Andy 0:00 Before we get going tonight, I just wanted to put this up front about the relationship between this podcast, and Marsal. Larry and I both do volunteer work for ourselves. But this podcast is our own creation is our soul to help promote it as a favor. That is the extent of the relationship between the two organizations. If you're mad at us for being political, by all means be mad at us, not in ourselves. However, on that note, if you disagree with me or Larry, feel free to be specific, right, comments, email, and hey, maybe we would have you on the show so you could do count the issues. I hope you enjoy the show. Recording live from the super secret FYI p studios transmitting across the internet. This is Episode 57 of registry matters. Good evening, Larry. Coming to you from my super duper Froggy voice. How are you tonight? Larry 0:48 Well, I'm doing fine. I think my voice is ok for the moment. Oh yeah, yours is fine. I'm talking about mine. I've had a I've had a cold for the last week. Andy 0:56 well that's what you get when you circumnavigate the entire little lower 48 yeah I guess that might be if the end up touching all the gross people with all the germs and I caught something from someone Larry 1:09 and I just stay here in the secret studios and I don't have I don't have that Andy 1:13 problem. Yeah, we are definitely recording in the the hidden FYI p studios bunker and an undisclosed location. The military couldn't track us down in here. Larry 1:25 Well, it is pretty Andy 1:26 much a buck or here. It's got its got like 1950 shag carpet. The sound acoustics in her amazing Larry 1:34 it was all day one opening for a wide and that's it for this place. Andy 1:39 It's like a prison cell just a little bit well accommodated. Hey. So during the past week or so the last two weeks, we've received a couple new patrons. We have a pair of Jeff's, we have Jeff M. And Jeff G. Both coming in at the bigger level and totally appreciate you guys very, very much. Welcome to the registry matters family. Larry 2:01 Well, welcome, Jeff. And Jeff. Andy 2:04 One of them is well known. You know who it is also the other one, I couldn't tell you who he is Jeff G. We definitely both know. But again, thank you guys very much. It's it's really humbling and very much appreciated that you guys will reach out and support the podcast Larry 2:19 beggar level is the beggar level is fantastic. Andy 2:21 Absolutely. So as the indigent level any level of spine even $1, I don't care. I just want the numbers really the numbers the the show of support is more important than the dollar value. Larry 2:31 Well, well, isn't it the more we have patrons does that does that trigger something good for us, the people watching the podcast Andy 2:40 it very well. I don't know if that one specifically. But that brings up something I was going to bring up later. Something that I would like to initiate a campaign just like we did with the YouTube subscribers to get the name channel for to have people to help people find the podcast. If if all of you, like hundreds of listeners, if you would go to the various places, if you would go to iTunes, if you would go to Stitcher, if you would go to like Google and leave a review of the podcast, it would hopefully a five star review. Don't you know, if you don't want to, if you don't like the podcast, you could just forget that I said a word to you. And And so anyway, that would help out a lot. If you would go to those places. I will put locations in the show notes and on the website to make it easier to find where to leave these reviews and such. We did get a question from Dave. He's one of our longest patrons. And he has a question regarding being removed from the registry. This question is if one is removed from the registry by the appellate court in one state and then move to another must one register in the new state. And we were talking about this beforehand, and there might not be enough detail. So I guess we have to get Larry to give us I don't know the 12 different scenarios that this applies to Larry 3:56 put the two nd for Dale and what he says By the way, appellate court, there's a couple different ways you could be removed by an appellate court in the states that have a removal process after you've been on for the requisite amount of time, you could request that process to be removed, and you could appeal that and the appeal could be denied or it could be granted the like the initial stage they could they could say, No, you don't qualify for removal. And they the appellate court could say yes, actually, the the lower court got it wrong. And you qualify for removal from state x. And let's just say hypothetically, Georgia, if you went through that process, you got remove through the process from Georgia court that has absolutely no impact on another state, their definition of a registered what still control so if that Georgian who got removed pursuant to the official code of Georgia section, which is escaping me at the moment, if they move to Wyoming, they would be defined as a sex offender by Wyoming law. And Islamic law defines that person as a sex offender of what Georgia did have no relevance. The other scenario I can describe would be if the person was appealing the actual conviction that put them on the registry from the from the get go if the appellate court or to grant them relief and either declare the statute unconstitutional, or declare something effective about the conviction overturned the conviction and almost all circumstances that would be binding because in most states I've convictions required to be on the registry. So if the conviction itself went away, and I'm not talking about the nuances of if you have a sealed conviction after a requisite amount of conviction self were to be nullified by either a declaration of a deficient statute or deficient process that resulted in conviction and trial were to be thrown out, or the plague would be thrown out, and you no longer have the conviction. And that would generally be binding on the other state there are we could go on and on with scenarios that will keep you on the registry. If you were found not guilty by insanity, for example, you don't have a conviction because that's what the not guilty verdict did not guilty of the criminality by virtue of the fact that most states she would still have to register because the facts in order to be found not guilty by reason of insanity, there has to be proof that you actually did Hinckley had to have been proven to have attempted assassinate Reagan before he could be found not guilty by insanity. So the underlying facts are established before you ever get to the termination of the person is, is not responsible by their mental defect. So in some cases, that would still keep the person on the registry. But in most cases, a lot of conviction, you will no longer have an obligation, right. Andy 6:58 It's interesting, the