Jump to content
Diplock

Criminal Defence Lawyer in Sole Practice - Ask Me Anything

Recommended Posts

I know plenty of female criminal lawyers, both in firms, or running their own firms, or in sole practice.  I don't really know what to say about the advice you're receiving.

In my small city the private (not legal aid or crown ) criminal lawyer are

1 female sole

3 male sole/small firm

1 female "big "firm

1 male "big "firm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I am currently finishing off my articles and I would like to pursue a career as a criminal defence lawyer, but I have been continuously discouraged by a number of lawyers  who have said that it is difficult for women to enter the field.  Is that actually true? and have you encountered a lot of female solo practitioners? 

 

I do think that there are barriers in the field of criminal defence due to gender, and I do think it is still a male-dominated profession and has a bit of a macho culture to it.  That said, obviously women can succeed in the field, and yes, I have encountered several female sole practitioners.  I am a female criminal defence attorney but I do work in a small firm.  I would say that there are more male soles than women and the women do tend to be with Legal Aid or in firms, but there are some female soles for sure.

 

Some things to consider:

 

1) If you think you may want to have children in the future, let go of the idea that you can take a 12 or 18 month mat leave as a sole practitioner each time you have a kid.  If that is hugely important to you and you're going to feel cheated without it, you won't be happy as a sole.  A sole practice just does not lend itself to being able to do that and have a job to come back to.  I know many female defence lawyers who leave when they start thinking of kids and end up with the Crown or somewhere they perceive as more family-friendly.  So people may be telling you that because they see so many young women leave for that reason.  That being said... you can be a sole and have kids and build flexibility into your schedule to an extent, but there won't be a long mat leave and you will have to miss some moments in their lives.

 

2) Likewise, as a sole there are no benefits for kids' medical, dental etc. unless you get them through a private insurer, so if that is a big deal to you, this field isn't for you.  If your spouse has them or you can make other arrangements, it may not be an issue.

 

3) Think about how you feel about defending sex assault and child abuse.  Marie Henein (example of an amazing, fearless female defence lawyer) got bashed for this by some.  If your feminist credentials are important to you, there are some "feminists" who think a woman defending those things is a traitor.  If you have your own past issues with those things, you may not be emotionally ready to deal with them dispassionately.  I know way more female than male defence counsel who refuse to defend those crimes.  This means they've cut themselves out of a significant portion of the work available and the income, experience, reputation etc. that can come from that.  It also means that the ones who do do it get looked at with some suspicion.  People praise me or comment on my taking those charges all the time as if it is somehow exceptional.  If you're not careful, you can start questioning yourself.

 

4)  Expect to take some abuse for being a woman.  Clients may call you a bitch or a slut, or want to hook up with you or ask you inappropriate questions.  They'll drive you nuts with their acceptance of rape culture and failure to grasp the nature of consent. You'll go through stuff the men don't.  Some older male lawyers and judges may make stupid comments to you, about you or around you from time to time.  You'll need a thick skin.

 

5) Plan to need to spend some time becoming "one of the boys" in order to network.  To hang with your peers, you may need to learn to drink beer and watch hockey if you aren't already doing that.  You'll also network with other female counsel of course, and commiserate about your circumstances as women, but you very well could have three male co-accused for a one-month trial that you'll need to get comfortable with.

 

*I mean co-counsel of course

Edited by providence
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a bit further on the topic (while of course "checking my privilege" by saying I am a male, and only briefly practiced criminal defence):

 

Starting up a sole criminal practice is hard for anyone.  You're running your own business.  You're knew, and don't know as much.  Your clients are not the most reputable people to begin with.  And it may be that it's more difficult being a woman - I've heard enough young female Crowns complain about the way they're treated by lawyers who would never think to treat me (a more experienced male Crown) the same way.

