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 FYP recording live from FYP Studios, east and west, transmitting across the internet. This is Episode 84. registry matters. Happy Saturday night, Larry, what's going on? Larry 0:19 Thank you, Andy, good to be with you. Glad glad you had me back again. Andy 0:22 I tried, it was hard, I had to reach out I had to constantly prod and poke you just just to get you to answer my calls. And finally, your phone was ringing off the hook, wasn't it? Larry 0:31 It was definitely ringing off the hook. Unknown Speaker 0:33 We had a conversation about that. Larry 0:35 You know, but anybody under 30 doesn't know what a phone and a hook is. Andy 0:39 We don't have anybody in chat that could try and we could see if they know anything about a phone ringing off the hook, you want to tell them real quick what that might allude to, for our young Larry 0:47 listeners, if they're under 30. That what what it alludes to is in the old days, phones, the receiver used to go into a hook to disconnect, disconnect the connection to the to the call, real bells and shit. And when you when you place the receiver in the hook the hook, the weight of the receiver would bring the hook down, and that would terminate the call. And so if you call enough, if you kept calling a person, you couldn't reach them. That was an expression, the phone was ringing off the hook because they would ring and ring and ring and ring the phone. And the phone would literally ring the bells and depending on the some, like car dealerships and certain places, gas stations would have these really, really loud bells where you hear the phone Right, Andy 1:30 right, right, right. Right. Right. So and that stuff was hardwired back to the phone company to like back in. I don't even probably before 1985, you were you were like you rented a phone from the phone company to prior to the bank, to the breakup of the Bell System, which that I believe took effect in January of 84. From Okay, all right, Larry 1:50 like the, the the, the phone company, which they were all these companies that were they were subsidiary of the big phone company was AT and T but they had all these regional names like Southern belle mountain bill and Michigan Bell and Bell Atlantic and Pacific Bell and so forth. But they were all the phone company and you got your you got your local dial tone, you got your long distance, you've got your Yellow Page advertisements for your businesses, from the phone company, you read in your telephone set from the phone company. Or you could purchase it later years, you could purchase a telephone set from the phone company, but but you everything went through the phone company, and the phone company knew everything about you. Andy 2:36 Definitely, I have a clip for you to play. And I want I this is I totally didn't prep you for this. So I hope you appreciate this. Here we go. Unknown Speaker 2:44 But the most important thing I found was Larry 2:47 go into the legislators offices and sitting down and starting to make relationships with key players. I've learned over time that relationship is is the is the catalyst to stop bad legislation or to get some positive legislation before out of your out of your room. From from your lawmakers. What do you think? It sounds familiar? I even detects a civil or southern accent. But that would be from the nozzle and action conference call Thursday night. That would be Patrick McNally. And what was he talking about though? Well, he sounds familiar to the advice I give people about being effective in legislative arena that you have to form relationships. So it was something that of all the guests I have on Arsalan action. He had absolutely no prep for me, because even though I sent him the questions in advance, he doesn't. He didn't open them. And he he he's been been around long enough. He's been in the legislative arena to know that get a lot more done if they know you. And if they respect you, and they have a relationship with you. So it was kind of like, I was glad he said it because like Jesus all familiar I say that. Andy 4:03 Yeah, so I wanted to grab that just so that you could speak to somebody else preaching your same words. And I know that it wasn't prepped or anything like that. So it's unsolicited. And that's the true meaning of edification is when someone else says, Well, I guess edification is when they say something nice about you. But in this case, he was speaking the same same words, Larry 4:21 been practicing since I think he said 1982 or three. Andy 4:26 Yeah, it almost sounded like he said, 1882. And then I was like, Oh, my God, you guys are peers. But he's been practicing, if he's been practicing since 82, and you wouldn't graduate from law school until your late 20s, or something like that. Oh, my God, he's he's not a spring chicken. The Larry 4:40 part of a four person team we're going to talk about that a little bit later about that about that case, but yes, he's been around for a long time. Well, let's, uh, let's, let's move on then. So Andy 4:49 I'm gonna I'm gonna throw this out there. I guess for the late breaking news, then. And let me turn that down, because that's loud. The late breaking news would be that Acosta, which is the Secretary of Labor, I believe is correct. He is a former federal prosecutor from Florida. And he has stepped down. And I guess we'll talk a little bit about that in a minute also, and then the extension of the tiara in Tennessee. Tell us about that real quickly. Larry 5:13 Well, the temporary restraining order in Tennessee was a phenomenal achievement, the that the people in Tennessee who had convictions against a victim, under 12. They were on the on the verge of being evicted from their homes on July 1. And four attorneys came together and filed an action in late June and they got on the pleading alone, they got a temporary restraining order. And then normally the progression of that is that they scheduled a hearing for preliminary injunction as quickly as practical after that. So they had an injunction hearing set for the 11th of July. On the 10th of July, they settled, then settled us the wrong way. They had an agreement with a state that they would that the state would not