Andy 0:00 registry matters is an independent production. The opinions and ideas here are that of the hosts and do not reflect the opinions of any other organization. If you have a problem with these thoughts, FYI p recording live from FTP studios, east and west, transmitting across the internet. This is Episode 64 of registry matters, Larry, it's hot here. It's like in the 70s. It's silly. Larry 0:22 We're not having that problem, Andy 0:24 really. And I guess we could ask Josh if he's having like negative hundred or whatever it was up there. Larry 0:31 It's not quite that bad here but it is a little bit Dippy storms blowing in. So they say Andy 0:37 apparently people out there on the inter webs really like having Josh on the podcast. Larry 0:42 Is that right? Well, maybe we should have him replace me. And I will have to get up and do this on Saturday. Andy 0:48 We could do that if you are so inclined. I don't know man. We might get a an uprising of people burning down the castle gates if you try and jump ship Larry 0:59 so well. I'll hang in here for another week. Andy 1:03 Alright, cool. So all right. So anybody out there? Larry's Larry's quitting next week. Send all your emails to larry@crackpot.org. Right? Right. Right. Right. How's your new car? Larry 1:18 Well, it's running Andy 1:20 is it and you're okay with parking it now. I haven't Larry 1:23 haven't received anything yet. Andy 1:27 So tiny little car. I'm sure whatever you hit would not notice. Did you get a smart car? What is a smart car? It is slightly larger than a basketball player. shoe is a ridiculously small car. It is literally it's a to see car and the front wheels are at your feet. And the rear wheels are extra. But Larry 1:48 oh, a car. It's not quite a small. Andy 1:53 All right. Well, let's get this show on the road. Let's do it. All right. We got a question from a Patreon supporter, Mike in Florida. And this goes to this is a really complicated issue. And I totally understand where he's coming from. It's and his question is about the Sixth Circuit, which we've covered for, I don't know like the last four episodes. Jeff originally asked the question about the Sixth Circuit decision. But Mike says I'm a little confused here. If the sixth district covers Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee, wouldn't all of those states be liable to make similar changes to its registry the same as Michigan will most likely have to and you please explain how In your opinion, the different states in that district would respond or react to whatever changes are made in Michigan, would they possibly follow? As always, I love the podcast on Patreon supporter Can you please talk about it on some podcast in the future if possible. I'm still here in Florida. But I have immediate family in Kentucky and may consider moving if it changes for excuse me, if it changes for the better. Please keep up the great work. You are my favorite podcast of all time. You're probably the most important thing I listened to all week. You guys rock Mike, thank you very much for all that that is a very heartfelt and makes me all squishy inside. Does your heart. palpitating I am and I'm all here. I'm kind of like getting a little bit of sweat and gets I don't I just feel good inside, I got some tingles. Larry 3:18 Well, we've always been taught that for every person that contacts you. There are a lot more that feel the same and don't take the time to bother particular with a positive comment you get you tend to get more negative comments. So I'm hoping that's an indicator that other people feel similar, but we do appreciate it. Yep. It's a lot of good questions buried in here. And I would start by clarifying that when we talk about the six we're actually talking about the Sixth Circuit, the the appellate level, federal courts are referred to a circus, the the trial level, those are districts so it's the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee and wouldn't they'll stay be liable to make some changes to the registry potentially. But what we have to remember is that all laws are presumed constitutional until they're decided to the contrary they enjoy that presumption. So how's law continues to be presumed constitutional Kentucky's preserve its presented a constitutional and Tennessee's is presumed to be constitutional until a challenging party proves shells by the clearest to prove that it's not this Sixth Circuit decision would give them what we call as as presidential authority to make the argument but we cannot assume that would automatically work because the registries are not the same. And they'll states you would have to look at what tipped the circuit finding and favor which was a 2006 and 2011 amendments that Michigan adopted. Do you have the same thing in Kentucky did they did they soup up their registry in 2006 and 2011 or in a two year using the exact same language of the Michigan statute with the same prohibitions, which which the court found very troubling, which was the proximity restrictions, the residency restrictions, and then the increasing the duration registration, it might be that those other states have have have the potential for the registries to be attacked with a valid challenge. But I second can are the state's going to feel compelled? No, they're not. They're not going to be feel compelled or persuaded to do anything until they're told to do so. And and then sometimes that's not even enough to persuade them. It hasn't persuaded Michigan to do anything. So to imagine that a court in another state would feel compelled to do something that the state of the litigation hasn't felt like I felt compelled to do, it would be very optimistic thinking I would not expect any state would feel compelled or persuaded or inspired to make any changes until a challenges brought forth in those states. So my question is, what are the people waiting for? And they'll states? And of course I know rhetorical, rhetorical question. The answer is they're waiting for funding. And they're waiting for a good qualified legal team. And they're waiting for the right places to come forward that hopefully will have somewhat of a sympathetic appeal to the court. And I don't A lot of things are involved, but the registrants themselves need to be organizing and supporting any organization that's credible, that wants to make such a challenge, because these things are expensive. As I said, the state of Michigan ended up paying agreeing to pay the plaintiffs attorneys which would be the ACLU of Michigan and the law school offer which law school it was it that assisted, they ended up to pay them $1.8 million. Wow, very, very few lawyers can afford that to carry litigation for years, and years and years. I mean, in this great capitalist system, we have staffers are waiting for their paychecks every week or two weeks. And when you go ahead and tell you when you go home and tell your family I was going to pay your tuition, but I'm carrying this registry case. And it's far more important than your future that both spouses and families just don't respond very favorably to that it may you have a kid, how would you respond, although he's only 12 years old? Andy 7:40 Yeah. And if I don't buy him his video game, he gets a little disturbed. And I just I wanted to, you know, if we use a pretty recent high profile thing of same sex marriage, and I don't want to talk about whether you're pro or against, I don't care. But that was pushed down by by the Supreme Court. And it's not really complicated to see that it's just marriage, just spreading your vowels, and now you're married. And what you're describing that the registry is this component, this component, this component, this component, and they're all worded differently, that's what you're referring to as the language being different in each state. Right? Larry 8:16 That is correct. That is a great analogy. And then in the same same sex marriage, you had overwhelming public support. I'm not saying you had unanimous public support. But the polling at the time that decision came down was nationally, very favorable. And even in a significant number of states, I don't think they ever reached the majority of having a public approval of the states. But you had you had politicians who had political cover of their constituents to bring pressure to, to, to, to adjust to the reality of same sex marriage. I am not aware of that pressure in any state. I am not aware of even the most progressive state of there being a massive uprising against the registry and broad public support to tear it down that type of talk you should comes from the offender themselves and the families of the offenders. But it's not a widespread public perception that the registry is bad. There was a widespread public perception the restrictions on on on who could marry whom was a problem that it Valley the equal protection clause. Andy 9:24 The other component here that I don't know, I don't know that analogy in Europe that sits but in my mind, and I think you've you've said that I'm at least roughly right. The 50 states that we have are similar to the way that Europe has the European Union. And it's really easy for us to think that Spain and Italy are wildly different places, you know, there's language differences, there's obviously cultural differences. And the United States is at least similar that Georgia and Florida are two different entities they are you know, they have their own laws and yes, then they fall under this federal umbrella. So what I was gonna say about like, there's not a similarity where I don't think the European Union has anything that would represent the the circuit courts that we have where you have you know, Italy Spain and and some other country over there they fall under some under some like oversight kind of thing like one of our circuit courts but what I'm what I'm trying to describe though is that each of our states since they have their own laws, you would have to go File those challenges in each individual state that is Larry 10:32 correct and you might if you were sorting a federal constitutional claim you could bring the claim in federal court but but each state is an independent sovereign and the United States and we presume that there are laws are valid we would the federal the federal system is not intended to scrutinize every state law and say this doesn't this does or just does not meet with approval the phone system use the art as we have uses the power of the purse not the power of the hammer the purse is what gets states to come into line because although they hate the federal government with a passion they love those federal dollars and you can persuade the states to do what you would like them to do because they can't let go of that almighty dollar but each state is free to make its laws until they trample the US Constitution and therefore the registry has to be challenged in some states have a stronger protection and their state constitution then Maryland is an example I cite frequently as that their constitution provides a greater level of protection and therefore the Maryland court could really give a damn less what the federal court thanks because it violates our constitution you can claim it volleys it doesn't violate US Constitution that's your problem we're holding that this statute violates our constitution and our is the one that matters because our Constitution is supreme as long as it meets the federal standards that minimum federal standards Andy 12:03 Can you remind me the language in Maryland please I always forget Larry 12:07 its disadvantages so the lockout not being an active that opposes any any any disadvantage or actually actively and a disadvantage is not the same as punishment. A disadvantage could be any number of things that could disadvantage you so so the Maryland ex post facto protection as much greater but other states have had had their constitutions interpreted to provide greater protection. And in fact, I think of one Donald last thing I know our state house and I think in case of California and I'd