way that you work lot of that we have an article coming up from a man and I don't want to get into details, we'll cover that in a minute. But he was exonerated by dna evidence, and he is having a hard time getting off the parole board will not let them off of the registration status. Larry 7:17 Oh, we'll have to take a look at that shortly. Andy 7:20 Right. Um, well, Dave, if you want to ask something more pointed, or if you want to reach out and get in touch with Larry directly, let me know and we'll try and get to you hooked up. I know that there was a lot of ambiguity in the way that your question was left to get Larry to leave a specific kind of answer over on Twitter. There's, there's a woman that I've been speaking to she's in the wonderful state of Florida and her son is trying to get into college and she left me she sent me a picture of the the admissions letter where if I don't know, I'm going to get some of the details wrong. But I believe that he was accepted into the school. But at the time, he wasn't allowed to use the Internet, and then that status change, maybe you came off parole, and then he was allowed to use computer whatever, then the college has denied him and like I said, she gave a copy of the admissions letter where they denied his his infant denied him access to the school says, based on information provided, the admissions committee determined it would be best interest of the college to deny your request for admission. And then as a closing line this is we encourage you as you seek to future to improve your future. Well, I mean, you know, they denied the kid go into college, so I guess you know, he can improve his future all he wants just not with them. Larry 8:40 That would appear to be what the letter says. Andy, Andy 8:43 is there any recourse from from them? I mean, I guess I college can choose to allow or not allow anybody that they want? Right? Larry 8:53 I wouldn't say that. I would say that there's always there's always that internal grievance process so would likely not yield any positive results, but many times to go to court, you would need to exhaust that that remedy. And then a lot of these questions that we we deal with on the podcast we truly don't know the answer to because there's no appellate case law to guide us. We don't know what would happen if a person had sufficient financial resources to litigate the issue of publicly funded University denying someone admission, we know that that universities to not people for academic reasons, we know that they have some latitude, but we don't know how far that latitude would go. If it would go that we get into questions. So how long what are the specifics of the of the sex crime? How many years ago did it occur? What sort of rehabilitation has the has the the young men achieved, and there's just too many Larrys here, and he probably lacks the wherewithal to litigate this book. We truly don't know whether my hunch is that that that that this case law is going to develop as we go forward slowly, in terms of denying people access to parks, and all the different things that people Larry 10:14 publicly collectively contribute to it's it's quite a shame that you can pay taxes for a public university and not be allowed to access the university system. And that's, that seems like that's what's going to happen, no matter what university he applies to me if he applies to another public colleges, that he's likely to get the same result Andy 10:36 do you do? Have you seen this get litigated in other situations, and do you know the results either way, Larry 10:43 I don't know of any litigation. Hopefully, one of our listeners will tell us that they know of I don't know of anyone being denied admission and having having litigated the issue. We're just beginning to save civil litigation in terms of Park denials, and all the public places that that people are not allowed to go to Illinois has a great system of restricted people from everything from lakes, to parks, to, you name it, and they're restricted. It's a lifetime ban and Illinois, it's not just for the duration of registration, it's it's a permanent ban, as I understand that, Andy 11:18 and we know that as far as re rehabilitation, recidivism rate goes, education, job family, those are massive, massive, massive predictors of recidivism. So more education, more family support, more job opportunities. So here we have a school that's actually like in cahoots with the idea of, well, maybe we should just send them all back to prison? Larry 11:42 Well, I would say that that you would want the ideal candidate for litigation and you would want to, to have one because you always want to argue that maybe they have the right to do but have to narrowly tailored, they have to specifically it's like the conditions of supervision, for example, we keep saying, Well, yes, they can have significant internet restrictions, but they can't have a blanket ban, and they have to narrowly tailored there. Again, depending on the specifics of this, this might be an appropriate rejection, liking specificity in terms of what the what the, the offense was, but it might be totally inappropriate, because it may be totally related to the university population. You don't have a lot of minds around university campuses Do you Andy 12:24 know not not normally, there might be one or two that get it, you know, early admissions when they're 16 and they're savant or something. Larry 12:31 But if this for for example, if this were were Romeo Giulietta Feds were there was only a slight difference in age one of those states where where they didn't you even if you're even close in age, if it's a minor that might be that might be it make a good candidate of it was up. And if it was a possession of porn under age that you just go carefully analyze, and you want to get the best best candidate for litigation, you probably don't want to just go willy nilly with anybody you can find, which is what we caution against. On When, when, when I'm on the dorsal litigation review committee, we're looking very carefully at how how well the plaintiff has been selected, how well the candidate for making the challenges because even though it shouldn't, as I said, we don't live in the world the way it should be. We're in the world the way it is, be and judges are human and they're going to look they're going to look at their double at all sacrificial look at so we want to have the most attractive candidate we can, but I would love to see litigation move forward. This The only thing holding us back all the stuff is what and Andy 13:40 it's going to be, let's see here, big cars, hang on more groceries? No, it's just going to be final cash. Larry 13:48 That's that's the biggest barriers that this litigation is very costly because the governmental entities regards for your fighting state or federal, even local, they have vastly superior resources and they will