contest a continuation of the TRO. So the order that was put in place on June 28, was continued for the duration of this litigation. So therefore, no one is in jeopardy of being removed until this litigation runs its course and anybody who has moved should contact their their the agency that instructed them to move and asked him if they were familiar with this temporary restraining order, which is on the marshal website, by the way a copy of it in case they say they've never heard of it. Andy 6:32 Okay. Well, that's I mean, yeah, I mean, so that's good news. I don't want to like, give me the big sigh. It's just I asked you this question. So across the street for me, they are just finishing building a couple churches. And my question to you was, if if I had been one of the people that was notified about having to go away, and then the tiara goes in a place where I could then go back home, but I've left my my handlers told me that I could stay I was here for. But if I ever leave, I probably won't be able to come back. What do you think, but I'd be able to come back after having left and found like new residents, whatever. Well, under this Larry 7:09 specific set of facts that you described, I believe you would have lawful authority to come back. As far as the state statute concern was concerned, the question would be whether a person that or supervision, if they would decide that since you had found what they liked this better housing, what they let you go back, would they approve another change of address back to where you were, but as far as the anyone who, who left in Tennessee, merely because the sheriff told them post enforcement of the registry requirements, if anyone left solely on that, it would be my legal opinion that with a temporary restraining order, in fact, they could go back. But if you're under supervision, and the PO says, right, right, I don't want you back over there. Because now you found a better place, then the question becomes a little bit mercury can kinda PL gave you an order to live at a place that's more to their liking? I don't know we'll have to find out. Andy 8:04 I just I I'm, you know, housing is hard enough to find as it is, and then to, to then find a second place, even if it was sent temporary, like, Hey, can I go crash on your couch? And then I can't go back to where I was, because it was adequate at the time. But then oh, my God, I got grandfathered in. I get you know, I had like, the first presence here. And then they showed up, and then I had to leave and come back. It's like, it gets taken up from underneath you. Larry 8:28 Well, now see, when you when you when you voluntarily leave, that's a whole different set of shocks. And being sure now, I've seen that litigation before where a person argues because they were grandfathered in, that they could leave the the non conforming address so that they could continue to live at non conforming addresses throughout the state. And that went nowhere, because that would be a grandfather and to always been noncompliance souls appellate court. I believe that might have been an Arkansas but the appellate court said no, it doesn't work at that way. You You're grandfathered in as long as you stay put. But once you no longer stay put, then the regulation that you're grandfathered in, applies to you when you move. So I think if you left voluntarily, I don't think you'd be able to come back under any circumstances. But if you leave because you've been ordered to leave, that that creates a whole different fact pattern about what you'd be able to come back. I think, unless the probation could have a really good reason for you not to go back. I think you could go back. All right. Andy 9:29 Just this is just always terrible. I just hate it. It just makes no sense to me that we Larry 9:34 Well, I think we treat a certain way, like when we play our scale the law think that what he says well, a little bit a little bit more on this about about some things, we just have to wait and see. Right? Sure. Sure. Sure where that can be done. And Andy 9:48 we have some exciting segments to cover and we have a mountain of articles. So are you ready to get started? video. Here we go. The first one comes from WSB out of Italy, Anna. And this one, we're not going to spend a lot of time but I do have a clip to play tag reading camps going up at these schools to catch speeders, and wait for it. And sex offenders. Here's a little clip. Unknown Speaker 10:13 Officials are also working to allow the cameras access to the statewide offender database. That way the cameras can read tags and alert police of sex offenders who enter the school zones tag. Unknown Speaker 10:24 So it's not just speed cameras, it's also a two fold. It also acts as a safety measure for the school zones as well. Andy 10:33 So yeah, we got to keep our kids safe. And we're going to track any sex offenders moving through the area also. Larry 10:40 I thought that was really, really shocking, because first of all thinking, those who are listening who would actually don't click on the view that the people interviewed are minority, African American, but they they sound they're just as conservative and protective of their children as any white person you could ever hear. Right. The The fact of the matter is, there's no prohibition against driving through schools on I mean, as far as the registry itself. Now, there might be probationers who've been told that you can't go within a certain radius of a school for any circumstances. And then some people end up having to take loops around it and take detours. But as far as just going about your normal everyday life, there's nothing wrong with going through a school zone. There there Andy 11:27 is a proven provision on the the probation restrictions that says you will never drive alone, especially where children are known to congregate, including, you know, schools, parks, playgrounds, etc. Larry 11:40 Well, then, in some places, if there's only one street that gets you where you're going, right law school, what would you do, you would get out and put Andy 11:47 your car like the Jetsons where you'd fold it up into a suitcase, and then you'd walk around through the dirt roads and through the woods and