like for someone to correct me if I'm wrong, I believe the voters in California through one of their famous referendum processes I believe that they pass the citizens referendum to prohibit the Supreme Court of California from from from interpreting the California Constitution to provide greater protection than the US Constitution because the California Supreme Court got to be under a bunch of liberal do gooders and back one I think the Chief Justice when a Roseburg if I remember, right, and they were handing it out all kinds of crazy stuff as far as citizens were concerned. So they they, they did a constitutional amendment to say our our, our Constitution is exactly the same and cannot be interpreted to provide any greater protection. If I recollect that incorrectly, a person can can say, I've got it all wrong, because I Andy 13:22 I challenge I dare you. I dare somebody out there to say Larry was wrong. I dare you. Larry 13:27 Well, I am wrong from time to time. But But I have recollection Andy 13:32 i don't i don't have you on here as a co host to come up with you being wrong. So I challenge someone to prove that you're wrong. And I bet you you're going to find out that that Larry was probably right. Larry 13:41 Oh, but but yes. So so the challenges need to flow and those other states now how has had multiple challenges already and and they're registered their Supreme Court has ruled that that the 2007, they were the first state to enhance their registry, they were told that they could not apply those requirement retroactively. So so that litigation has already been one in Ohio. We're we're waiting on Tennessee and Kentucky now, Andy 14:12 right. And we need people in those states who feel that they are being hampered in so hang on, let me ask it this way. If the Sixth Circuit said that these things were proved to be unconstitutional, so crossing the street wearing a yellow jacket is proved to be unconstitutional, someone in Tennessee would have to say, Hey, I can't do this, I'm going to bring a challenge because I'm not allowed to walk across the street with a yellow jacket on and you'd have to file that claim debts and then a Larry 14:40 little bit of an oversimplification, Andy 14:42 but I apologize, I'm just I mean, so like, you know, the, the Alabama thing they said that giving up all of your internet identifiers, stifles free speech if you are in a state that has something very similar to what you can say, well, Alabama said it so we could use it here. And that's that's what I'm trying to describe. So if in Michigan, I don't even know what the claims are that they were asserting in Michigan. But let's say they said you can't make 1000 foot living restriction. Okay, well, I'm in Kentucky, and I have 1000 foot living restriction. They said that the Sixth Circuit said that they can't do that. So I'm going to file that challenge, because they said that gives them that that wait to to have the the precedent Larry 15:24 that is correct. And if that so prohibitions are very similar, you would likely in federal court get a fair summary outcome, because the district court judges within that circuit are bound by that decision, unless there are sufficient distinguishing factors that that make that non binding authority, what you're litigating, you're always trying to distinguish your case, if you're defending a case and the plate of a site this this is controlling precedent, the defense attorney saying what it is, here's the distinguishing factors and you're deciding if you're on the other side of the issue, you're you know, if the state is saying this is this is great stuff, the woods Smith vs. Though they always reflect that as a good plaintiff's attorney for challenging the registry and think in terms of plane is now rather than big defender challenge to the registry. If you're doing it so correct way through civil process, the plaintiffs attorneys tried to say, well, we distinguish ourselves Smith, the registry that Supreme Court analyzed is no longer relevant, because that was first iteration registration, you know, we've had multiple generations added. So distinguishing is what is what the attorneys try to do to say that that's not controlling authority. But if all things are roughly equal, within that circuit, you should get roughly the same outcome auto challenge. Andy 16:42 And one final question before we move on, what is the difference of being within the circuit and outside of it, as far as how much weight that that carries? Larry 16:51 Well, it's bonding in the circuit. Okay, it's persuasive authority outside Andy 16:56 so can you can you expand on what persuasive would then been getting into court and using an outside circuits information on your case, you would, you would take the legal analysis Larry 17:07 to incorporate it into your playing. And you would say, this is a very thoughtful analysis done by this court. Our cases are sort of virtual identical challenges. Therefore, this is persuasive, you should consider it although you're not bound by you should consider this as being a direction you would want to take the circuit the people outside that circuit of the six they can thumb their nose at and say that's really nice, but we don't see it that way. A legal binds can agree to disagree, or they can take it as persuasive authority incorporated into their ruling. But but it is very persuasive if as well reason decision this the the, the Sixth Circuit had a well reason decision. I mean, it's so it is persuasive every time it's used. Unknown 17:55 Right, Andy 17:56 right. Right. Right. I have a feeling that we're not on here. Larry 18:01 I'm sure we're not because what the what the listeners want to hear. And I'm unfortunately not able to tell that when a court rules things are going to magically happen and dominoes fall and that's not what I can tell them because that's not likely to happen. Why did they have to file another lawsuit in Michigan? Yeah, to try class Unknown 18:22 action with 40,000 people Larry 18:24 because the the the lawmakers and the the authorities there say, well, it was this is what as an as applied challenge, if the Sixth Circuit had said registration is facially unconstitutional, which they're never going to be able to say. But if they did say that, then that would in the inquiry that they but they didn't say that the mere act of registering sub one is not facially on constitution for a law law to be facially unconstitutional. It means there's virtually no set of circumstances by which you could impose such a lot. You can't leave your home between nine and noon on Sunday morning, that would be facially unconstitutional. Why because you have a right in the United States to worship, right. So therefore to prohibit, try to prohibit people from leaving their homes between nine and noon on Sunday morning would be invalid on its face, there would be no set of circumstances short of martial law, that that would be permissible in the United States. So therefore, that that would fall. But these were as applied challenges meeting that these particular individuals suffered the harm and the law was declared unconstitutional as applied to them. Michigan said, well, that's nice. But there's $40,000 that we're going to continue to apply to Andy 19:43 write it only applied to those six or however, many people were the original suit. And so then they went back and brought in, hey, these 40,000 people also have similar claims. So you need to have this apply to them, too. Larry 19:55 And they're going to spend a whole bunch more money if Michigan now I'm optimistic based on data brief, that maybe they're ready to start considering throwing in the towel and stop fighting, because of the new agey, but time will tell if they actually throw in the towel. Andy 20:08 And that doesn't mean the registry goes away. That means the lawmakers are going to go Okay, well, they found this so will will make the law less evil. And you won't have to do these three things, whatever they said in Michigan that you can't do, and they'll just roll it back to either that or what it was prior to these enhancements. Larry 20:25 That would be that would be the argument that would be made from the people who want to preserve as much as they can they would make the argument of course now we wouldn't make that argument we would say yeah, that that it's still violate even we would want to design the only problem is if we're not there helping design of the registry, right state law enforcement apparatus let's go to design the most honest thing and they might even go beyond what's permissible under the sick those verses Snyder six organization and you may have to litigate again, because that law will be presumed constitutional when it's an active and it will, it will survive until the clear to proof shows it's not. Andy 21:02 And I'm still tickled that that a mutual friend has the opinion that we don't need to be at the state capitol to influence those things that we just need to do it on the legal side. And I'm still very much puzzled by that opinion. Larry 21:15 It's a it's a basic understanding of how much you can do with the capital people. People have this notion to, since it's not something in the everyday ordinary person's life, that there's that it's all for the elite and they don't realize that many states you can have an enormous impact. It gets more complicated in the states that have full time legislature. So I think Michigan is one of them. So it would be to go to Lansing, you probably have a little bit more trouble than going TO to a capital like in Wyoming or Nebraska, Lincoln or Wyoming, I mean, place wide open, they invite you and they'll talk to you as if your neighbor console few people show Andy 21:50 up. I'm sure that's because only 12 people live in those states. Larry 21:53 There's, there's 17 at Wyoming. Andy 21:57 All right. We got a voicemail question from Shark Tank, and she's one of our longtime listeners from Alaska. Let's listen. Unknown 22:06 You're like a trust over wheel or putting them on your life insurance as a beneficiary. Andy 22:16 Thank you for that question. And also, I don't know if I mentioned it before. She's also a Patreon supporter. And thank you for that support. It's really, really, really appreciate it. Larry 22:23 I remember those colors you talked about her son about when he gets out of prison moving to Andy 22:27 Yeah, she's trying to do a transfer and I always forget which direction it's one either to Alaska or from Alaska to Virginia Larry 22:34 from Alaska. I think he's in prison in Alaska, they're going to transfer I remember the question well, this is a great question but I'll start by saying that I don't know of any confiscation of resources thats related to just simply having to register that that I'm not aware of that enough have looked at most every registration scheme in the country. And I guess you could look at the fees that they charge which are I mean, they're not gargantuan but they're like that can be a few hundred dollars a year I think in Louisiana but the fees that they charge would be the closest thing to it but then when you dig a little bit deeper what she may be getting at as what happens to money that the system confiscates for other reasons people come out of incarceration having had a huge amount of financial obligations imposed upon them the the we're good in America but extracting court cost if you look at a judgment you'll see line after line of all these different junk fees and then they get equal well over 1000 couple thousand dollars before you even start talking about restitution and finds it just the court fees for all the different things for the for the victim compensation to the brain brain injury fund the coat court autumn automation fee, blah blah, blah, you go on and on with all the fees and and then and then you have all so you can have a personal who owes a bunch of money and then there's the in the federal system and I don't have many states have have matched this were viewing child porn is presumed to be damaging to the victim. So you