 

But is it any more difficult than any other kind of law practice?  I'm not so sure.  And certainly any number of female criminal lawyers are making it work.  Remember now this profession is rapidly converting into a female-dominated field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That being said, while I am not going to lie and say that there are not barriers (and these are only compounded if you are also indigenous, a person of colour etc.) this shouldn't discourage you from entering the field, but should motivate you to seize the opportunity to be a young, up-and-coming female defence attorney and blaze a trail for yourself and others.  People may just be wanting to make sure you do it with your eyes wide open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am currently finishing off my articles and I would like to pursue a career as a criminal defence lawyer, but I have been continuously discouraged by a number of lawyers  who have said that it is difficult for women to enter the field.  Is that actually true? and have you encountered a lot of female solo practitioners? 

 

General disclaimer. I am not a woman. And while I can offer some observations based on seeing what goes on around me, that's obviously not the same thing. Providence may be the superior source of info here, despite not working as a sole.

 

First off, I should probably add the glue that goes in between your questions, and you may be aware of this already but other readers may not. Once you have specified wanting to work in criminal defence there are really two ways that can happen - either working for someone else as an associate, or else on your own as a sole. Okay, there's also duty counsel, some very limited number of legal aid clinic positions, etc. But it's mainly either associate or sole. There are a limited number of associate positions overall, and there are a very limited number of good ones. So there's some blanket advice I give everyone (male or female) looking at criminal defence. If you aren't prepared to self-employ, at least theoretically, think long and hard if this is a good idea. Because it's fine if you'd prefer to work for someone else for a while and get your feet wet that way. That makes sense. But you can't guarantee it. If you aren't prepared to go sole, at least potentially, you are restricting yourself to so few opportunities that you may find you're better off not going down this road at all.

 

So, you're right. The decision about whether or not you can make it in criminal defence, as a woman, is directly tied to the question of whether or not you could make it as a sole, as a woman.

 

There are women who do this, obviously. There are good ones. But you do need to be willing to be "one of the boys" to a degree, as has been mentioned. And it's not so much that you need to put up with sexual harassment or anything like that. It's just ... criminal defence lawyers are a really quirky, iconoclastic tribe. We have very little time for correctness, for hurt feelings, for appropriately sensitive declarations at the start of every complicated issue. Today we're defending a sympathetic, mentally ill guy who really doesn't deserve what the police did to him. Tomorrow we're looking at pornographic material that our client allegedly produced of his own daughter. Compared to this shit, being nice and polite kinda goes out the window. That said, the criminal defence bar is also so incredibly nice, supportive, willing to lend a hand to a fellow defence lawyer. Male or female, if you're one of us you're one of us. I also know that female defence lawyers have their own network and events and I believe there's a special collegiality there too, which I unfortunately can't share.

 

The real issue is this, and will always be this. Most of the clients are men. And you're dealing with a brutal, survival of the fittest marketplace out there. When someone is charged with a criminal offence and faces severe consequences to their life, they want whoever makes them feel good about the situation and who seems like they can do the job. If their instincts about who is best are potentially sexist, or display any other bias, believe me, no one is going to say "hey, I'd feel better with an older man but maybe I should give that nice young girl a chance." I wouldn't expect otherwise. If the CAA sent a young woman to change my flat tire, I would hopefully overcome my natural bias and give her a chance. I'd feel the bias, but I'd fight it off. If I'm relying on someone to get my kid out of jail ... fuck being correct about it. The biggest feminist in the world, when the chips are down, will hire the old white guy over the young woman of colour any fucking day of the week, unless that young woman of colour can convince her she's every bit as good. And that's a fuck of a tough sell. Gray hair alone is currency.

 

So, there's that, and there's the issue of no benefits, no breaks for childcare, etc. That's been covered.

 

It can be overcome. It has been overcome. There are great women doing this job. There's even, perhaps, a bit of a Tuskegee Airmen thing going on, such that the relatively small number of women who manage to do this are better, on average, than the men, simply because only the best hang on. But that's what you're up against. If you can sell to clients, you can make it as a sole. All the rest is just what you are and aren't willing to live with on the way.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rates of women in custody are rising, and a lot of them want female lawyers - they have often been abused by men, and are not comfortable with them.  I have several female clients like this, many of whom were specifically referred to me because they wanted a woman.