whatnot. And then when you get past the area, then you could unfold your car and keep going. Larry 11:58 Uh huh. I don't see think that would. There's another Andy 12:03 article that we have right behind it coming out of slate, it says license plate readers are creeping into neighborhoods across the country, cheap surveillance software is changing how landlords manage their tenants and what police can enforce. You know, I'm just pointing this out, because I mean, I have security cameras here at my house, and they're 20 bucks a pop, and they just put in some artificial intelligence stuff that it knows when it sees a person versus a cat or a car driving by so it can detect those differences. You know, for 20 bucks, that's what you get, it is not very difficult to put in the facial recognition stuff and then start tracking down where everyone is going. This puts us right up against 1984 and other kinds of dystopian futures like that, too. Larry 12:44 But you know, the license plate readers, there's a whole issue of, of what to do with that data was collected, how long it can be kept, and what how it can be utilized and who can have access to it. I know it's going to be a major variable for the for the technology, Scott hidden statutes, the lawmakers in part time legislature, it's we're not thinking about when the cops are spending these enormous budgets, getting new knowledge, tactics that are being shown in national conferences, about the latest tools and law enforcement, the legislators were not thinking about how they'd be misused, because the cops never been accused anything right? Of course, they're pure. It's only years later that after we start hearing about them parking in front of a hotel, and running everybody, every guest, and then document doors at 1130 at night, 1230 at night. And, and, and and giving people a hard time then we become we say, well, gee, that's not what we thought they were, we thought they were going to go out and break real crime rates and stuff. So the this, this rapidly evolving technology is going to take some time for both the statutes and the decisions from the courts to catch up and decision. So the courts are probably going to be the least helpful because you don't have an expectation of private obviously, that's long established when you're out in public. So that being a picture of your license plate is not going to be the problem, what you do with it and how you act with what you want. You've gotten it, whether you can run it through a criminal records database, and where you can make contact with that person, or that constitutes probable cause. There's a whole lot of things that we don't know the answer to yet, because it hasn't been litigated, but merely step and you're right. I do that all day long. I don't need anybody's permission, I can go out there and start doing it with a old fashioned camera with my cell phone. If you don't have your license plate snapped big step Street. Yeah, yeah. So that's not the problem. It's what what happens with the information, how it's stored and how and how it's disseminated, and what actions were taken as a result of what they find out particular people who can convert that readily to, to an identity on average person, if I snap your license plate number, I can't do anything with it. Sure, candy convert that if I'm not a tow truck operator, or insurance agent or something for her I'm access to have access to MVD records heard that, but the police can and all, all all arms of law enforcement, even court personnel can can, they can convert that stuff out easily to who it belongs to. Andy 15:05 Let's move over to this article from the intercept where we are favorite prosecutor Larry Krasner, he's actually now getting hit back by a Republican legislature that I know right there reducing his level of power for him to be this super progressive criminal justice reform advocate person, Larry 15:23 the republicans were in favor of local control. Andy 15:26 Later, if you keep up that attitude, you're going to drive away every listener we have Larry 15:30 you have to Why did you put such a distorted fake news article in here? Unknown Speaker 15:34 Frankly, I think you put it there. Andy 15:38 Well, you know, I mean, just just to catch people up. So we have Larry Krasner, who's the DA of Philadelphia, and he's running through the sweeping changes of one of the ones that I recall is, if the prosecutor wants to put someone in prison for something that would be more than like, I think three years, the prosecutor has to write down. How like $40,000 a year times person's going to get a 10 year sentence, are you is that the crime that the person has committed? Is it worth $400,000? Even like, now he stole 20 $500 from a local liquor store. So you're going to charge the city, the state $400,000 for something of 20 $500, that doesn't really make sense. So you know, that that was, that was one of the things that he was trying to put in and like go for the minimum kind of sentences are their alternative pass. So here, the the legislature is trying to reduce his ability to do these things? Larry 16:26 Well, and not only they tried, they did, and in fairness, it was also signed about democratic governor, right and Republican dominated legislature. But what they did is they gave the Attorney General concurrent jurisdiction over certain offenses. So that if the if the if the Philadelphia district attorney who's elected by the City of Philadelphia doesn't want to prosecute that the big old bad state government can come in and prosecute it anyway. And the democrats are crying fell. Now they're saying that it was a maneuver at the last minute, and they didn't understand this House Bill 1614 did what it what what it what it actually does, and I have some level sympathy for that, because in the rapidly moving legislative environment, things do sometimes not get fully vetted. And and it says they can get through. But if that was actually the case, I have just a little bit of sympathy, not a lot. What you should have done is you should have gone to your governor and said hey, we got snookered. The Republicans outsmart us on this, you need to veto this. And, and and persuaded to try and persuade the governor to