may end up owing, if that's been your offense, you may end up owing for possession images, or if you've had a child victim, you may end up owing Coulson because the child magical when he counseling for 1015 years after after they've been a victim of a crime. And so you may end up having a huge amount of money. And that's the money that's at risk for being taken. Because the judgment will say, to pay these cost, pay these fines, pay these restitution as a conditional supervision. And they will do everything they can to extract those from the person including trying to identify assets they may be holding, and attach them. So what I would say that she needs to do would be rather than trying to asked us on a podcast, which were great grateful for the question, but I would say that a financial planner would be much better suited to look into this. And I'd be willing to talk to a financial planner, if if one were surface and talk about all the things that people that have this conviction have to deal with in terms of where their money is at risk. But I think you're going to want to protect it from from the system in terms of the criminal justice system, not so much the registry system, but anything that may have been owed or assessed as a result of the conviction as a part of the player Andy 25:34 roll back the clock, I think it was 2015 a podcast called Freakonomics they did the title of the episode is why we continue to make sex offenders pay and pay and pay and pay and pay something like that. And through a few law professors from like Princeton, and so forth. They said that people on the registry between treatment finds fees, lost wages, all these things, it costs about $10,000 to walk out a prison. And I'm, then I'm wondering, then if, if you walk out and you are, I don't want to say indigent in reality, like living under a bridge. But indigent as in you can't find work, but you do have family supporting you. But if that money isn't visible to the system under your name, but mom and dad are kicking money in there, like you're going to be treated differently with probation fees and so forth, because you don't quote unquote, have the money as opposed to, if you have, you know, some sort of, I don't know, you know, an endowment, whatever, some sort of inheritance fund life insurance, whatever sitting there, you know, if you get to 50 or hundred $50,000 sitting your bank account, they're going to treat you very different. Well, they're gonna Larry 26:39 they're gonna try to take it, but what do you mean by that they're gonna treat you but very different. I mean, if people have money to get a little bit different, because they have the potential the power to, to respond differently than a person who's indigent. Andy 26:51 I mean, if you don't have money, when it comes around to pay your fee, and you literally have $4 in your bank account, they're not going to take your $4 out of your bank account. But if you have 100 grand in the bank, they're going to make you pay your $28 or whatever your monthly probation fee is, Larry 27:06 well, a lot of states don't take the $4, but they lock you up for failure to comply with terms of probation. And yet, you have since it's sort of a debtors prison, we've talked about that. Louisiana was right with King Alexander. They, they, they, it's unconstitutional as hell. But I do it. Andy 27:23 I know that even here, at least the treatment provider that I went to, if you were that down on your luck, he was not going to kick you out of class for not being able to pay for treatment. And I know that that's not always true. And not all cases. I'm specifically stating that particular individual, but somebody's going in there saying they don't have the money. It's like, yeah, you know, we make it up later in, pay overtime, whatever. I'm just that's what I mean by people get treated different. If you're broke, they they they cut you some slack, maybe I wish, Larry 27:52 I wish that we were several universal phenomena. But yeah, Unknown 27:55 I'm with you. Not Larry 27:57 you have had the the good fortune of encountering things that people encounter. And I agree, we we we should not we should not presume that that's the benefit because people get violated for not paying and they get incarcerated for not paying, although it's unconstitutional. We're supposed to have eradicated debtors prisons A long time ago. But right, we still do that. Andy 28:23 Well, it's not a thank you very much for the question. And also thank you for continuing to be a Patreon supporter. And, and in doing that, I happen to just log over to Patreon. And I forgot to mention that we have a couple new supporters. And we got Robert and Mac both coming in at the hustler level. And thank you guys so very, very, very much. It's really awesome that you support us and Michael from Florida, you increase your support, and you are just a hos and again, I can't thank you guys enough for your support. It's just really humbling, and just again, makes me a squishy inside of a hustler level. Now, has anyone Larry 28:55 taken my suggestion to look at their net pay and just lined up for the amount of their net pay? Has anyone done that yet? Andy 29:02 Surprisingly, know. And I'm really shocked at that. I can't imagine. Larry 29:07 I mean, I know that I would, if I were, Andy 29:10 you would, you would run right there and fill in all the zeros, which I Larry 29:14 know I was. I'm actually kidding. But I was so flattered. I know because, because I would, you know, by age and generation, the thought of supporting a podcast Well, I didn't know what one was, until we started this program, and just the thought of actually value in something enough to send in a monthly contribution. That was just a foreign thing to me. So I've learned a lot from people how they value of this and not just this, but so many podcasts that they value that they support, and, you know, people have 10s, 10s of thousands of donors that have have large audiences and I never would have done Andy 29:49 absolutely, it's really, it's really, I mean, I support a bunch of different content creators. Honestly, it's pretty interesting. Well, let's move on to some articles. And one of my favorite media outlet is box and that's a Vo x, not the one with an F, but Vox. They they cover things to me, it feels like they just cover from policy and like this would be a good idea, this would be a bad idea. Forget the parts inside of it. And this article is entitled The Case for capping all prison sentences at 20 years. And neat, neat article, even the author says it's a pipe dream that we would ever get there. But if someone commits a bunch of crimes when they're 20 years old, they're probably not going to commit the same crime when they're 40 plus all of the garbage in, garbage out, you know, I'm a computer person. But if you put someone in a an environment with a bunch of hardened criminals at 20, they're probably going to be impressionable and and learn the ways of being a criminal and you've possibly just ruin them for when they get out. so neat article cover I think it presents some pretty good ideas and rationale behind the idea that we should should cap sentences at 20 years. But one thing specifically that I liked out of the article, it says What a pretty is for? Are they for keeping the public safe rehabilitating inmates purely for revenge? If our answer as a society is the first two but not the ladder than a cap is something we should consider. But I think that we primarily put people in prison for revenge, not for any sort of rehabilitation or public safety. Larry 31:19 Well, I agree, it's a great long article, I read the entire thing. I think I'm the one that found it. But it's, it's, it's it's a fantastic article, if you can stay focused long enough to read it and, and it But yeah, I think it's a pipe dream, certainly in my lifetime to think we're going to get there. Because in our forgiving country that we live in, we're not we're not actually that forgiving. And user just will hear just you'll hear justifications when people say they should get a long sentence an extraordinary long sense as they don't deserve to walk Bree Bree argue well that's a value judgment you're making based on something they did when they were 1920 2327 you don't know what that person could become over the next couple of decades and the right environment but you pronounce them not fit to ever breathe and be among us again that's an emotional response it's not backed up by evidence the evidence shows just the contrary but but we're not particularly evidence evidence driven here it will when we formulate public policy we do a lot of it based on emotion and emotion is he did something awful he never deserves to be free again you told me sometime Andy 32:32 very early in our in our friendship that I think you said after about two years like the punishment side of it is gone and like the the the value of the prison like beyond that you're just you're just being vengeful, Larry 32:45 I said something to that effect. And and what I guess I'm a good chance to clear that up. I don't mean a broken person can be fixed within two years, depending on what type of rehab they need. But what I mean if you're just wanting to feel good about punishment, you've prison is shocking and awful enough place that taking someone's freedom away for two or three years, that's about as good as you're going to accomplish with that with with with just the deprivation of freedom if you want to move beyond just simply deprivation of pre freedom that you have to incorporate some expensive services in prisons that we're generally not willing to pay for in America which is the beginning of reentry with a focus on preparing for reentry. And that's that's a long way off some states are beginning to talk about reentry but it's just not something we focus on if we're going to have you re Enter We need to prepare you for reentry otherwise we're setting up another disaster but and and so yes, I did a couple three years all the all the deterrent value by them, they've acclimated to prison life. And if you keep it for three more, six more 10 more didn't make any difference actually makes it worse. Because the depth of the barriers to the there's no additional determine value to keep them for 10 years. But the barriers grow exponentially as whatever skills they had a connection and understanding of the modern society evaporate. I don't know how long that you were behind the walls. But how much life change while you're behind the walls. Andy 34:21 It For Me personally, it didn't. For me personally, it didn't. But I have someone that 17 excuse me that does like 17 years. And that wasn't technology focused going in the world is radically different. After 17, 2030 years, it is amazingly different. Larry 34:38 So at that point, we might as well we could do one or two things we could keep you in prison at 30, the low 30s does highs some states spend and the high 40s or invade or we could cut you a check and let you out because we're not gonna let you make a living your fellow director record at all the barriers we place and the fact that you're tattooed from head to toe with not bolts and screws and all this stuff hanging out. If you nobody's going to hard anyway, of course, you can make a choice on data, tattoos that's not being forced upon you. But But if we don't prepare you for working in the modern society and help you with housing and help you make that transition, we're setting up a system of of failure, we'd be better off if I were estate budgeter. And even though if I'm if I'm if I were to be a very conservative person, I'd rather cut you a check for 24,000 that to spend 42,000 keeping would you do math the way they taught me 24,000 less than 42,000, but that's not going to be a very popular sell to keep totally not to go ahead and cut people checking them out there that's just not going to go over in our country very well. What do you mean countries check? I know, but it Andy 35:53 brings up like that plays right into the hand of the UPI plays right