OSHA and other state and federal oversight considerations;
• review of any existing VA, Dept of Defense, etc. requirements, and so on;
• analysis of political issues and personalities as part of viability analysis;
• There are other issues that would need to be examined, but I hope that these examples, give you an idea of what this kind of research activity would entail, but if I oversimplify, I’d say that applied research in this context means answering the question, “what do we need and how do we make it happen?” with an eye toward providing consulting services geared toward helping to create, initially, the necessary pilot projects.
STRIFE, a dual-format publication from the Department of War Studies, Kings College London, published in August 2018 the account of a now-deceased client, a combat-wounded veteran who fell between the cracks of a modern jail after his latest arrest for PTS-related domestic violence.
Lethality cuts both ways at the tip of the spear: 1st SFOD-D operator KIA when Kurdish Peshmerga allies couldn’t get the job done serves as an example of the character and calling of those tasked with keeping terrorism away from American shores
“Between Christmas Eve 1994 and mid-April 1995, three terrorist attacks received worldwide attention: Algiers – Marseilles, Tokyo, Oklahoma City. Joshua L. Wheeler enlisted in Army infantry in May 1995.
“During the summer and fall of 1996, I coordinated activities in support of an Army veteran’s reelection to the United States Senate. My zone of responsibility [for the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, United States Senator Jim Inhofe,] included the entirety of Oklahoma’s 1st Congressional District [which includes Tulsa] a big chunk of OK-02 and a sliver of OK–03. Twenty counties in northeastern Oklahoma, almost all of which had entrenched majorities of conservative aka “Blue Dog” Democrats. Master Sergeant Joshua L Wheeler was born and raised in one of those.”
A personal word about mental illness, loyalty to your tribe, and the three inaugural research projects that I’ve selected.
I’ve never served in the military. I’m not a member of the close-knit, fiercely protective family of those who have. I’m not a member of their tribe.
I have no idea what it’s like to fight like hell to save your brothers, only to watch them cut down in battle. I don’t know what it’s like to blame yourself for their kids being orphaned. I don’t know what it’s like to struggle 24/7 with guilt because you survived while they didn’t.
Those who’ve been in combat and I both know that it’s impossible for me to know their intimate, unseen, and ever-present facts of life because I’ve never been there.
I can read 1000 books about our warriors and watch 10 documentaries a week and listen carefully when they speak. But I’ll still never be able to think or speak accurately about their reality because I’ve never experienced what they have.
The same type of barrier stands as an unmovable wall between those of us who have and those who’ve never, themselves, experienced mental illness; who’ve never been entrusted with the vast and sobering power of prosecutorial discretion; or who’ve never heard the unyielding doors on a cell block close behind you as they lock both you and your client inside a high-security prison in which – like most lock-down facilities – none of the guards is armed.
Two of the three inaugural research projects benefit from my years of experience as a lawyer in America’s criminal and juvenile courts – the Foster Child / Military Family project and the Veteran Staffed + Veteran Occupied Civilian Lock-Up project.
The third project – the Combat Translation project – benefits from years of sharpening my ability to learn and then effectively communicate – both in writing and verbally – my client’s story to decision makers, e.g., judge, jury, prosecutor. As I hint at above, the challenge will be – as a civilian who’s never personally known the service and sacrifice required of our military personnel and their families – to ask the right questions from the right sources and then listen and, as best as this civilian can, understand their realities well enough to effectively translate their lives into concepts and language that my fellow non-service civilians are likely to understand.