fight tooth and nail to protect all this stuff. And the university system would come in with their attorney with their legal team that they would they would be able to to extinguish a person who was just haphazardly funded and organized. It certainly appropriate person I would probably extinguish, but they would, they would extinguish the litigation pretty quickly if the person wasn't well prepared, because they have superior superior resources to work with. Andy 14:29 Well, let's move on to this email message or voicemail message. This is from a new listener who's only been listening for a couple weeks, so I can't thank you enough for I would actually reach out and let me know how you found us. And so we can try and traffic those areas to get more listeners. But here's a voicemail message Larry 14:47 or Yeah, well, I'm gonna remain anonymous. I am a registering calling out of Virginia. I've been listening to the podcast for about a week now. And yes, I am very interested in becoming a patriot. But I you know, I'm no I'm not only one is, you know, Brian about this thing, because I know there were some people that didn't have to register at all. And then all of a sudden, they are put on the registry idea, receive a letter last year stating that actor petition after 25 years to get off. But my main thing is, I would just like to know if about the ex post facto law. And if that would have any effect on my situation, Larry 15:35 what do you have to say there? Larry 15:37 Well, I've appreciate having the new listener and I appreciate the question. And we do talk about from time to time. And that's the beauty of the podcast, we can come back and talk about, again, ex post facto, the analysis of ex post facto only applies to criminal laws. And there's nothing in the constitution that prevents retroactive application of something that doesn't inflict punishment. Larry 16:05 And there's where it gets tricky because a regulatory scheme if it's truly regulatory not inflicting punishment that can be applied retroactively. That's what the Supreme Court said Smith versus Doe, which is the landmark decision is still control for this day, Larry 16:23 a relatively benign registry scheme for that would be 10 years. And then they went back and added another 10 years to it, as long as it remained a benign non punitive requirement that could be done. I know, that's not folks saying that I approve of that. That's saying that from a constitutional perspective, it could be done, you could extend a regulatory requirement beyond the original time, the regulation was required, as long as it remain pure that because the Ex Post Facto Clause protect people from punishment, you could theoretically have a registration scheme that of that inflicted no punishment. And I've cited the example of what would happen if you simply were told to register a punk conviction in mail in a form once a year, never had any restrictions on where you live, never had any restrictions on where you work, never had any obligation to go in and person to see anybody, the only thing you had to do is melt the form and notify them within 10 or 20 or 30 days of changing any any any of your residential information. That would be not a whole lot different than what you read your when you register a car, you're supposed to register in most states within 30 days of becoming a resident first register vehicle and convert your driver's license and you're supposed to notify them when you change that information, usually within 30 days, I haven't heard anybody allege that that's punitive. And it's not it's it's a regulatory measure? Well, you could have a registry for sex offenders that was equally benign. Unfortunately, most of the registries are far more than just what I described. But until the registry requirements of your state have been challenged sufficiently with a well developed case, showing how that those requirements have evolved to be to inflict punishment, they are assumed to be regulatory, and that's the stated purpose of the registry. And that's what the courts have said time and time again, until the last 10 years, the courts have begun to look at the ever increasing requirements and they have said Well no, this is no longer regulatory Larry 18:43 you're being required to do too many things that it resembles too much like probation supervision and probation supervision is punitive therefore you can't so in terms of the question about the Supreme Court looking at this term I don't know of a case that they've granted review that deal specifically with ex post facto I just I just don't know what he's talking about I know that there's like there's a case that that that's on cert petition from North Carolina but they a case I don't know a case that has to do with Larry 19:18 delegation but that has nothing to do with ex post facto all the people would like to it they would like for it to be about ex post facto it has to do with delegation clause so I'm not familiar with what what what he's talking about but in terms of Virginia I happen to believe to Virginia registers punitive anybody who's on it would agree that punitive but that has to be proven and a court either state or federal court that that that that's the case the courts are not roving tribunals looking forward, to speak, to settle, there has to be a party that's aggrieved at the party has to bring the complaint through the proper process, build an evidentiary record and prove and show by the Claire's to prove that that the Constitution is being violated. It's not to states job to prove anything, it's the challenging part is responsibility to prove it. That means registrants in Virginia are going to have to make the challenge and put forth the proof that their registry has evolved and transform to be punitive Hope that answers a little bit of what of what he's getting up. Andy 20:26 So can we move Excuse me? Can we move up the scale just a little bit? So you talked about just like mailing out a form once a year? What would be an amazing this is totally your opinion, what would move it from being just regulate regulatory to something resembling punishment? Is it that we go to the police station? Is it that we get booked like we're being convicted of something or charged with something? Where does that line get crossed? Is it the the number of times per year that it happens? Where do you think it crosses that line? Larry 20:58 It's not real clear because of all the decisions where the line has been crossed, and there's a number of them. There's the Wallace case out of Indiana, there's the left lane case out of man. There's the Starkey case out of Oklahoma, there's a dose vs. cider case out of Michigan. And I mean, I can go on and on. But with a little bit of thought of the four where the registry has been declared to have crossed the line. The only case the recent case there's still an appeal out of Colorado in the Maillard