 

I definitely think criminal defence is more macho and male-dominated than other areas of law, as far as it is possible for me to know without practising in those areas.  For example, family law seems to have a lot more women - a lot more of my female classmates from law school took that path as compared to criminal law.  And family seems to involve more negotiation and collaborative work than criminal law, and much less time in court and in trial.  Trials appeal to a competitive, hard-edged personality which traditionally is more likely to be male, but certainly could also be a tough woman.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for giving a realistic background on why my gender might be an issue as a criminal defence lawyer. In the city I live in we have a small criminal defence bar and I can count on one hand how many women I have seen in the provincial court which is worrying. Most women tend to favour the crown which might be great for some people, but I like helping people navigate through a difficult process. I am considering opening my own sole practice, but it is a difficult decision for the reasons everyone has given. 

 

I have already struggled with clients initially not taking me seriously because of my young age and gender. It is a bit annoying, but after a couple of interactions they tend to mellow out about it.  I am afraid that if I open a sole practice I will continuously get passed over by potential clients, but it is a chance that I will have to take. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for giving a realistic background on why my gender might be an issue as a criminal defence lawyer. In the city I live in we have a small criminal defence bar and I can count on one hand how many women I have seen in the provincial court which is worrying. Most women tend to favour the crown which might be great for some people, but I like helping people navigate through a difficult process. I am considering opening my own sole practice, but it is a difficult decision for the reasons everyone has given. 

 

I have already struggled with clients initially not taking me seriously because of my young age and gender. It is a bit annoying, but after a couple of interactions they tend to mellow out about it.  I am afraid that if I open a sole practice I will continuously get passed over by potential clients, but it is a chance that I will have to take. 

 

To be honest, I really have not had issues finding clients, even in the beginning.  The things some people pass you over for will attract others.  And if you are good at networking, you'll get referrals fairly quickly - at least, I did.  That is the one area I really did not struggle or feel disadvantaged, as a woman or otherwise.  Opening a practice is tough in general, but I never felt it was unmanageable.  Find a female mentor, and male ones too, and learn all you can, and be humble and pleasant and hard-working and committed, and things will fall into place.  And then give back to others who are where you were. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for giving a realistic background on why my gender might be an issue as a criminal defence lawyer. In the city I live in we have a small criminal defence bar and I can count on one hand how many women I have seen in the provincial court which is worrying. Most women tend to favour the crown which might be great for some people, but I like helping people navigate through a difficult process. I am considering opening my own sole practice, but it is a difficult decision for the reasons everyone has given. 

 

I have already struggled with clients initially not taking me seriously because of my young age and gender. It is a bit annoying, but after a couple of interactions they tend to mellow out about it.  I am afraid that if I open a sole practice I will continuously get passed over by potential clients, but it is a chance that I will have to take.

For what it is worth, I think it has evolved to the point where in many jurisdictions (including my own) Crowns are majority female. Recognized mat leave / family leave / benefits may well play a part of that. Just something to consider.

 

And if you open your own defence practice... remember this is a long-term game, and sooner or later you will get grey hair. As a male with a youngish face, that grey hair has been wonderful at giving me credibility even if someone doesn't know my background.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the comments above, absolutely it is possible to attract clients as a younger lawyer, as a woman, as a visible minority, etc. And as Providence has alluded, there are even times when being female can work to your favor - though some of those times do include cases where men are accused of doing heinous things to women and girls, and part of the "advantage" to having a female defence lawyer is simply the suggestion that if you can stand to defend your client, he may not be that bad. So be prepared for that to happen, at some point.

 

The real point I was making is that sole practice has none of the institutional accommodations and supports that you might find otherwise. The community of fellow defence counsel can be fantastic, as noted. The support from the tribe doesn't extend quite as far as generating work for you. So yes, it can be done, absolutely. But that's what it really comes down to. Can you find clients and keep the clients you have happy.