veto then of course analysis but but become doesn't have sufficient strength override the governor, because if they felt that they were near close to a override, they would they would do it override vote, just embarrass people that would vote. And people don't understand an override of override vote, you end up in an awkward position because you're having to decide whether you want to uphold your executive or not. Which means you might have voted for legislation. I'm an executive, please sustain my veto, you turn around vote to state the veto. But in this case, the republicans would have relished in being able to put the the heat on the Democratic governor the veto this so they could attempt to override because they could portray him as soft on crime. And he had been for the criminal and we're trying to protect you. So the way they've run away district attorneys who choose not to do their job, we can save you by bringing in the powers and resources of the state so that we can prosecute these, because the DA there until death is not going to do the job. And the people there were stupid. But like I say it goes contrary to what they claim that they believe which they claim. They say that the local people always know best, but magically on a lot of things. They take they do a flip flop like they do on minimum wage and things when we local community, like in the case of St. Louis, Missouri, they acted a higher minimum wage. And they said, Oh, well know if we trust these people. And they they preempted local control over minimum wage. So they've preach local control. But magically, there's times when they completely abandon that local control. This is an example of that in real time. Andy 19:08 d. And I'm not sure how you worded this before, is this another one of those cases where the government just has to sign it? Like there's just an overwhelming support in the legislature that it would go, you know, we've talked about this from like the sex offender laws, that the government just has to sign it, you'd have to kill it. So it gets there. Larry 19:25 I don't know the margins, I'm assuming since it said it was bipartisan, I'm assuming get past was relatively little opposition. But But what what the Mark was a real test what we have what are the margins of the Republican majorities? How close are they to big it override level and how ugly this would have been had they had they try to override, and they would, they would have said to the citizens of Pennsylvania. This is why you don't want to live in Philadelphia. We've got this right away prosecutors, this making his own law, and he won't enforce the laws of the Commonwealth. And we're trying to bring a civilized behavior back to pencil mania, Philadelphia to our largest city, and you really need to vote with us to override it. And that would have been a lot of Democrats who have been under a lot of pressure to override, even if they even if there's not a supermajority already. And I don't think there was a supermajority I think it's actually a much closer in Pennsylvania. But but let's just take a look and see what the what the what the rates Andy 20:18 are. While you're doing that I was listening to something in the last couple of days ago of talking about collective bargaining. And I'm the reason why I'm bringing that up is because down here towards the bottom of the article, there's a Twitter post from the true blue warriors. And it says Help Wanted Philadelphia Police union calling for new district attorney. And as far as I know, the information that we have covered on this is that the the crime hasn't changed. But they have reduced the number of prisons, so they shut down prisons, which would definitely affect the police union. And at least the color the their their peers, their cousins has been like the prison guard, if that's even unionized in that particular I would guess it is where I was going with this is it feels to me that how do you how do you say that a union shouldn't be able to advertise like this. This, this doesn't feel right to me that they are making this kind of statement? Larry 21:07 Well, I've never had tremendous respect for law enforcement unions. I have great respect for for labor unions, but I've never really considered the law enforcement unions to be the equivalent of a labor union. And traditional sense. So I'm not, I'm not surprised. And the reason Andy 21:25 why this is feels scuzzy to me is because these people are very closely tied to where these laws are being written. And they have very close ties to the DAS and so forth. It's not the same. To me, it feels as though that's not the same for me to go try and talk to the DEA that a cop would have much more ready access and a more friendly or amicable relationship with that person, for them to push forward. And now the union being collective, they can go block vote much easier than we can. Larry 21:51 It feels absolutely, absolutely the Republicans control the state senator by 28 to 22. It's a 50 seat Senate. And they control the house by one 110 293. So it's much more divided in the house. But But like I say there would be enormous pressure. The governor's office, if he chose to veto, it would be facing enormous pressure. He would be actually not facing but he would be putting forth enormous pressure to sustain his veto to on those and Republicans would be putting enormous pressure trying to get to that magic, two thirds. And they would be the people that were voting to sustain the governor would be quite well aware that this was going to be a campaign issue in the next election cycle that they voted with the criminals. So this would be one of those things where the government would possibly burn political capital by making a stand on a veto, which would be overridden, because there'd be no way that they wouldn't be able to get to the two thirds. And the one way you could figure that out would be look at the budget, but margin it passed at the beginning. So this may be an example of where it's kind of like with international Megan's Law, there was no way that a president was going to veto that in 2016. election year, but he couldn't run anymore. And he would be leading on his people, he can't help very much to say, please