versus rank in case it's not clear there there is because under the Supreme Court guidance there seven factors this called a kid to do Mendoza Martinez test. And and they don't tell you exactly where how much the weight each of the seven factors and one or two of the factors are not even relevant. But the one I lean most heavily to is disabilities or restraints, as does the requirement impose any disability or restraint one myth vs. Doe analysis. If you look at that decision from page 100 of the case the the there there was no disability restraining posed by the Alaska regular regulatory scheme. Back in 2003, when the court was looking at that's not the case. These days, there are tremendous disabilities Australia, you look at the summit as a those verses cybercafes out of Michigan, they said the 2006 and 2000 changes clearly transform to be punitive, in Michigan has residency restrictions, and they changed the direction of registration, which is what this gentleman complaining about. And they change the frequency of reporting, which is he's complaining about it very well, could be that that the line has been crossed in Virginia, we just don't know. But I'll lean more toward that disability restraint. If If the court says we find this as constitutional, because it does not do these things to be the logical conclusion what they once they start doing those things that that's contrary to what the US Supreme Court said, it's myth vs. Don't I'm not the brightest person around that, to me, seems like a pretty clear cut, we uphold us because it doesn't do this. If it's doing them, it seems like to me or you have to do is go back and litigate and say the court said you could do this as long as you didn't do these things. They're now doing these things. So based on Smith vs. Though, you cannot continue to do this while running Valdez Post Facto Clause. That is what I would argue can't guarantee it to work. But I can guarantee you won't if you don't. Andy 23:35 Yeah, definitely. That and then we're back to finding attorneys to help bring the challenging you need. You need Paul doing doodling caliber attorneys. You can't just get a run of the mill attorney that's going to fight this and you need a six figure bankroll right, Larry 23:51 that's what you need. And unfortunately, that's not available to most registrants. So we understand that they end up wanting to go back to their public defender they want to challenge what what's the civil regulatory scheme, and the public defenders are not allowed to do that. So they end up with a very limited challenges that they can do mostly by violating the registry and then but they put forth the motion to dismiss claimants, it's registry is evolved to be punitive and the trial judge that's going to be trying them I'll be charged violating some some violation of the registry finds that it's not punitive, they just simply regurgitate Smith vs though, and say it's not people do. And they may want without an evidentiary record to do this, right, you're going to have to bring a civil action which were the civil courts of setup to develop evidence, that's what they do and civil disputes and you build an evidentiary record, you put the put the state on trial, and you call witnesses and you cross examine their witnesses that you take depositions, you do things that cost money, you really can't do much of that in a criminal setting. But unfortunately, that's how a lot of registration challenges are broader through the through the criminal process. So that's not ideal. And the results are usually not good. Andy 24:59 Interesting. That's really, really interesting. I'm, I'm sure we're going to come back around to that issue at some point time in the future. Let's try and cover some articles before we run out of time. So this week was interesting that the the effects of a law being signed into place around April is called it's foster ancestor, which I know that the sister one is the sex trafficking something or another look up foster fo es, ta or se Sta. And you'll find all the information about it. And I have some information in the show notes. But both Facebook and Tumblr and maybe you guys remember, we would have covered this that Craigslist pulled down their personal ads, it's all related to that, that the government has decided that anything that it's section 230 of the foster assessed side of things that a content provider so a Facebook, anybody like that if they have sexually explicit content, they have been exempt from being prosecuted for having, you know, some sort of questionable content, whether that's pornography or moving it on down to like child pornography. But there are a lot of people who work in an industry you know, in the sex sex industry cam shows our sex chat and and they provide these services. But now places like Tumblr and Facebook have now started they've removed all the content. And this is now I mean, in my opinion, I, you know, hey, if two consenting adults want to do it, let them do it. But here these operations have taken their content off because there is then a threat of a government challenge to bring them up on charges of having this stuff. So this is totally like puritanical government overreach in my opinion. Larry 26:51 Well, this is an example of where you have that great bipartisanship of the conservatives and the liberals say conservatives because usually they they come up they come at this from a moral point of view and the the the the liberals on this, there's the victimization of to make these Larry 27:10 there's theoretically trying to target those that are beyond below the age of 40, where they can voluntarily be the content sometimes it's under age that that's their allegation that the content of was on top words as under age, and therefore people are being victimized. So you get the victims and their advocates together, and you get the conservatives who believe we should be pure as a society, and you get bad public policy. So that that's an example of your great bipartisanship that you strive for at work, because I can just buy guarantee, got it and look at the votes. But I just do I guarantee you just sort of bit unanimously approved by Democrats or Republicans and sent to President Trump and any like, I'll say, President who gets this stuff, they're going to sign it I can't be any more consistent than I am about that whatever president's office, if he's get something protect children for to stop exploitation of children, they are going to sign it even regardless Andy 28:09 of Army. But even even in the case of someone that is doing some kind of legitimate work, however, you want to word that and they're an adult, and it's consenting and they didn't get extorted into it that it gets sex trafficked into it. You have I hear I heard actually driving up here that you that you've taken away where they are known now they are moving into places Larry And wouldn't it be