into the hand of that, alright, you bi being universal basic income, or some sort of flat fee for everyone to just live, whatever. But yeah, to me, if, to me, it feels like it plays right into that if you would, if you're willing to spend 50 to keep them locked up, it sounds like you'd be willing to pay because probably in the majority of cases, correct me if I'm wrong crimes are financially driven most of the time, Larry 36:23 significant amount of the time and economic driven and people say that you don't have to do it that you can pull yourself up by your bootstraps. Andy 36:32 So there is true there's, there's Larry 36:35 not some Andy 36:36 truth in that because you I you know, not not to get personal, you are an example of that correct. But, Larry 36:43 but I had a lot of lucky breaks, I didn't win the lottery. But I have Unknown 36:50 also funny, Andy 36:52 very a lottery that's funny, I like that one. That's one of the cleanest ones you've ever shared with me. Larry 36:59 But But I think I've had a lot of lucky breaks being a tour place at the right time makes a difference. And, and, and if you if you listen to the song a little child was born in the ghetto was that Elvis from the late 1960s and the kettle's the name of the song if you actually are born in the ghetto, and you actually have to dodge the things that people that grow up in the ghetto have to do to stay alive, you're not as likely to acclimate to take advantage of opportunities. And the opportunity is a lot more sparse because there's not a lot of places to get work in the ghetto business dissolved handle locate in the ghetto and you're trapped in the ghetto. And so pulling yourself up by your booth. Now I was in the ghetto so to speak. Except I didn't know that I was at the time because poverty was much more rampant in the 1960s than it is today they were We were in the midst of the world poverty and a lot of people around me didn't have much more we lived in mobile homes and your friend up the road lived in a mobile home and the front the next one did as well and and you all were roughly the same and as far as you do your little world when you're when you're growing up if you if you're living in that setting and everybody else's you don't think as much about it but when you live in an inner city for Thursday Thursday's immaculately cared for lawns and these nice luxurious cars and people working fine jewelry and clothing and they're going to these big beautiful schools that have gates and you're going to the school that's run down and there's there's drugs being dealt and there's people there's people committing crimes all around you and you don't know if you're going to make it to the night without a bullet coming through that changes your outlook on life Unknown 38:49 yeah Larry 38:50 I mean I'm sorry to tell you but it does sure how how about you can focus on being a good student is dramatically altered by those those circumstances that you you find yourself in the ghetto which you didn't choose that was the ovarian lottery that chose that for you I love that Andy 39:09 you want to talk about public Larry 39:09 defenders again I love love bashing the Wisconsin Public Defender system well Andy 39:16 this comes out of Wisconsin Public Radio and it's totally there's there's no meat to the article is a it is about a 20 minute listen and it's it's a it's a decent Listen, I recommend you go listen to it. But apparently public defenders there they are the lowest paid in the country at about 40 bucks an hour. Here's my question to you, Larry, that I didn't hear anybody asked or answered on the show. So 40 bucks an hour is pretty good pay. That's $80,000 a year. But I'm curious, is this salary money? Or is this like contractor money? 1099 kind of money that changes the economics a lot? Unknown 39:50 It's 1099 money? Andy 39:52 Uh huh. Okay, so where you think it's 40 bucks an hour you probably can only keep somewhere between a third and a half way you account for paying for your taxes once you account for paying for education, you know all of those things that a company pays for for you. So now you're only talking that these guys are making about guys gals are making about 14 bucks an hour for they spent a gazillion years in law school 14 bucks an hour is kind of shit. Larry 40:18 Well, on a contract basis. It is now now starting attorneys 40 bucks an hour I got to the rhythm of thick I used to be good at my head 40 bucks an hour times 40 is 1600 times 52. That's a district talent and that's a decent salary for an attorney because with benefits you have if you're an employee in the public defender sis Andy 40:38 absolutely, absolutely Larry 40:41 where they're paying for your health care and they're paying for your vacation. But when you're getting 40 bucks an hour when you're building First of all, you're not getting 40 hours a week and in most cases of billable hours you're getting a camp like in our state contract public defender. So we have a we have a hybrid system we have we have a public defender system they're paid employees of the state and we have a public defender system that contracts the scales are so low you may get six or $700 for a felony case or it'll translate out sometimes less than 40 bucks an hour depending on how many hours you put into it Andy 41:15 but so yeah they get page that's that's pretty miserable. I mean, you know, I bill out at x rate and I I purposely I have to put away a third for taxes i have to put away a third for my own benefits package so to speak, whether that be vacation or health and so forth. And then I get to roughly keep about a third that's the way that I slept. That's the way I plotted out so I didn't hear them asked that question I thought that I wasn't sure if that was going to be turning into money if it is then they're not making any money at all they're really in miserable shape Larry 41:45 what it says something about the commitment we have to publish indigent defense and this is in this country and I will get hate mail every time I say that you know the love it or leave it but it it is because it's an essential thing that we have to create provide or else we need to amend the constitution let's say you're not entitled to counsel it's you sink or swim and if you don't have the money too bad you shouldn't have done the crime I mean maybe that's what people want but but that's not what that is totally Andy 42:11 was but you know we talked about that all the time innocent until proven guilty so shouldn't you have some level and I'm not saying public defenders aren't competent but they're overworked meaning they can spend less time with their with their charge and all that stuff anyway it's garbage bill listen to the show to decent portrayal of them being the lowest paid public defenders in the country. Good times and then hey, you know I'm not really a fan of this guy this guy is pushing this law this Marcy's law around the country this is from Mississippi today.org and victims rights bill pushed by California billionaire quietly up for debate in legislature Marcy lock creates we talked about this last week I think with Josh in that it creates quote unquote rights for the victim to have a say in like the entire like sentencing post sentencing post treatment of how a conviction of a person convicted of a crime is treated and I'm really not that there are many places where these things kind of already exists This just makes it more right or like you have more rights in doing this but good grief man Why Why does the victim have any sort of say and how someone gets treated in their conviction that's what the laws are for not for what this billionaire would like to see as a pipe dream Larry 43:38 well zero dental a quote in here it says we can all agree well let's make sure we leave it at the person I think it's Philip gun who sponsor it who's the yeah speaker he says we can all agree that know rapists she'll have should have more rights and the victim no burger should be affordable rice and the victim's family the group's website rates bars is law would ensure that victims have the same coca rights is accused and convicted nothing more nothing less now what Josh said last week is folly a sucky into my skull. It was taking me some time to process it. But what he was trying to say thanks Josh, for putting it eloquently. I just couldn't follow it. The person we're protecting is the one who is going to have their liberties taken away, right. And the victim is not in danger of having their liberties taken away. Now, they were held at gunpoint, they had their liberty temporarily taken away. But the system is protecting the person who might be put in a cage for a very, very long time, we have to try to make sure that we only put people in cages that should be in those cages. And that's that's why they don't have equal rights. Because Josh was saying they don't, the government's not trying to do anything to them. They're not trying to deprive them of any Right, right, taking personal freedom ways. That's pretty substantial removal of rights. Therefore, we have to protect that person, even if we don't like what they were accused of doing to make sure we get it correct. Andy 45:21 I need to spend some time and actually like, frame my mind around this idea of what it means. So you see an interaction between a person in a common like, I know my rights, you can't do that to be so that officer is doing something to remove liberties away from a person whether, you know, you've been handcuffed. Do you like I know my rights? You can't put me in customer the slump? What is the victim? What rights are Do they have that are being in any degree squashed by the person getting out of prison, anything of that nature that they're trying to increase victims rights to cover? Larry 45:57 Well, they would argue that the victim has the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness and therefore this creeper would would would take that away from them. So therefore, they should have the right to prevent that happening. But see, as I've settled other podcasts, you don't get to decide what the punishment is, you are merely a witness when you're a victim of a crime. This was a crime has been committed against the people that people have organized and formed a governmental system. And they have decided what boundaries are in terms of acceptable behavior. And they've determined how to orderly administer those boundaries, so that we don't have mob justice and have vengeance. And so you don't get to make the decision when the person comes out. Again, that's for a person or an entity that has far more objectivity that you are likely to have as being a victim, you're going to see it differently, you're not going to want to take any chance again, on someone coming out because they hurt you. So you can't be objective about whether they've been rehabilitated or not. It's a you'd say, keep it locked up and will be safer. Well, maybe we wouldn't be any safer. Andy 47:01 Let me ask you this question in regard to like, the policies of how these things go through? Why would law enforcement agencies oppose this? I would, I personally would think that they would be in favor of it, Larry 47:12 you would personally think that well, what it does is it the more they stack these requirements on the more complex and it becomes this to meet all the burdens the victim of Bill rights, and you end up eventually losing cases because things that because of the defense side what what we're going to do is try to find loopholes. Well, something you did wrong, we're going to try to find a timeline. If we can't find anything else, we're going to try to find a timeline to shoot your case down because we're trying to win the case. We're not trying to get to the truth, we're trying to win the case. And so the law enforcement I'm curious, concerned about the extra cumbersome nature that is going to take and if cases getting up getting lost, because they get too darn complicated to meet all these requirements. And you need to push our our meat grinder needs to