 

Side note. I think I alluded to this pages ago, but I can't recall. Even for men, for anyone really, there are clients who respond well to you and those who don't. I'm not going to write for paragraphs and paragraphs about this, right now, but part of the way you can help yourself is by paying attention to what works for you and what doesn't. Starting out, you won't be in much of a position to turn down any work. But all the same, there will be clients who naturally respond to you and those who don't. Figure out what your sweet spot looks like. There are all kinds of different groups that get in trouble with the law. Some lawyers do a lot of youth cases. Some have practices heavily concentrated in certain ethnic communities. Some work more with poorer clients, some with wealthier. Some develop practices around certain offences. Some work with the mentally ill. I could go on and on. But if you find you work well with a certain sort of client, consider how you can find and attract more of those clients. Because in the end, you're better off working with clients who really do feel good about you naturally, rather than fighting up hill on ever file.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Summering at all in criminal defence is very unusual. There may be summer positions in some Crown offices (I'm really not sure) but if you manage to score any related experience in the summer it would be in a clinic - probably one affiliated with your school - or else on a very exceptional basis with someone in private practice. I won't swear it's impossible to score some kind of summer position, because I do know students who have done this (both from my time in school and from observing my colleagues, where there is the odd student around) but it's very unusual. Certainly it isn't something you'll obtain through organized recruiting. You simply have to hustle your ass off and hope to make the right connection.

 

Articling is similarly more about networking than anything, though I believe there are some positions posted through organized channels. My articling was arranged through a school connection. As in, a classmate who knew what I was interested in coincidentally made a connection with a lawyer who was looking for a student and who passed it on to me, so I interviewed, etc. That's far more common than anything arranged through OCIs.

 

In terms of hire-back, due to the small nature of most practices (see below) you'll almost never find a position that offers even a fair prospect of hire back. I won't say it's impossible. You might article somewhere they have enough work that you could return as an associate. But your odds of this are extremely long. You almost have to assume you'll be on the market as a fresh call, and either trying to make a go of it on your own or else looking for someone who has work but doesn't feel like training a student (common) or else figuring out a contract relationship of some kind.

 

 

There are ... a few of what I might term medium sized firms. I don't know enough about their internal operation to comment on how one might hope to proceed to partnership. But even the largest criminal defence firms probably top out at a dozen or so partners and so joining a firm like that would be far more about personal relationships and one-off decision-making than a structured path that results in partners leaving and joining every year. A new partner in a firm that size is a major event.

 

I could speculate about why criminal defence firms don't tend to organize on a larger basis. But I'd be speculating. Anyway, here are a couple of the larger firms in the GTA (larger by size, not commenting otherwise) to give you some idea:

 

http://www.criminaltriallawyers.ca/

 

http://derstinepenman.com/

 

The first example have a number of partners. In the second, you'll see two partners and (currently, it seems) 10 associates. And yes, that really does qualify as a medium(ish) firm. So you'll see, there isn't a structured path to partnership in a place like that. It could happen. You could simply become indispensable and eventually formalize that fact. But it isn't a path that will be laid out for you.

 

Hey Diplock, forgive me if you've already answered this somewhere else in this thread (haven't read through it all), but I would be interested to hear your speculations on why criminal defense firms tend to stay small.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not Diplock, but some good reasons why firms stay small, all of which we have discussed as a firm:

 

1. Conflicts.  Because accused and Crown witnesses tend to be interchangeable from file to file, and because you can't take files where you or a lawyer in your firm previously represented a Crown witness, the more lawyers you have, the more this happens and you start losing work.

 

2. Expenses.  Because it takes a while to make the really big bucks in criminal defence and most firms rely on Legal Aid for at least a portion of their profits, you don't have the money to have the multiple assistants, big office space etc. for 10 or 15 or 20 lawyers.

 

3. Mentality.  Most criminal defence lawyers are more lone wolves/individualistic type people who don't really want to get involved in the management, organization etc. of a big firm, which takes you away from the actual practice of law. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The real point I was making is that sole practice has none of the institutional accommodations and supports that you might find otherwise.

 

I don't think 0-year-calls understand the scope of the benefits available to Crown Counsel. Forget about the money and the pension. All it takes is a letter from your doctor, and suddenly you're on paid leave. If you're defense counsel and your client spits in your face post-conviction at his murder trial, you're left alone to re-build your practice. A Crown can have a bad 3 months of set-date court, then spend 3 months in Florida getting well. I work in a pretty big jurisdiction in which 20% of the Crowns are on leave.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Diplock, forgive me if you've already answered this somewhere else in this thread (haven't read through it all), but I would be interested to hear your speculations on why criminal defense firms tend to stay small.