better for the government to like just put their finger on the pulse of something and know that all the bad things are happening in this place instead of going to shut it down you could just use that as not entrapment. But just as the place where you know that this is going on and you could not regulated but just monitor it and no, you know, if you find the kiddie porn go out there and arrest the people that opposed to the kiddie porn, if somebody is doing something legit, and offering sex chat for five cents a post, I don't know, then let them run it. Have fun. Larry 28:58 Well, that's decadence society that allows people to engage in camp shows and all that kind of vile stuff. I mean, what's what's what the hell's wrong? Larry 29:08 Is that what would that violate your supervision conditions? Is that watching porn? Larry 29:13 Well, I don't like watching a camp show would be considered porn and my book it's not been porn isn't that recorded. If you look at Port you're wicked, either magazine or you're looking at or video but you're if you're looking at live that that's that's just simply camp show. Andy 29:28 I can't even contain myself. I'm laughing so hard. I can't even I can't argue with you. But I have to think that there's no condition that a supervising person would come in and look at you. And you're like, Hey, man, I'm just watching a capture these two people are live or one person, whatever. And they would like Oh, sure, man. That's no problem. Because you're not watching porn. Do you have any point on your phone? Nope. What's all these cam show stuff that's live. It's not on my phone. Larry 29:57 Well, now they they generally have brought enough to say you can't watch the live performance as well. But if they didn't have that they just said Larry 30:06 can't watch porn then you get into a nuanced discussion about what constitutes porn and that's what the court many years ago again, I can't define it but I sure Larry 30:15 that that's what they said in the Supreme Court. Larry 30:18 Well, so don't don't forget the fight it but I know when I see it, but I can show is not poor. And I don't know why you don't understand. They also Andy 30:25 say that you can't dial 900 numbers. But if you find someone that you can, like, if you can have a live conversation with someone that has some naughty words, but you couldn't text message someone with naughty words. How is that different? Larry 30:40 I'm not sure on that. I don't even know there's another nine. There's a 900 number still in existence. What? Andy 30:44 Okay, so for those of you that don't know what a 900 number is, do you think there's anybody listening that doesn't know what a 900 numbers I would think there's a Larry 30:51 heck of a lot of people who don't know what 900 numbers are Andy 30:54 2000, maybe they would have died, there was it was a way for you to dial a phone number, and it was reverse the charges instead of you placing a collect call where it would be built to the other side. But you were paying for a service and you pay I don't know, 299 a minute, $15 for the first minute and 299 for each minute after that, or something like that. Larry 31:12 It was it was a racket. I can tell you that. But yes, it was a paid service. But that was the days when it was able to be put on your phone bill and collected through the the company that ran the 900 service. They would interface with the local telephone company, which probably less than half the people have a land based line anymore. It can be charged to it. But that was the days where you got everything on your phone bill. Andy 31:38 So a little personal story. I was, I don't know, 12 or 13. And my father had some naughty magazines. And in the back of the magazine there was like, you know, pages and pages and pages and page I think I Larry 31:51 I hear this I think Larry 31:53 I ran up about $600 a phone bills. And you know, this was 1983 or four or five or something like that my parents were not happy. Larry 32:04 Well, know what you were making the calls Did you did you realize there was gonna be a charge or was it not clear? Andy 32:11 I would have to say I probably like I'm sure it was clear, but I didn't understand. I didn't understand the rules of the game. And you know, Hey, man, you're just picking up the phone. You call your friend down the street you called your grandma like there was no consequences for that. Why can't you call some naughty chick readings and you know it was just a tape recorder right you just hearing a naughty message on a tape I wasn't talking anybody well and it was and how did those charges get paid for a I'm I grew up in a pretty well to do house so I don't think it was any issue on actually paying the bill I think it was an issue of like, Damn, dude, you're stupid. Larry 32:49 So well. I remember those skills back when we had Larry 32:54 lived in a rural area and we had black rotary phones that were on the wall I remember those days most people most people had them in the kitchen and they were beginning to push out direct dial you could everybody at one time doubt operator make a long distance and they were said you could dial one of the number and I was convinced because I was only in my single years maybe 910 I was very young and I was convinced that that that you could dial that in it wouldn't know that you were doing it not made a long distance call so when the bill came through like $1 35 or whatever was had some explaining to do about where that call when and what was the purpose of it was because it wasn't that far when I say long distance you could be calling a very short geographic this this but if you were outside the toll free area and I had a large toll free area but we were outside you could want to be calling from covering Conyers he called the odd Conyers It was a long distance call into Atlanta you could call from Kevin to the call your that it was local than if you went to the next town up like don't deal with long distance. Andy 34:03 Alright, so somebody in the chat just just gave us like one of their conditions. It says sexually oriented material you shall not possess or subscribe to any sexually oriented or sexually stimulating material to include male computer or TV nor patronize any place where such material or entertainment is available. Larry 34:23 Well, that would be broad enough that that would cover most everything. But But we were just having a discussion about whether it's porn. What it's not porn, but it is sexually Andy 34:31 stimulating. Maybe it might be it might. Maybe it's not for you. Larry 34:36 Well, it is for me. That's why Larry 34:39 all right, then Andy 34:41 ready to be a part of registry matters. Get links at registry matters dot CEO. If you need to be all discreet about it, contact them by email registry matters cast at gmail. com, you can call or text or ransom message to 747 to to 744771 a support registry matters on a monthly