sustain me. And they would have said, No, sir, we're not going to sustain you, we're going to override you because we're not going to be we're not gonna be vilified for protecting sex offenders. Right? Maybe things weren't before the governor felt like he just didn't want to burn any capital. And that's because he was going to lose. And I know you're supposed to do the right thing. Andy 23:22 Or they're supposed to fall on their swords for the right thing. And that's why we have elected them. Larry 23:26 So that's the theory. But that's not the reality of politics. Unknown Speaker 23:33 You want to take a little, you can't stay at the office, do it? Do it the right thing. Andy 23:36 That's a really disturbing kind of statement. You can't stay in office doing the right things you have to stay in office doing. I guess, the answer is what the people want. Larry 23:46 That's correct. You have to serve the will to people to stay in office, Andy 23:49 no matter how idiotic and moronic and stupid and as Holic. They are. Larry 23:54 with some exceptions, but yes, if you don't represent the will of people in the democratic elected system, you're not gonna be elected very long. Andy 24:01 Yeah, I understand it. Let's take a drive over to Kansas real quick. And Kansas is take on insanity defense to face High Court test, this is from law 360. This is a you describe it as as another attempt at chipping away at anybody ever using any sort of insanity defense, I believe. Larry 24:21 That is what that is what I said the the thought spent a lot of time on this is this is a an unfounded defense is very rarely assorted, there's already been great changes since 1981, when reagan was was shot, the standards, which were already tough, have gotten even tougher, and then Kansas wants to make it even tougher. And they want to to, to, to have it worried if if the state can show that you acted purposely a willfully. That's all it takes. So you could what what's confusing to that people, you can help them, you can purposely do something and not understand that it's wrong. So so in an insanity defense, the general rule is can you distinguish between right or wrong, you can purposely cut a telephone line. But that doesn't mean that you know that your mind is so diseased or defective, you may not know that you're doing something wrong, so so so we're convoluted issue, you can purposely do something. But it doesn't mean that you can understand the criminality of what you're doing. So they want to eliminate that they that not understanding that being able to distinguish differently, right wrong that did you just you just act purposely or willfully to do the act, and they didn't, then you can have sort of an insanity defense. So basically, no one would ever have a chance of using an astounding defense in Kansas. Andy 25:38 And my understanding of what this would be as someone with a very depleted intellectual capacity, low IQ, however you want to get there does something heinous. And they say, is that where we're headed with this? Or are we talking like someone walks in on their wife, bang in the neighbor and you lose your mind and you kill everybody? Which way we going? Larry 25:57 I think we've we've pretty well gotten rid of that long time ago. That was the irresistible impulse that you give up what will people of rage, temporary, temporary insanity. Like think that's already gone. But this is this is where if you if you you can you can do something that you ought not do but not appreciate the impact of the criminality of that distance taking away the not the inability to appreciate the criminality of your act. Just simply if you intentionally did whatever you did, that's enough. Okay. Well, Andy 26:29 I mean, intentionally Don't we all pretty much intentionally do everything that we do? Larry 26:33 Well, mostly, but not every everything we do some sometimes you possess drugs that your teenage son, but in your purse that you didn't intentionally do, but okay, the general rule? Yes, you do it you intentionally, but you may not understand because of your mental state, that is criminal. You could you can fill the bathtub up with water, put the baby at it, not know that you're going to kill the baby if you're so defective, but you intentionally filled a bathtub up with water. Andy 26:57 Right? Right. Alright, so Andrea Yates wouldn't be able to get an insanity plea for sure. Let me grab what she did to Fiverr kids, and you know, continue to do them after the first and the second and so forth. Larry 27:10 So you won't be able to say you heard voices in your head or anything like that. As long as you acted purposefully or willfully to do that you're not insane. Andy 27:17 All right, I'm going to avoid going down the path of where I shouldn't go of hearing voices and responding to those voices, I'm going to avoid that. Well, then we also have an article from the collateral consequences Resource Center, that is really hard to say. So it's a cc resource center.org, new restore restoration lost take center stage and second quarter of 2019. Later, this is way more words than I'm ever going to read for an article. So can you please explain to me what this is, Larry 27:47 I would just urge people to read it, because it's helping to say that there's a trend developing across the nation for have been convicted of crimes or even been arrested and convicted it to diminish the sting and the consequences. There are, there are there are dozens of states who have taken modest and sometimes significant measures in the last in the last year or two. This is just an elimination of the trend, including my state, we passed a limited expansion bill, which just took effect on July 1. So so it is a trend that it's a favorable trend. We we don't get a lot of good news on this podcast. This is just some good news for people to peruse through and 6am live in one of those states and there might be something that would help you. Of course, you should sexual convicted of sexual offenses are exempt. But you never know. It might it might help you or might help someone you know. Andy 28:43 Okay, well, cool. Yes. And like I said, it's it's I mean, it's not it's not an Atlantic article, is those take you like a matter of days