 

Bear in mind, I'm still working on this theory and I have absolutely no proof in the real world that I'm right. Still, it's a theory.

 

I believe that law practices can be usefully divided into what I call "retail law" and "commercial law." Retail law deals primarily with individual clients. So that's criminal, family, immigration, wills and estates, most real estate, etc. Commercial law deals primarily with institutional clients - generally businesses and corporations or such high net worth individuals that they might as well be institutions. So, your typical "big law" areas of practice. There are exceptions, obviously. Even the richest individuals still need wills. A corporation might step up to defend an employee, or even be charged in its own corporate entity, and therefore retain criminal defence, etc. And even smaller businesses and clients run into labour law issues, tax, etc. So I don't mean to establish absolute categories. But generally speaking, there's a clear division between types of law that will mainly serve individual clients, and types of law that serve institutional clients.

 

Institutional clients understand the value of brand. When your law firm serves a major corporate client, that corporate client is sophisticated enough to know that even though they have a relationship with a partner at the firm, the firm might send a second year associate they've never met before to serve a particular file. And that's fine, because the corporate client understands that the firm stands behind the associate. This is the classic model, where the firm leverages its existing reputation to make money off of associates that the firm (presumably) recruits for ability and trains properly. At its best, it's a win-win relationship.

 

Retail clients, in my opinion, don't buy into this system. They simply lack a level of sophistication, or else their issues are so intensely personal that even if they "get it" in some level, they still can't put it into practice. When they retain a criminal defence lawyer (or a family lawyer, or an immigration lawyer) they don't want the second year associate. They want that lawyer. And anything else is going to leave them feeling ill-served and unhappy.

 

If Marie Henein (who seems to be my go-to example of high profile defence lawyers, these days) could leverage the Henein brand to send any old associate to defend someone, she'd no doubt have a much larger office than she has. Now I should admit I don't know how Henein Hutchinson operates (note that Scott Hutchinson himself has quite a reputation) but in the criminal defence practices I know, the associates primarily serve to stretch out the time of the principals (i.e. Henein is still credibly serving more files herself, but having the associates do work that supports her) or else the associates are being assigned to clients who are satisfied with getting "less." They knowingly and intentionally hire the associate rather than the big name.

 

So, in a nutshell, my theory is this. The name brand lawyers, however individually successful they may be, just don't have the incentive or the ability to capitalize on their names in a way that would lead them to run larger firms. Once you add a couple more associates to support your own work, you can't really sell any more of yourself. You need to start selling your juniors instead. And that's a very foreign idea to retail brand lawyers. It's foreign to me, too.

 

Yes, we're iconoclasts and individualistic and we don't play well with others. But some of us do, and even they don't seem to expand. So that's my operating theory, until something else comes along.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Marie Henein did send Danielle Robitaille to cross-examine a few witnesses in the Ghomeshi case. There's definitely some brand power there. And this brand model works for "retail" areas like PI and class actions. But I agree with you generally that when you're talking about criminal charges, a lawyer's personal brand is it. Most people wouldn't accept you sending an associate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think clients mind having a big name's associate do some of their work. It's cheaper and they know or believe that the big name oversees the conduct of the file. I worked for a fairly big name as an articling student and clients didn't complain as long as they knew so and so was approving what I was doing. It is if anything prestigious to have minions. When I started having students, my clients were impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A  few questions open to those equipped to handle such questions: 

do criminal defense lawyers largely charge on a flat-fee basis? 

do you often experience that your clients are willing to pay or do you often times have to go back and forth with them discussing a reasonable price to charge? 

do clients ever bail out and not pay you after the work has been completed? are there any measures in place to prevent clients from not paying despite the legal work having been completed? 