basis. Head to patreon.com slash registry matters. Not ready to become a patron, give a five star review at Apple podcasts or Stitcher or tell your buddies that your treatment class about the podcast, we want to send out a big heartfelt support for those on the registry. Keep fighting. Without you, we can't succeed, you make it possible. So let's go on to this next article. And this is on the heels of the first step act. So the Congressional Budget Office, which is I guess, like a nonpartisan group, and they they digest all the information on how a bill is going to affect the government. And so if you follow the stuff the health care bill, it was supposed to increase costs by this but then reduce it over time and all this. But they said on the heels of the first step act that the CEO predicted that the faster release of inmates would increase the number of people benefiting from federal programs like Medicare and Social Security, since inmates are generally an eligible for many federal assistance programs, while serving time I don't think that you can get your nut check while you're while you're locked up. Right? Larry 36:10 That is correct that the the people who who accepted system when when they're properly exiting the system, they can if they were receiving Larry 36:22 Social Security, retirement survivors or disability, it would have been suspended while they're in prison is. So it's an amazing situation where they don't catch that because the Social Security Administration is notified of the social security number of everybody who's in custody, when you're in custody, in all likelihood, your benefits are going to be terminated. Andy 36:43 So they said, they said that that would increase direct federal government spending by 346 million, and reduce revenue by 6 million, also from so 3634, $346 million over 10 years. So $34 million a year, like considering that we have a $5 trillion budget, that's kind of the drop of the hat. Larry 37:07 Well, it's kind of kind of hard to know, I suspected that there'll be things that are the people eligible for, like the states that have adopted, it's difficult to know who went and when they leave the federal prison and exactly where they're going to go back to. But you may have states who have expanded their Medicaid to capture the hundred percent federal payment for the expanded population, which dropped to 90%, if you if you knew exactly where they're going to go, they're going to be eligible for Medicaid right away, that would that would add to the federal spending, because the federal government still picking up 99% of that. So some of this is destroying in the dark. But what what it'll show is illustrates the bigger point when people talk about all this money that will be saved. It's kind of like when they talk about all the money that the registry will save, if they just simply had a risk based system. Well, when you when you let people out of prison that don't magically go to work. And oftentimes, they'll end up on a benefit of some type because of lack of employability, and they'll either go back onto the Social Security system after old enough, they'll seek disability benefits if they have enough recent work history, or they'll go into snap, and they'll go on to any type of benefit that they can. So it illustrates the bigger point that what we really need to be doing, which is what we've talked about on podcast before, if to make prison resemble the outside world as much as we can and have transferable talent did that goes with the prisoner when they go out the door with reintegration assistance into the workforce with trying to make sure that they don't go on the dole, which is what's missing in the CBl analysis. I'd like to say the other half of it, which is of this population that are leaving that that 64% of 100 are within their prime working age years and that they should be reintegrated into the workforce and be paying taxes and how much additional revenue we would have that part of it some missing they're just looking at the negative side of how many of them will seek benefits but we can't do something about that if we only have the will Andy 39:09 and the first step act was the whole kit and caboodle and everything is fixed on the federal criminal justice system now Larry 39:16 no it's That's why they call it first step I think people realize that it was a minute first step there was a lot of pushback a lot of concessions had to be made to get that passed we're going to have through this was it was another election cycle or all life is we know what and criminality the crime rate doesn't sky raw perhaps we can go back and build upon the first step back but Larry 39:43 people for getting them back into the workforce is of paramount importance. We don't want to release people to go on to the public assistance dollars of some type we want to really people with transferable job skills and become taxpayers that's my idea. I agree with Senator Lindsey Graham about them Andy 40:00 they need to be working so this article then comes from Fox 17 out of Nashville the wonderful state of Tennessee here's a man who spent 11 years in jail based on the testimony of a 12 year old and a report that said he could be a DNA match I think that could be is a as a key element there and after all that time served during that time his 15 year old son I think it said was had committed suicide and then through through processes they they he was exonerated is a completely exonerated Mr. Males based on DNA evidence. And but the parole board there in Tennessee will not take him off their their roles. And I I'm still kind of baffled at how he can be he's completely exonerated that he didn't do this crime. He couldn't have been involved in the crime, get the parole board there will not let him off of the registry requirements there. Larry 41:02 Well, it's clear in the article either it says the board and quote seems to see Larry 41:09 cuter judges on the top of legal system, you would assume that DNA completely exonerated Mr. Mill's would at least get a hearing but when the parole board attorney he doesn't even bear to hearing it's impossible to explain. Said I guess that's the attorney. Yeah. Daniel. Larry 41:25 It baffles me as well. Larry 41:28 I'm at a loss to explain, Andy 41:29 did you say that they can second guess the whole legal system? Larry 41:33 Well, that's what the quote from Mr. Horowitz says her and are in the article Andy 41:36 That's bizarre, like, I thought that they would be the final. I mean exonerating means like hey, can we roll the clock back and start over there? Like, we just need to go back to square one, right. I mean, that's what exoneration means. Larry 41:50 That's what that's what I'm thinking. But Larry 41:54 it's it's it's not clear that the exoneration is complete Andy 41:59 didn't something like that happened in Georgia, and the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that