keep running because we run a lot of people throw it in this country. And and of course, I think it'd be a good thing, in some cases, filter the cracks. But law enforcement probably doesn't think it's a good thing because they're being yelled at. Why didn't well, because the x, y and z and this bow loophole general law enforcement tells people well, we can't prosecute because the statute of limitations, what Andy 48:19 does this then we certainly need to go after that one don't Larry 48:21 absolutely we need to go. I mean, we can't have something that provides fairness. So So I suspect without being having law enforcement here in the studios that that's probably their concern. Andy 48:37 Okay, well, I figured you have talked to them or heard their arguments along the way in your hundred and 50 years that have you been on this earth, Larry 48:44 just turn it last week, so just don't overdo it Andy 48:48 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 register matters cast at gmail. com. You can call or text a ransom message to 747 to 74477 want to 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. All right, let's move on to our super duper favorite person in the week this guy wins like the the schmuck award I don't know how to put this any other way. So this is at a detroit news it's a ex to trade homicide cop found with a locker of evidence the funny thing is is like his he's being evicted and they're rummaging through his things like the movers are there like cleaning out his his apart? I don't know. They didn't really say and they found a box full of evidence. And what I find interesting in the article it says we're concerned that this could take some cases the word taint in this context to me sounds like it could make the cases bad. But like so what you're really saying is you don't want to have a conviction overturned that there was evidence that could is the word of scope is that the right word Larry 50:26 Episcopal Tori, Andy 50:28 okay. exculpatory evidence in that box that would have have let someone go free. That was actually innocent, but this asshole has evidence at his home, potentially. And the thing goes on it says, What if some of the evidence was never introduced in court? I'm not saying that's what happened right now. We just don't know. But that's what we're looking into. Shouldn't we be concerned that there are people erroneously locked up know that anyway, so yeah, this one, this is really sad. Larry 50:57 Well, it has the potential depending on what the evidence is because an attorney that's got someone serving life without parole if they hear evidence, even though it's strapped even once on death row, even more so. But if you're facing the needle, or I guess they brought back, yeah, the firing squad and Nevada did their Andy 51:19 wheat and somewhere Yeah, because we couldn't get the three drug cocktail at a Europe because they said it was inhumane, but no, do you ask, we still have to go, we still have to go do some up with three chemicals. Larry 51:29 Yeah, and I think they they fired up the electric chair in another state that had not used it for a long time. So we could Andy 51:35 spark spark is alive and well. Larry 51:38 But the attorneys that particular represent him when he was facing death or life without parole, they're going to be trying to figure out if any of these cases if this detective had a hand in any aspect of their case, and that's exactly what they should do. Andy 51:53 Yes, I should be shouldn't Shouldn't the DA be like, we need to bring those cases backup because we could have locked up some honestly. But that's not the attitude that I'm getting. That's not what they're going to do. Larry 52:05 It's unlikely there's a there's a large number of days that I can't put a percentage on it. But we'll try to cling to their conviction and say that this is all irrelevant. There might be an Alex hunter out there that used to serve up in Boulder, but they're far and few between. And so you would, you'd more likely have them fighting to preserve the conviction, because it's closure of the case, we can't reopen this case, we've got closure the victims knows what happened to their loved one. And, and we reopen this case, all that pain and suffering comes back. And we can't do that. So so they cling to those convictions for that. What's what tenacity, they don't want it to reopen cases, just the opposite. You should want to reopen the case. Because if you've got the wrong person, what does that mean? The person who did it is likely still roaming free if they haven't died, Andy 52:57 right. And I was listening to something else. And I was just going to make go back and listen to two or three episodes. Go have a podcast called cognitive dissonance they did to one hour segments on some handful of documentaries about our criminal justice system. And they said, if you have the wrong person locked up, you have three victims. Now you have the person locked up, is erroneously locked up and not do you have three injustices, I should say, the person that did the crime is still running free, there's an injustice and the victim is not made whole because the wrong person is in jail. Larry 53:28 And certainly the person that's the wrong but roughly in jail, they're being victimized, their life has been taken away from yes, no, there's no amount of money we can give, you know, we can't give you the right back up with your kids that you were taking away from. Yeah, children, we can't give you the future you might would have had, if you weren't saddled with a felony conviction. We can't undo all that. Andy 53:49 I don't know what it would look like. But it feels to me that we need to have a system and economic incentive or some sort of incentive structure for justice, not convictions. I don't know how to implement or how to do that. But it feels to me like, hey, Larry, if you do extra good work at work, we're going to give you a bonus this year sweet, I will do extra good work. But that's not how we run it. You just like, Hey, you need to flip through as many pages of the things that you need to flip through, and you'll get your paycheck the page out. Larry 54:21 Now, let's just play with this a little bit. I remember most prosecuting district attorneys and state's attorneys are elected in this country, the overwhelming majority of them so let's imagine for a moment to to da stands for his constituents, his or her constituents running for reelection, because I will tell you one thing I'm the most proud of my office we have reviewed and my last four year term we have reviewed 17,000 referrals from law enforcement and we found about 40% of them to be totally lacking and evidence that that even they can't even beat the most rudimentary standard of probable cause much less prove beyond a reasonable doubt. So I chose not to diagnose I said another 35% of them to different programs because these are first time offenders and I don't think they that society benefits when I'm having a criminal record so we really only took a small portion of the cases that we took seriously that we actually prosecuted to the to the hilt and of those of those we would that we took to trial since we took him to trial and we took a hard to stay on we didn't plea bargain of 30% of those were found not guilty so I've got a great record. Can you imagine what the response of the audience would be if they if they if they campaigned on that platform and Andy 55:33 I and I understand that that's where it would go but so then the part of the the public also thinks that like, the only way that a DEA is effective is by getting convictions but we have an ignoramus public thank you Bugs Bunny that thinks that convictions are the way to judge the effectiveness of the person but the person is supposed to get justice not convictions and our public just wants justice they just want they just want vengeance conditions Larry 56:01 well yeah we would you would you are on the receiving end of a crime and you call the office called the State's Attorney's Office you're working on this mumbo jumbo about well you know, we feel like this case is best handled by diversionary program we really don't think a harsh sentence as a treatment is an order that try doing that say how long you stay in office it'd be only the rarest of prosecutors that would that would survive the public scrutiny because what they do is they run call up channel to in Atlanta we're not gonna believe I just go I just called the DHS office and they told me they weren't interested in prosecuting they were trying to divert this person because that was the best thing for public policy so I think we have to look at ourselves in the mirror just a little bit for the reason why we're the way we are Andy 56:47 We absolutely do so speaking of victims rights, Larry we often talk about re victimizing that you know, you can't you can't bring a witness into court because oh my god that'd be so traumatized over it again trying to remove the whole controversy thing that you're you're a fan of Scalia for saying and there is a case running around and we pulled this from NBC Nightly News and there is a case running around about forgive me I have no idea who this guy is I know he's on a TV show called Empire he's a good looking black dude and he alleges that he got kind of roughed up so here's a clip from NBC Unknown 57:25 tonight we're hearing from the TV star the center of a story we've been following Jesse small at speaking out about the attack he says he suffered last month Ron mod has details Unknown 57:35 pissed off Unknown 57:37 appearing with Robin Roberts for Thursday's Good Morning America Empire star Jesse small let striking back at those questioning his account of being attacked near his Chicago apartment last month is it the Unknown 57:48 the attackers, hackers, but it's also the attacks it's like, you know, at first it was a thing of like, Listen, if I tell the truth then get because it's true. Andy 58:03 Then it became a thing of like, oh, how can you doubt that? Like how do you how do you not believe that it's the truth. Unknown 58:10 Smaller, totally. Two men assaulted him put a rope around his neck. horde liquid on him. And yellow ratio and homophobic slurs. Police say they have pour through hundreds of hours of surveillance footage but have found no evidence of an assault and no independent corroborating information supporting the actors allegations this week Chicago police a small at turned over a heavily redacted photo of his cell phone call log. He told authorities he was on the phone with his manager when he was approached police when a more complete digital version of his call logs. They say to help narrow the timeline. City officials continue to consider a small as possible prime victim let's say he will be held accountable if they suspect the actor filed a false report run my nbc news chicago Andy 58:55 one thing that I would like to bring up is they said they pour they've poured through like hundreds of hours of service footage. I don't think that Joe Schmo civilian would get that kind of treatment. If they just say they were roughed up they might look through I don't know five minutes of video but because of this guy's hope, high profile nature they're they're going above and beyond what they normally would to try and validate his claim. Larry 59:17 Well, that's the point that I wanted to illustrate is that it's not really victimizing a person to say that in the United States of America although I believe everything you just told me I have to go in and convince 12 citizens beyond a reasonable doubt that this occurred and that the person that we bring in did and that that is not a victimization because as the defense attorney you're going to get cross examined as you should about at inconsistent state but you gave the police if you told the police like for example Mr. Small and said that the guy was five five and that he had a slim build and he had a scar on his left cheek and the person that's in police custody doesn't have that well i'm going to be all over that it