to read, but this one is decent size. And then quickly, we're going to jump over to the reason magazine and the reason why I'm jumping through these so quick just for you. So you know, is there so much stuff we have to cover at the end that I want to get through these things. But from reason magazine, the Defense Department computer network among top shares of child pornography. This just boggles my mind that something of 20% of the child porn that's hosted on the internet is hosted by the United States government. And I don't think I can come up really with a parallel kind of example of of there being criminal content or criminal activity that the government is like they're hosting the they're hosting the symposium on on drug dealing, and then you show up to the drug dealer symposium and they arrest you right there on that I'd like I can't figure out how this one works. Larry 29:45 I can't figure it out either. Andy, Andy 29:46 it can you think of anything that is remotely similar to it? Larry 29:51 No, I think we should go into discord and see if anybody else knows about this, because I can't. Andy 29:57 So far, they're just they're just making smiley faces me because and I, you know, like I listened to a boatload of tech podcast, and I've heard this over, you know, and obviously not related to our issue. But as a being a technology thing. It's so like, being in possession of the content is considered like a crime than viewing it isn't considered a crime. These people are then distributing it, but then coming back on us and putting us in prison for five years per offense, or some crazy shit like that. And these people have all of it is the problem that come on. I mean, I I'm just I'm baffled at how we get here and how this works. What Tell me just like off the top of your head, what could we do to have this not be a thing? Right. Okay, so you went there to the voices. All right. We should we should move on that I just, it just didn't seem right that we should have the server farm setup. Larry 30:58 I don't understand all the stuff. That's how happening here, but it says that there's a bill been introduced. Did you see that? Who co sponsor the bill by represent totally Andy 31:08 didn't see that. Okay, I just see the biggest bang and bigger Larry 31:12 bang Steinberger, and co sponsored by Representative Mark metals. Okay, so we Andy 31:16 have we have bipartisan support. Larry 31:19 It says the notion that Defense Department, department Defense Network and Pentagon issue computers may be used to view creator circulate such horrifying images, shameful disgrace, and one we might want to fight head on. So there's some legislation. Okay. All right. Well, that's attempting to deal with that. So I guess we could support the legislation if it's good legislation, Andy 31:38 okay. And then by that, that, like, by extension, we should call those representatives. And we should say that we support the bill provided that it has the right text and so forth, criminalize all the other Larry 31:48 things, we should have some of our people that are listening to the podcast, analyze the legislation, and I'm wishing we can decide if we want to advocate supporting it. Andy 31:59 I'm, hey, speaking of the Atlantic, the next article actually does come from the Atlantic. I didn't even do that on purpose. And this article is Jeffrey Epstein cases, like nothing I've seen before. So that was part of the the breaking news part we covered at the top. Is it Jim Acosta? what's the what's the Secretary of Labor? his name? His first name, Larry 32:21 man, manual cost humbly? Andy 32:23 Oh, manual cost. Okay. I'm sorry. And he's the former Florida prosecutor that prosecuted this case. And Jeffrey Epstein got, just from what I'm hearing, Larry, he got a ridiculously easy sentence. And he got like 13 months in county, he had 12 hours of work release where he went to his office, he's a billionaire, he was taken by his driver. And the officer stood outside where his normal business operations continued, including women going to his office every day or you know, whatever. And and then he would go home at night and say, that was six days a week that he was allowed to do that. I'd like a prison sentence like that. Larry 33:04 Well, but see, there's there's a I don't know if we're going to get into some the in great detail in the in the subsequent segment. But prosecution is a is a tough business. For for, because an ethical prosecutor. There's such a thing. And I know there are because I've met a few. You have you have the duty to try to do justice that you're not supposed to prosecute cases for there's not evidence to convict beyond a reasonable doubt. Well, that's ideal. But the reality is, sometimes you want a conviction, even though you don't believe you have evidence that would went beyond a reasonable doubt. Because she's believed that that person needs to be under under the thumb of the authorities so that they can be monitored. And so that hopefully, you're you're praying that they violate the conditions, because the standard for putting them in prison is much lower after they're convicted. So oftentimes, when a prosecutor gets criticized for a sweetheart, they were giving a deal based on a very, very weak case, but yet they wanted to have the person in the system so they're willing to make a deal. I get this from mothers all the time, and they call it SA with my son. All he did was X, Y, and Z. And I said, Well, that is a crime. And the state of Arizona, and you are a person. Right? Right. And I say and did when the police came out to talk to him about the consensual sex that he had. Oh, yes, he was very cooperative. So he admitted that he had the sex. He admitted that he knew the person was under age. Yes, he did all that. Okay. Well, the prosecution had a very good case, not as your son reading, right? Yes. His understanding your final? Yes. Did you finish high school? Yes. So he would not be able to claim any disability and interrogation when they said you have the right to remain silent. You have the right. He would understand those miranda warnings a lot. Yes. Well, then getting your son's confession set aside, it's going to be very, very difficult. We can make the motion but