was it wasn't that the case that brand and Thomas had worked on do you know, Larry 42:09 I don't remember, I seem Andy 42:11 to remember something vaguely similar, that someone had their their sentence squashed. And the parole board said, Now you you were convicted. So you get to stay on the registry here in Georgia. And, and eventually the the Georgia Supreme Court said, No, that's garbage. Because exoneration means that you should have never been convicted in the first place. So how would you end up on the registry? Then Larry 42:37 think I vaguely remember that? Well, this this is certainly one we'd want to try to follow them figure out. But it's bizarre that they can't get off of the registry. And he's he's been cleared as an impossible that he couldn't have committed the crime. Well, say. And that's one of the things where I always find it crawling prosecutors, if it's if it's been proven and possible, it would seem like to meet the prosecutor because they have a special higher duty of ethics. You look at the Code of Professional Conduct, it would seem like the prosecutor but they never do sell them. But the prosecutor would want to clear this person's name and block this person to go back to normal life. That's what I would think. Andy 43:18 But how I mean, like, even normal life, so Okay, fine. You somehow can restore the guys 11 years of life. But in there, his kid committed suicide because dad was in prison. And he just felt, you know, whatever the kid was going through, as far as dads abandoned me, and so forth. I mean, if he was 15 years old, the kid was, you know, four years old when dad got locked up. So right, when the kid is becoming something of a functional entity, and not just a little bundle of goo. You know, Dad's not their dads in prison, you're visiting dad in prison, trying to go through the whole Shakedown process. They're doing a cavity searches on the kid going into jail to visit dad, and the kid can't handle it all. I mean, how do you can't undo that. I mean, that seems like that would be even grounds for a massive lawsuit against the state to Larry 44:05 Well, I hope so. And maybe from our Tennessee people will tell us more. But it's the bizarre thing I've ever seen. Andy 44:14 Well, this is going to be kind of an off the cuff conversation you brought up something to me roughly a week ago, maybe two weeks ago about the system being designed to target certain kinds of individuals. And there is a faction of people going around saying that the system is designed to target homosexuals. And I found an article that I mean, I ultimately agree with you that the system is not designed to target homosexuals. But that doesn't mean that there aren't humans that then twist how the system works to target whatever class people that is. And so I found this article that talks about people in Texas where there are murder convictions and the whole the whole operation there where the families can't get any evidence behind how their their their their child was, or you know, their family member was killed. And the reason why I chose this article as like the the reason behind it is because the system itself has policies and processes and things in place to help I don't think that the system is designed or there are there are checks and balances in the system to help people you know counter against the system However, if there are enough things inside of the system that push back and I don't being really vague but if there are enough if there's like if the whole police system is corrupt you know talk like I don't know 1950s or something like police force mafia is run around the police just do whatever they want there's no there's no checks and balances Larry 45:59 and Andy 46:02 this article has you know, it's a long article out of reason magazine and there's this police force that the families can never get information about how their child was killed and so anyway like what I'm getting at is I wanted you to speak to this whole thing where there's a group of people that think that the system is designed the system is designed to target homosexuals How was that for a veil completely amorphous non specific introduction Larry 46:30 you're trying to have me assassinated are Larry 46:32 not necessarily we can cut it if you want to Andy 46:35 so well I'm not being specific about it Larry 46:40 well i've i've heard that for a long time and and i just don't i don't see the evidence that that that supports that I see evidence that supports that individuals within the system misused or power would be foolishly naive to think that if I said that people who work in prisons don't take advantage of our call people who are LGBT community to be to be missed I would be foolish to say that that police officers when you when you're talking about a criminal case it goes through dozens and dozens of people from its trajectory from from the time that the original first phone call report to please reporting field officer to the detectives Bureau to the to the review by the intake at the district attorney and prosecution office to to the actual prosecutor prosecutor the defense attorney the judge the pre-sentence report it to probation office there's just so many steps it would be it would be absurd to think that somebody who didn't have an anti gay bias did did not touch that case because the the most Larry 47:55 well liberal numbers of the gay population as it sinks data so that means 90 plus percent of the people or not and so of course you're going to find people who have those biases and who are going to let them impact what they're doing but i have i've got been convinced that when people made the laws they sat around and said all right a boys and girls we've got a problem with with older men targeting teenage boys for sex so therefore we're going to make it against the law for adults to have sex with with with with teenagers but it only goes for boys we don't care about if it's girls or if it's girl girl or whatever it's just we find it disgusting that that that that that these homosexual men are targeting these teenage boys now even though I don't see any evidence of that I do see evidence of people who works the system deliberately going out of their way to target prosecution because they have that law of the books and they they they use that because of their own personal bias but that's not the system designed that way that's the actual practice of the practitioners and I made on being a bit naive but I've not been convinced that the system was designed to I don't think that the system was designed that way I think that's the result of human frailties and imperfections and biases and prejudices isn't that Andy 49:23 though I mean if we go to the run book stuff in in in Florida it's not against just boys I mean that was a that was a female nanny or babysitter whatever that was accused of of mess with Lauren book so I mean