cross examination Why did you tell the police that the person was five five and they had a scar and they had a slight built with this guys are obviously got a 40 inch waist line and I don't see any scar why the discrepancy that is legitimate because we're trying to put the person in a cage for a long period of time. And we have to know that the right person has been put into the cage it's not at degradation to the person who's as a witness on the stand is to make sure we've got it right. You had some they're willing Andy 1:00:37 to do you think they're willing to push back on this particular case? Because it's a dude and excuse me a check or female Larry 1:00:46 I think it's because it's not a sex offense, the police are actually doing exactly what they should do, which is to take every accusation that comes in and tell the person we were at an evidence gathering phase right now and the more evidence we can gather the more succinctly you can describe things to quicker we can get this down the better off we're going to be because I'm going to be way nicer to you that the opposing counsel is going to be because their job is to is to make sure I don't win and I'm on your side but but we've got to get this right and that's why it has to be in this country and the victims advocates keep saying that to put people through any scrutiny is a real victimization I don't believe it is a real victimization I believe it can be uncomfortable absolutely can be uncomfortable but it's it's not it's not the purpose did re victimize. You were kind of put someone away in a very difficult situation that they're going to do or for a long period of time with life altering consequences. We need to get this right. Andy 1:01:51 Absolutely. You know, my favorite thing is in Iowa, the state with like, 12 people, Larry 1:01:56 what's your favorite thing? Andy 1:01:58 I love hearing from a police officer. You're saying that because of the wacky weather that they are burdened by compliance checks of registrants. here's a here's a clip clip from Iowa five, Unknown 1:02:08 local five and eastern Iowa where the Scott County Sheriff is looking to make some big changes to the way the department handles sex offender cases. Under a proposal. It would mean a government employee would handle the work full time local fives, Jacob Peck low looked at what it could mean here in central Iowa. Sorry, county is one of several sheriff's departments that we reached out to to see if the prospect of this proposal would really work out for them. They tell us it would certainly be beneficial, but there are also need to be a lot of control and how it was carried out. My first thought is that it would help in regard to easing that burden a little bit in storey county Sergeant Unknown 1:02:44 Elizabeth Quinn coordinates 15 sheriff's deputies to run quarterly checks on more than 100 sex offenders. And that group is made up of first shift, second shift and third shift deputy. That way they always have someone that is available to be doing the checks with the Unknown 1:03:00 wild winter weather. Getting those checks done can be challenging, Unknown 1:03:03 it isn't easy because we do have the responsibility to make sure that we're upholding the law and all the laws Unknown 1:03:12 other departments like poke and Madison counties divide the workload among two or three deputies and even with potential ease and workload. Quinn says an outside hire is no Sure thing Unknown 1:03:21 depending on how this bill is written what the requirements would be of the person that's chosen to do those compliance checks instead of ourselves Unknown 1:03:33 quinces the database they're constantly updating includes a lot of confidential information and they don't want it falling through the cracks Unknown 1:03:40 working also with the Department of Public Safety to maintain that registry it would have to be an individual that would also have those privileges so until the idea grows a bit more formal Quinn trust her team to get the job done Unknown 1:03:52 it can be overwhelming we may not always have the time but we make time to make sure that we're doing our compliance checks Unknown 1:03:59 you Aveda Jacob pack local five news we are Iowa Andy 1:04:04 to cover that in reverse that last part they said where they have to update this database blah blah blah we've we've talked about couldn't they couldn't you go to a website and there could be a massive disclaimer like you are certifying that you live at this address you work at this address and like under penalty of death you're checking this at this information is valid that database doesn't like the person did the database update poof that problem solved Larry 1:04:33 while but we're not we can't take a person has been convicted of a sexual offense at their word they would put down bogus addresses and if we don't check their out there roaming the countryside committing these sex offenses we can't have that Andy 1:04:46 right but like I like under penalty of perjury, whatever. You're certifying that you're so I'm just saying like that part of the equation would be taken out I just love that they're bitching about like, Oh my god, here's this extra burden on us the Burt like, hey, that burden could go away by checking less frequently or not at all? Larry 1:05:06 Yeah, well, but see, they can't do that. Because the sheriff's are largely elected officials. And they get good PR from doing those checks, even though it eats into their budget. And it it slips away law enforcement resources that would probably be better deployed in other ways. But that's what the public wants until the public starts telling them to quit doing this, which I don't see that happening. They're going to check out say, my scheme is, since I know the public's not going to quit doing that must be enemies to get it out of law enforcement. I don't think that I don't think a civil regulatory scheme ought to be administered by law enforcement. So therefore, I want to take it out a law enforcement hands all together because it's civil, regulatory, non punitive. So therefore, it should be handled by an agency that does civil regulatory oversight. That'd be more like a motor vehicle division with with no interaction with law enforcement, because it's, after all, it's just a civil tracking mechanism. Andy 1:05:57 And I know that you have sinister plans there for real Larry 1:06:00 Well, absolutely. If it's several regulatory let's make it what it is, let's take it out of law enforcement and turn it over to a regulatory entity. Unknown 1:06:09 And I mean, Andy 1:06:11 your sinister method is i i don't i don't want to divulge anything that you might be trying to keep secret? Larry 1:06:17 Well, there's nothing to divulge This is a civil regulatory scheme. So they say, therefore, it should not be handled by law enforcement that you try and have it both ways. If it's civil regulatory, let's put in a civil regulatory agency if you want it to be punitive than to say that and we'll leave it with law enforcement. But you can't have it both ways? Andy 1:06:34 Well, I I'll cut it if you want me to. But isn't there a budgetary element in there? If it goes to the civil side, you have said, if it goes to the civil, you know, DMV kind of place, then there will be a budget request and someone will have to go do a survey on how much does it cost to actually find it. But Larry 1:06:53 we've already done that we already we've already proposed to move it to the state police. So we've already got we've already got an estimate of what it cost. Andy 1:07:00 So I didn't want I didn't want to, like reveal that if that was one of the strategies that Larry 1:07:05 that would be a strategy that other states should employ. Yeah, get get sponsorship to move it from this hybrid model, which conceals it within county budgets. And county budgets are not subject to the state control. They may get some state dollars, but the county budgets are decided by county commissioners and county select men and county, whatever they call it. commissioners, Councilman, all these different things that county governmental entities, they like people and they leave they decide how much delegate to the sheriff's department and and as well as a run for office, they're not going to run out and all the campaign trail and say, I'll tell you one damn thing I could provide a whole lot better service to you if I didn't have to keep track of all the sex offenders. Yeah, sure. That's not going to do very well on the campaign trail. It just it works just the opposite. I'm keeping you safe from the sex offenders by putting resources out there to monitor them and make sure that we keep track and tabs on them. That is exactly what the public wants to hear. But since I know the public isn't going to change, I want to move it away from the sheriff all together from the police all together because it's civil and regulatory. So let's have no law enforcement involvement in a civil regulatory scheme. No, law enforcement only come into play when the person goes non compliant. And the non compliance can be identified by community tips. It could be by forms that are sent out that people need to bring in within so many days of going out if they if the form gets returned as undeliverable no longer lives here, then law enforcement comes in to do the tracking to figure out where the person went Andy 1:08:41 really like this land. You're You're like you're really into some for DHS, though. Larry 1:08:46 Well, I want to force them to decide if it's punitive forfeits regulatory yeah yeah i mean i don't know would you go to get a driver's license do you have to do you have to go be fingerprinted but printed sit in a holding cell I mean a lot of shares of offices actually have people in effective detention when you're going to do this so called civil regulatory scheme you go behind locked doors You can't leave once you've started the process you're effectively detain now you actually could leave you could say you have to lawful authority to hold me and on the job of the door. Very few people are going to do that Andy 1:09:22 you would be a ballsy person for saying that. Larry 1:09:25 Well, it particularly if you were on your last day before you can before you'd be compliant. And they deliberately, right people like that they tell him your day is to come in on this day. Well, if you look at the calendar one day over, then they said, Well, you could leave all you want to, but we'll go get a war for you. Because you'll be a non compliance tomorrow, then what do you do? Yeah, yeah, yeah, Andy 1:09:48 on another front, a website called Gov tech.com. Never heard of this one. The title of this article is police hope software can help avoid losing sex offenders. I don't know that. I mean, have we actually lost anybody goes back to what I was just saying about filling out a form on a website and certifying me to you do other things like I registered my car, I'd like hey, you're certifying that all this information is accurate under penalty of perjury, and you click Yes. And you put in your credit card and off you go. So here, but this is, to me, this feels very sinister, this feels very, we should there should be something HIPAA related to this, like the the healthcare like privacy stuff. Here's a private entity that is going to help law enforcement, keep track of registrants so that even across state lines that you have the information of registrants available to other other districts, this company is called offender watch. This is to me this feels really sinister. And they're totally capitalizing on this quote unquote, civil regulatory scheme and helping law enforcement agencies share information and I don't think that that should be handed over to a consumer commercial entity. Larry 1:11:04 So what do you do about it? I don't Andy 1:11:07 Yeah, what am I gonna do about it? I don't I don't have an answer to that for sure. I just I just feel like that like like the sheriff said on the other clip that we had you know, we have we have private sensitive data we have their their