 

thanks

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LawyerBryant said:

A  few questions open to those equipped to handle such questions: 

do criminal defense lawyers largely charge on a flat-fee basis? 

do you often experience that your clients are willing to pay or do you often times have to go back and forth with them discussing a reasonable price to charge? 

do clients ever bail out and not pay you after the work has been completed? are there any measures in place to prevent clients from not paying despite the legal work having been completed? 

 

thanks

Well, first, remember that a lot of what we do is on legal aid, so your questions only really apply to private clients, which may be a minority of any practice to start. Just in the interests of giving a complete answer, Legal Aid uses both block (flat) fee models and hourly rates for things that have gone to trial, but the number of hours you can bill is capped anyway and you almost inevitable bill to the limit of the cap so in practice even the hourly model is sorta a flat fee anyway - it's just a flat fee of X rate multiplied by Y hours. The nice thing about LAO is they usually pay you (eventually) and only occasionally screw you over. Note that's in Ontario. Systems elsewhere would be different.

I almost always charge flat fees. Most lawyers I know do the same. There could be situations where an hourly rate is used instead, but it would be rare for me, and I think it's rare generally.

There doesn't tend to be a lot of negotiating in my practice. I quote a number, sometimes if the client seems to be reluctant to bite at that number I may reduce it a bit. Generally I go into any retainer discussion with two numbers in mind - I hope to get X, I'd settle for Y. It doesn't get more complicated than that. I find it's very helpful to have those ideas in mind already, because otherwise I find I lowball myself badly, when I'm forced to go completely off the cuff. Generally speaking, once you quote a number, you're either in the ballpark of what a client is willing to pay, and then pay it, or they go elsewhere. Criminal defence isn't the sort of thing that a budget conscious shopper bargain hunts for. So generally they either meet the price you quoted or decide you aren't worth it.

There are times I have trouble getting money out of clients, yes, and every lawyer goes through this. The only proven and guaranteed system for avoiding this problem is just to not perform work until you have the money in hand or in your trust account. There are lawyers who take that approach, and refuse to even show up to court for a set date unless they are being paid. But that's a hard line to take, when you have a client who's in custody and needs a bail hearing, or who keeps promising to come up with cash but needs help right now. Inevitably, everyone needs to come up with their own approach to this. But yes, I do get dragged into doing work before I have money in hand, and some of the time that results in fees outstanding that I can't collect. You try to minimize that, but some amount of it is probably a part of the cost of doing business.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2017 at 1:10 PM, LawyerBryant said:

A  few questions open to those equipped to handle such questions: 

do criminal defense lawyers largely charge on a flat-fee basis? 

do you often experience that your clients are willing to pay or do you often times have to go back and forth with them discussing a reasonable price to charge? 

do clients ever bail out and not pay you after the work has been completed? are there any measures in place to prevent clients from not paying despite the legal work having been completed? 

 

thanks

 

1) Yes, mostly flat fee for cash clients - Legal Aid is generally a flat fee, sort of.  For cash clients I'll say "I'll do your trial for 10K...." with the caveat that if unexpected extra issues arise, I may bill more. They sign retainer agreements explaining how the billing is determined.

2) Most of them are quite happy to pay - they know they are getting a valuable service.  Ocassionally there's a bit of haggling over the price. I base fees on what the client can actually afford. If people are screwing around too much not wanting to pay a reasonable fee, I don't take them.

3) No, because I never let it get to that. I don't go on the record or start doing work till they have money in and I withdraw if they stop paying, before it gets to the point that it's too close to trial for a judge to let me withdraw. Those are the measures in place. They have a retainer agreement with a payment schedule. If they fail to pay, they get a couple of reminder calls/letters and if the debt is not satisfied, I get off the record. Harsh, but necessary. (Unless I decide to do a file pro bono, which I will do once in  a while.)

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should add that a flat fee doesn't have to be paid all at once. If the final bill is 10K or 15K or 20K, I understand that most people can't pay that just like that. So they'll have a retainer of 2 or 3 K that they have to pay before I start acting, and then they bring 1K a month, or $500 a week, or whatever is reasonable for them, until they have the full amount, and they will get reminder calls/letters from our assistant and a call if they miss their appointment so that we keep them on track. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×