it's not going to probably work. So they've got an open shut case. Well, then there's another son, or the mother cosmic says, Well, what do I do? Well, you've got a really good case, because when they came to see your son, he told the police go pound sand. He says I'm not missing anything. And it wasn't reported for six and a half months, and there was no forensics evidence at all. And they have a very weak case against her so and they have the evidence of the accusing party. So now we've got a whole different set of circumstances here. So we've got a case where we if we go to trial, here, there's a there's a good chance we'll make it a hung jury, we even got a straight out acquittal, or not guilty. But the state's offering in this case, they're offering your son a probated sentence. So we can be certain that he won't get any prison time at all. And, in fact, they're offering him a non sex offense. They're offered him contributed, delinquent civil minor, which is not a ritual sex offense is three years of supervised probation. And then he's even there, the prosecution willing to even stipulate that he can get a conditional discharge, which means that it'll be off his record if he completes the three years. So now you want to roll the dice and save the citizens of Central County, we're going to convict him based on her on her credibility, you can roll the dice, but if you lose, he's got at least have to register as a sex offender. And he may get prison time possibly. We don't know for sure, because it's called GM decided its sentencing later. But we have the certainty here, and we have the uncertainty of the jury. What do you want to do? Well, that's what happens in a lot of cases where people see a sweetheart deal. Well, the sweetheart deal was offered because it was a very weak case. And the ages were identical. of the boys stage was identical at the girls at the men and the women, the agents were identical. It was a 21 year old boy and a 15 year old girl in both cases, and the girl was one year too young to give consent, but one confessed and what didn't. And they say, well, that just ain't right. Well, it may not be right. But that's the hand that the prosecutor was dealt, your son didn't do what he should do, another son did what he should do. And therefore, the prosecutor is in a much more opposition, and the prosecutor has to make a deal. The prosecutor can say, all right, well, I'm going to take a principal session, we're going to go to trial on this thing, by golly, and we're going to get a sex offense and registration or we're gonna get nothing. And they walk out embarrassed. At the end of a four day trial, the jury finds not guilty, they returned a verdict in 37 minutes after deliberations begin. And the person has they're not in the system at all well to the scenario, the sweetheart deal during the system, and then they pray to God that they can revoke the person during the three years to take away their conditional discharge and send them to prison. Sure. Andy 37:30 First correction. The attorney's name is Alex Acosta just just wanted to check on that. Okay. Um, and do you know how like, I mean, this guy is a billionaire and something that I was listening to I didn't realize that he's like, he's a math for not a fee, nom, so to speak. He didn't even finish college. But he is he has been a teacher, a professor of mathematics at various things. Hedge Funds manager, I mean, the guy's the the guy is not a stupid individual by any stretch of the imagination. He's a smart, smart cat. My first thing because of that he is a billionaire. How much of that do you think? Do you think that he has the influence in the prosecution system of donating money to various candidates to try and get them to push put pressure on prosecution to make things a light lighter deal, he would be able to have the attorneys of the century, so to speak, how much you think that weighs into him getting this deal of the century? Larry 38:23 It would, it would, it would have the potential to weigh very heavily because you're not only as a prosecutor, you generally don't have unlimited funds, although you generally do have more more funds and your your opponent than the defender does. But in this case, the prosecution starts out being out resourced, because very few prosecutions warrant spending millions of dollars. Very few. Andy 38:44 Yeah, this guy would totally be able to outspend the budget, even even if this is more Largo Larry 38:50 this, this this would be where they would be evenly matched or the out match. But also the connections to connections have a lot to do when that when the district attorney's getting phone calls saying hey, this guy's been a charitable donating 10s of thousand hundred thousand dollars to charity. And he saw this he's done that. That that that is that is a potential consideration. The truth is none of us know. We don't know. And I get is irritated. When we do the same thing that we get mad at bit having done to us. We don't have any evidence that I'm aware of that says there was anything crooked by Costa that he was that he was influenced by any of the things we have the statement that that it was the best that could be done under the circumstances, considering all the relevant factors. Well, I for one, don't want to be an intellectual hypocrite. I don't want to constantly go back and use mob rule and public anger to second guess a judicial decision like was done and they brought Turner case and more recently another case which the name is escaping me. But But I don't want to I don't want to go down that road. They were dangerous territory, what up when when when decisions are going to be subject to Bob justice. And second and third guest years later. You know, that's what we gave we we claim we want prosecutorial discretion. Why is it we get so darn angry when someone actually exercise a little bit of prosecution prosecutorial discretion? That's what's puzzling me. Andy 40:17 I'm with you. And the only like, I'm just just to expand on the way that this sentence was structured. Do you do you think that this is unusual, says in exchange for the Southern District of Florida's abandonment of its criminal investigation of Epstein's conduct, agree to