name, address, telephone number height weight you have all of that stuff presented here and now you're giving it over to a corporate entity to handle it I know all the all the Team Read people out there saying well, corporations can do it better than governments and put in the hands of the of companies. That's correct. And the corporations private entities they do everything better than government they run water systems better than run prisons better do sanitation services better I don't know why you don't understand it Larry 1:11:47 with you. You always want to you always want to do government have government involved in things they need to keep their nose out of the private sector can run parks better, it doesn't make any difference. They can do everything better than government Andy 1:11:59 This is closed sinister. I do Larry 1:12:00 not like this one. One. let's let's let's move on. This is this is not even article talk about. Andy 1:12:06 All right, then. Well, then we'll just cover the the feature thing. Larry 1:12:09 Yeah, the private sector. I mean, they deserve this information. They deserve to make a bunch of money off of off of off of data is being collected at the government's expense. I mean, after all, they did this all themselves, you remember? Andy 1:12:24 Yes. So tell me what you really think about offender watch. Larry 1:12:27 I don't completely understand it. It was kind of an article I was I was having trouble understanding. But I get for understanding I get I'm not I'm not excited about it. I'm not excited when companies come in and strip out government data and make a fortune off of it. They do that across the board. They do it with your you have your property ownership records. They do that was with marriage records. I mean, they come in, and and they don't pay for our pay very pittances on the dollar though of what it actually costs to assemble that and they assert sub right to it. And then they get it and then they resell it for a massive amount of money. And they call themselves entrepreneurs. They are in a sense, they figured out how to get something for free and make a whole bunch of money off of it. Andy 1:13:04 There's this funny little paragraph in here. It says before Fender watch information sharing between different police departments could be a cumbersome task. I got it right off the blank is this 1950 police from different jurisdictions would have to call each other or physically meet to compare notes. Seriously, you have to compare notes to like, hey, Officer, Larry, Can Can Can I drive up to your district tomorrow? And can we compare notes about this john doe? Like, there's these things like, hey, there's this internet thing. They come on. Really, they can't share notes. Better than calling which I know you love but physically meet. That's ridiculous. That's, that's really absurd. That's really disturbing to me. Like, we have email. I know it's a bunch of tubes, but it kind of works. Larry 1:13:53 So I've heard I've heard of that. And, you know, for today. Oh, my God, Andy 1:13:56 it's it's really bizarre. All right, let's, let's hit this main feature. And we can cover a little bit about the reason magazine article, just if you want to, like read the I won't. I won't say the dumbed down version. But the cliff notes version. Let's call it that is the reason article. And then we have the actual PDF with the decision. The dough versus Marshall out of Alabama. This is good news. You people ask for good news. This is good news. And we got a good news thing because someone filed a challenge. Imagine that take it away. I know, right? This is from February 11. So this is like hot off the press five days ago. Larry 1:14:31 Yes, it's a it's a it's a great decision. I'm still it's the LinkedIn read saw it from a from a federal district court, Middle District of Alabama. So it'd be very surprising if it were not appealed by the state of Alabama. But and I've invited Janice Bellucci for those of you who know and she was not in that around this weekend. But hopefully we can get her on maybe next weekend. To talk more about it. She saw expert compel speech, which, which is one of the things that this asserted that was actually one of the prevailing claims. But the the, there were a number of claims that started in this in this challenge. And most of them failed for various reasons. But the the, the surviving claims that didn't fail was the Alabama has decided to mark on the driver's license with big red letters. why they call it sexual predator or sexual offender. What did they say it's a Andy 1:15:30 criminal, sex ephemeral Larry 1:15:31 sexual offender. Yeah. And that is that is compelling an individual to carry a message and that message that individual would probably choose not to carry very few people I'm sure would volunteer to carry that on their drivers license and the government can mark documents I've said that on this on this podcast. But the documents that are mark there are limits to everything that the government can do marketing a license of an under age person to hopefully deter them from purchasing alcoholic beverages when I'm old enough to make it easier for the average citizen who might be retailing and for the average law enforcement officer in our state their their sideways their vertical until the person reaches reaches 1821 excuse me their their vertical well that's that's acceptable because it's for a narrow purpose of at all enforcement but this criminal sexual offender is pretty pretty significant in terms of the impact it has on a person's life so so the court said that that was facially unconstitutional you just can't do it and Janice will be able to take it away because we're looking at a similar challenge in the state of Georgia yes not for driver's licenses but for science that the that the sheriff's departments and two counties erected on Halloween and there again that was forcing to carry a message that people would probably choose not to have a sign in their yard on Halloween and and they so I'm looking forward to getting into compel speech more deeply and the in the coming episode but then the the internet usage reporting requirement also restricted because of because of the broad overreaching on lack of clarity in terms of what has to be reported on to Alabama law. And so there's there's there's two provisions that have been stricken from from the constitution on Alabama, Andy 1:17:36 you would you would have to go if you went into McDonald's to use Wi Fi. If you borrowed somebody's phone to go look up an address or something like that you would have to report both of those events back to your handlers which is absurd like you just go like you go into McDonald's and you place an order and you use their Wi Fi to place your order and you have to tell your handler that you used Wi Fi at McDonald's Larry 1:17:58 well that's what it says this judge repeatedly at least two or three times called them out of the state of Alabama under disingenuous litigation strategy that obfuscation at their best representations which is kind of rare for a judge to do that but on the other part about the internet requirements it says they act as far reaching out defender must report to police every time he connects to Wi Fi spot a new McDonald's every time he uses a new computer terminal a public library every time he borrows a smartphone to read the news online and every time he likes comments on a news article every time he walks into a new coffee shop he must determine whether opening his laptop it's worth the hassle reporting that does not limit to unlawful internet activity took the contract justice burdens burden sitting child pornography and soliciting sex with minors and also burdens blogging about political topics and posted comments online regarding news articles. So this is this is good stuff the here's here's what here's one of the quotes the targets of a sexual predator is changing online identities and email addresses so off of that it becomes a burden one must wonder why it's going through such efforts to change its own identity and the the courts have normal internet usage would not require some a different know this is the states in a normal internet usage it says without requires on a different identity so that that reporting would be would be such a burden but the argument Hill several flaws one is it incorrectly assumes that that applies only to sexual predators. Not every vendor is a predator and the state poisons the well which is the judge called about and the state poisons the well by applying otherwise like say the judge the judges is like the state habit for further litigation tactics. Andy 1:19:49 There's also another little block it says it brings together most of the restricted features used by other states adds new restrictions and punishes mile minor violations with years in prison I thought I was reading the section that said that it is the Alabama one is the worst in the nation says no system comes close as a sore cannot as Oh RCN a which is the Alabama sex offender registration and community notification act. It says no other state system comes close escrow scores applies to adult offenders no matter where or when or where they live when they were convicted in bands people from living or working within 2000 feet of a school daycare or even if the vendor has never harmed a child between 10:30pm and 6am know offender can be in the same house as a minor niece or nephew not even for a minute wow I just do you think that this is worse than than Florida does Larry 1:20:51 well that case that we've talked about it people don't remember but it's handled by an attorney big McGuire and it's it's regarding his brother which is still pending in the 11th circuit where this case will ultimately end up as well he he did vast amount of research must require did and he was convinced that Alabama this was the most obvious and debilitating sex offender registration scheme. And I think I remember reading this opinion that the judge borrowed from that case use some of the information that was accepted by the court is factual, in terms of how debilitating Alabama's registration requirements are, you have to civil that you have to you have to get a travel permit not when you're all supervision but just to be away from your own home that's fine Andy 1:21:43 um and then back to the compelled speech there was a significant comparisons to the license plate stuff in Vermont I believe Connecticut excuse me and they have Live Free or Die and there was a there was a challenge there that it's almost hard to live in an American society without a car so therefore you would have to have this license plate with that message on it and that would be compelled speech same as having it on your driver's license you like I think even in this law it says that you can't use another form of ID you might be able to use a passport but a passport comes with some pretty heavy charges and so again we're back to compel speech they compared to some other states that use some other kind of code on it that would be a little bit more obscure not in big bold red letters sex offender on it they could have gone to a more benign way of marking the driver's license but they chose not to which brings me to Oklahoma Oklahoma just did that in the last handful of years that this would then be all of the case work for them to make a challenge in Oklahoma except a challenge Oklahoma's already been made in last that's the only problem Oh Never Never mind I thought I had a novel idea Larry 1:23:02 yeah the there was a pro se guy who played the challenge and he lost Unknown 1:23:06 Oh Larry 1:23:09 the pro se litigants always screw us almost always not always Andy 1:23:15 interesting interesting I you know until I got involved I never you know everyone thinks of free speech like I can say what I want but I never heard that the government cannot force you to speech speak and it also is a freedom to receive information not that thats related to this but I never I never considered those like a three legged stool of what