it's not targeting just boys it's that that brings into evidence that there's a there's a female component there too Larry 49:44 yeah then the one of the hottest least from a male perspective hotter sex the Federal Register for her name's escaping me at the moment but she got national variety was a teacher and a teenage boy Andy 49:56 we also had the case like there was the the teacher this was like New England good at yeah you gotta just just less than a year ago because we covered it on the podcast she was 22 and he was 18 I guess it's not kids but he was you know still under like the child relationship parents teacher not parent teacher the teacher student relationship Larry 50:19 that I'll take it like Debbie la Fey or something and the one in Florida was also notorious back 10 years ago but but I just don't I see the result and I'm best result but I'm not convinced that the people who created the the laws or were his cloak of secrecy tried to target homosexuals now if the evidence I'm a big believer in evidence if someone can bring me the evidence I'll buy into the scheme but I just it's the same result and there's cause the results I I'm convinced but I don't know that that will say that we get those results because that was the plan I think of results because that's the people and and you can probably address this better than me How come he is that Larry 51:08 that that so many guys when they were that police uniform ready type of uniform and they find it so objectionable that two guys are be kissing are touching each other. And there's their turn. So turned on that to women are doing the same thing. And since the majority of police officers and law enforcement are men that would explain some of the bias right there. But I can't explain why you guys look at things that way. Why is it you so find it so revolting? The two guys are getting it on? Can you tell me that Andy 51:35 I can't explain it. And I think about it often, and I just go I just have to accept it. If I like one and not the other, but then I'm being a hypocrite. So I try to not be a hypocrite. So if it's a turn on for two guys to guess, enjoy. not my thing. Two girls kissing God? Is that the hottest thing unless, of course, they're really ugly females. And that's not to offend anybody. But I'm just saying, Larry 51:59 Okay, so we're, it's, it's okay. But it's not hot. It is not. Larry 52:03 It's not user, Larry 52:04 you would not use your powers to prosecute. So if you're an officer, you rolled up on two guys make it out in a car, you would give them every bit of the break that you did the two girls because this is just as an illegal to be doing that in public. Would you give them the same break? Would you say you guys need to get dressed and get out of here before I have to before have to take you out? Or would you would you do what typically male chauvinist would do and say, Well, I don't put up with any of that around here. I got this bad, y'all. Man. I'm gonna do my job. And I will have to run y'all. Liam, Andy 52:36 I can say that I would not lock them up. I wouldn't, I would tell them to get on their way. But if the two girls making out, you know, who knows, maybe we hang out for a while. Larry 52:46 I think, Andy 52:46 by the way, this this Deborah Lafave. That's her name. She is a good looking lady. And she's serving five to 15 years for having sex with a 14 year old student while she was married. And while she was a teacher, Larry 53:01 and I'll tell you this, her husband that she was married to was a sexy man. So I don't know what she was seeing him at the edge boy, but she already had good Andy 53:10 stuff. All right. She may have had something good, like in presentation but maybe there was something lacking on the other side of things. Larry 53:18 Well, if you're if you're if you're getting turned off by taking a 15 year old foil that are freezing up with something that that's all fruit that that young people drink. Larry 53:31 Not very Andy 53:33 special. Okay, taking the kid out for a smoothie instead of like getting a beer. Larry 53:36 Yeah. Larry 53:38 So what you're saying Larry 53:38 yeah, that's what she was doing. She was like she was alive. She wasn't get forgiven him alcoholic beverages. There was no evidence of that she at least took a bottom smoothies Andy 53:48 Yeah, she was sentence in 2006 to three years residence and seven years probation. Good grief. Man. That's not really that doesn't sound the Wikipedia page said something different than the age JC Larry 54:01 It was a community controls what they call it. God, why Andy 54:05 do you know this? I also realized, you know that I get paid to Nobel Okay. Is that is that what you're paid for? By registry matters? Larry 54:12 Yes. That's the I'm supposed to know things. Andy 54:15 All right, then. Well, Larry, I had moved a bunch of articles to the bottom that is all we have for this evening. And so we have we have some we have to make some adjustments and how we we announced the phone number. How do people get in touch with us? Larry 54:33 Well, they have options but if they choose the old fashioned option, they call us at area code. 747-227-4477. And if you didn't catch that, I'll repeat it and then you could do the replay 7472 to 74477 Andy 54:55 or is there a website that someone could go to to find all of this information Larry 54:59 they could could go to registry matters dot c Oh, Larry 55:04 and how about if they want to shoot us an email message Larry 55:08 that would be fantastic and they could do that it registry matters cast@gmail.com Andy 55:15 and if somebody wants to support the podcast and show all the love and appreciation for the work that we do here registry matters how do they do that Larry 55:22 they get they contact me directly for my personal account number to wire the funds to Larry 55:27 I got it what is the alternate method Larry 55:31 I think there's something about Patreon patreon.com slash registry matters. Andy 55:37 This is we are recording this on the 29th of December so in two days it is going to roll the clock so in two days and four hours it's going to roll the clock into 2019 Larry 55:50 how we're going to be having a happy new year with fantastic growth I think we're actually going to be recording next week of the week after I'm going to be traveling so next week will be on a normal record schedule Andy 56:02 okay groovy so if anybody wants to chime in on discord and listen to us record this live and laugh at us or ask questions while we're recording feel free we record some around seven o'clock eastern time and the links are at the website at registry matters that CEO to get into discord and if you're friendly and all that maybe you can you can say hi, and you know, have your 10 minutes of fame with all that though, Larry, I wish you a very very very happy new year I prosperous and I will talk to you soon. Larry 56:35 Thanks Andy. Good night. Bye.