freedom of speech means but I never considered that the government can't make you say something either which I guess is the right to remain silent I guess that's what that one is to Larry 1:23:49 yes there's no harm this rain for their opinion and what the first man private says being forced to speak rather than to remain silent and the harm does not turn or whether the speech is a delay illogical factual or something else and that's exciting a 10th circuit case from 2004 but but uh. This is going to be great stuff and it'd be fun to have Janice want to go a lot deeper into compel speech and then hopefully we can chat a little bit more what we're gonna do in your Peach State Unknown 1:24:19 that'll be Larry 1:24:20 fun that'll be good that'll be good as people people want to hear some good news now this is not bringing the registry down in Alabama this will not bring the registry down but I can guarantee you this it will make people's lives a whole lot better if they're not having to conduct their day to day affairs with sexual offender and red letters on their drivers license Andy 1:24:43 yes Larry 1:24:44 it will improve their quality of life it'll still be a very delicate debilitating registry requirement in Alabama there was some of these challenges claims that were but they were did not pan out because in most cases either the plaintiffs dropped out of litigation or the didn't have standing they they there was claims about the the familial relationships being disrupted and and the the courts of well you're actually prohibited from living with those particular people go through an exclusion zone so therefore it's not the the the registry prohibition that you can't be with a minor it's the people want to have for example get married to somebody who has a kid already Alabama won't let you do that and arguably under the decision loving versus Virginia think it is from back in the 1960s where where it was established that you can you get married anybody you want to directly that should apply here but that wasn't that wasn't the issue they live litigated they were they had to two things that were preventing them and the courts of value even if you could marry and be live or cohabitate with that person you couldn't live there anyway because you're prohibited but but those those claims can come back in another day Alabama baby baby baby in for some tough sledding if the 11th circuit happens to affirm these two decisions that were made because McGuire took a little little cheek out of it with with with his challenge that you had to get a travel permit you had to register both the city and the county and so they struck the fact in McGuire and the ground case that you don't have to register both the city and the county that that was definitely to honor us well if they take off the ID requirement and they take off the internet reporting requirements that you that you that you have to report with it how many hours was it of establishing a new identity it was quick so you take it another check out the armor did see that you're beginning to build momentum for the courts are questioning how far the so called regulatory scheme can go and the courts may chip away at the next person that comes on has good solid legal standing that could actually live in in asleep could be living with the person they're not in an exclusion zone for example and they are not being able to to cohabitate with someone has a child they may take that chunk out of it and take another chunk of this and another chunk of this it's not the answer people looking for but it's progress right Andy 1:27:16 let me ask you like in this decision, there are sightings to cases all over the place and I don't want to I don't want to be naive and say obviously like an attorney did this but did an exceptional attorney do this or is this like what an attorney does do you think that the the dose they did their research to bring in all these references How did this go about to find all of the different sightings to the packing a suitcase and all the other things to support the what the what the judge wrote here well they the attorneys largely provided that but the federal courts have very good Larry 1:27:53 law clerks they pay good money and they have the best so if you're a federal judge your law clerk going to be unless you're just the joke of a judge you don't hire but you you have the capacity to hire a good law clerk but largely This is putting the pleadings when the judge decides which way they're going to rule they're if they're willing for the state they're gonna they're gonna allow more than their citations that they're willing for the for the other side they're going to pick more than so so the the attorneys on the marshal side the provided all this and the briefing that led up to if you look at that when they when they say docket but number all throughout this you can see over 100 documents were filed in this case if you went on Pacer because I say like on on on page on the Word says double three until seven like like standing doc they refer to document number 140 okay so that tells you that a lot of documents I've been following this case if you went on patient look this this case been going for four years and those three ish that's where the legal bills are devoured right and this distortion is going to win a significant if not all of his his or her legal fees back as a prevailing party assuming that the circuit doesn't get this decision okay Andy 1:29:11 and just based on the the Michigan thing Marissa Malcolm in and the ACLU up there it was one and a half million ish some some kind of number in that ballpark I'll just a Larry 1:29:20 certain point and that was all the way through the appellate process Andy 1:29:25 okay and so we could just guess that it's in that ballpark Larry 1:29:29 This is not as complex of a case i don't think but we could it could be significant Unknown 1:29:34 and high sixes or low seven Larry 1:29:36 it could be it could be a million dollar case before it's all said and done but but this but that doesn't deter Alabama I'd be they will continue to fight Andy 1:29:47 unbelievable and and then we could throw the conservative argument out there again, it's like you have already been told that this is not a viable strategy stop spending the money pull back right Larry 1:30:02 you could do that but they sell but God I put my hand on that Bible and I am going to defend the laws of this state as long as I have air to breathe I'm going to do what the people this they'd like Andy 1:30:17 me to do but you hold but you were told to not do that you'd like this is not a valid while you were told to stop with this law. Larry 1:30:26 I was told by a federal judge as it pertains to these plaintiffs the federal judge it's not the end I've got the court of appeals and I've got the Supreme Court and I don't have to stop until I'm told by the highest I've been on this layout and we haven't been told yet and by golly I'm going to keep going that's what the people told me to do when they elected me Andy 1:30:49 I do want to close this out the the conclusion has a really to me it's an astounding statement by the judges says Alabama can actually in one of those I have to attribute to you too so he's totally copying your quotes in here Alabama can prosecute sex offenders to the full extent of the law it can also act to protect its citizens from a set of a sex offenders but the state denies that so school whatever those letters are, is designed to punish offenders and once a person services full sentence he enjoys the full protection of the Constitution that's your quote sex offenders are not second class citizens and anyone who thinks otherwise would do well remember Thomas Paine's wisdom he that would make his own Liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression for if he violates this duty he established a precedent that will reach to himself and that is the 1795 I love it Larry 1:31:45 but but yes though when you've paid your debt to society if you frame it that way you win because even conservatives I think this is a conservative judge I heard one someone say I haven't done a research but someone said that on something else listening to one of the comments or read but but anyway if you if you believe in the constitution but you pay your debt to society it may be a harsh debt it might be lenient that but when it's paid your restored or or so we claim Andy 1:32:13 that's what they say, isn't it? Larry 1:32:15 Yep And you should be allowed to live your life and they said well what we do if we didn't have the sex offender registry This is a question gets close to me What do you propose an alternative and I say pretty straightforward simple we do like we do with the other crime if they offend again, we prosecute them and lock them up again Andy 1:32:31 and probably with more with more, Larry 1:32:33 yes, but but that's what we do. We allow them to resume normalcy until they offend again, and then we innovate again Andy 1:32:40 that's what we can we can make the assumption that George W. Bush being a republican president appointed a republican a person with conservative leanings to the judiciary and he was appointed in oh five I believe it was yes so we can assume that he's on the conservative side of the opinions game you're talking about the Alabama federal judge Larry 1:33:00 this yes Andy 1:33:00 honorable W. Keith Watkins is the one that presented that made this decision and he was appointed by pushing us oh five Larry 1:33:09 well a true a true conservative if they didn't contort themselves they would actually come down to exactly what he did but see the problem with true conservatives as they vacillate so much of what they actually do believe they can put themselves in positions to justify consistent inconsistency you know it's like I mean we talked about it before the you know the budget deficit ballooning you know, they they they had poor budget deficit so separate where they have power and then magically, they become okay when they have power and they brought him up every single time so so and they claim to be the power they get the part of that keeps government off your back, but they can't increase government intervention fast enough when they're in power that created the TSA the created the Homeland Security, I mean, they created the Patriot Act, I mean, audit on on I could name things that they created it or treat in our lives, but they say that they're the party of keeping government out of your lives. It's amazing. Andy 1:34:03 We're going to have to shut this down before we run off all the remaining listeners. Larry 1:34:08 So Alrighty, well, we had we had a guest a few weeks ago he explained it to me that it's okay to do those things because it's for the national security Andy 1:34:17 Oh, I got it I got it. I got it. But if it's in the interest of not what your parties interested in, then it's not okay. Okay. That's the definition of hypocrisy I think all right. Well, Larry, I so very much appreciate you coming I appreciate the Patreon people visit registry matters dot CEO to to listen to podcast, if you want to stream it, call and leave voicemail messages like you heard tonight at 747-227-4477. shoot an email message at registry matters cast at gmail. com. And of course, as always, the best way to support the podcast even at $1 a month is patreon.com slash registry matters. Come join in a Discord server, hang out, have conversations, listen to the live stream. And that's all I got. Larry 1:35:03 Well, thanks, Andy. And when you're in discord, we could actually talk back to you and we can take your question live. Andy 1:35:09 That would be super fun. We record generally around seven o'clock on a Saturday night if you want to come hang out. Larry 1:35:15 Oh, well, hope you have a back again sometime. Andy. Unknown 1:35:18 I might. I'll see about inviting you next week. Larry 1:35:22 All right. Andy 1:35:23 Take care of you. Have a great night and a great weekend. Good night. I'll talk to you soon. Bye. Transcribed by https://otter.ai