not prosecute him federally and incredibly agreed to agreed not to prosecute anyone else who helped him procure underage girls for sex? Like it just feels like, what? Larry 40:45 I don't feel I don't feel is that unusual? There's there's there's there's there's constant agreements between federal and local authority, federal state authorities, which which is going to take the prosecution. And it's not that unusual for them to difference they were to, you know, if they prosecute them for the same offense steadily, they got convicted of state they would be saved. Well, isn't that double jeopardy, which it isn't, but we're beefing and jerking and moaning and crying about double jeopardy. You can't win. But But he he? I don't think it's all that unusual. Andy 41:15 We did just have a Supreme Court decision about that double jeopardy thing, right? Larry 41:17 Well, yes, it's not double jeopardy. This I know, I know, could have could have prosecuted him. But we get mad. Well, how many phone calls? I'm gonna take him on what you don't all around. Todd was prosecuted by the state of Tennessee, and then the feds came in and filed charges. Well, wait a minute, isn't that what? What? Why is it okay, for Epstein to be double prosecute for the same offense? But yet, you're against that? Right? Well, the difference is, I can tell you what the difference is, the difference is you're angry, because he's got money. It looks like he got away with something. And there's perception of injustice. And something's got to be done about it. That's That's the difference. Andy 41:54 And we have seen this we were talking about earlier of a handful of other cases where someone with an social presence, you know, a famous actor, or you know, music star, whatever, that they've gotten very light sentences out of the whole equation. Larry 42:08 Yes, we we talk about light sentences all the time. But it is strange to me that it makes our people so angry that someone gets or gets a sentence that supposedly where for individual analysis of each defendant, how do you square those conflicting statements? Andy 42:24 It would the prosecutor have as close to a perfect outlook of what evidence is available to make that determination as anybody? Larry 42:32 Well, I don't know who would have I mean, theoretically, the defense has all the evidence, but it's the prosecutors discretionary call, the prosecutor is going to know that what juries and their jurisdiction are more likely to convict on what levels of evidence they're going to require what they're going to find this credible, you kind of know if all your people drive tractors and have non trade education. So and I say, well for probably say, done it correctly, did do it. Or, you know, if your people are much more educated, they're going to be demanding more forensics analysis. So they're gonna be, you know, the expectations of God. If you if you prosecute Boulder, you know, you're not going to convicted by their drug possession, probably in Denver as well, you're not gonna pick that up. I don't care about that. So so a prosecutor said the best position to know whether or not he or she can get a conviction based on the evidence that they have. Now, I guess what people are saying the same that want the prosecutor to bring cases regardless of whether there's evidence that sufficient to convict the young, reasonable doubt, which is so inconsistent with what we claim that we're angry about that people bring charges, prosecutors bring charges on the flimsy evidence, you can't have it both ways, which is it? Andy 43:33 And the and the funny thing there is that, you know, at the same time we're doing that, that we were just talking about Larry Krasner and then squashing his ability to do all the reform stuff. Yeah, I'm with you. And then then we talk about judicial activism. And then where the legislation, legislators the weather line is, and we supposed to have these three co equal branches, and the lines are already delineated. And the prosecutor has done what he's done Do Larry 44:00 That is correct. And I think it's very dangerous if we're going to start reopening every case. And we'll tell Andy 44:05 me to cover that for a minute. What about you mentioned that to me during the week of how this is dangerous, tell me how this is dangerous. If we second guess what the prosecutor has done, Larry 44:15 what you do get to second guess what the prosecutor has done, when they're elected by the people, you simply don't like them again, that's one way you get to. But if if we can start opening up old cases, and saying you should have done this, rather than this, then pretty soon we're going to have a system where it's robotic justice, where there's not gonna be any discretion, because if the prosecutor has to be worried constantly about Bob justice, and if this is perceived wrong, even though it's the right thing to do, then I better not do it, then we're dangerous territory Andy 44:44 will be down to the judges aren't safe, depending on the state. So now prosecutors aren't safe, depending on the state, like, what is what is the solution? Larry 44:53 Well, the solution, it's not going to happen in my lifetime, the solution is for us as people to become better and formed and realize that these decisions are not for us to make it we're not capable as a people sitting back as the Monday morning quarterback to examine the evidence that's available to a prosecution, that determine whether they have enough to convict someone beyond a reasonable doubt going through affording the due process protections that are required for our Constitution. And sometimes something's not going to look right to us. And we're going to have to accept the fact that people were like, they did the best that we that they could or if they were appointed, or however they got an office, rather than we have all this skepticism that everything's crooked. Now, I don't, I don't like to buy into all this conspiracy stuff until I have some evidence. Is it possible that Alex Acosta was influenced improperly? Yes, it's possible, but you haven't shown me the evidence yet. Right? Andy 45:44 You have a lot, a lot of circumstantial that he's tight with these people. He's got all this money, etc. Larry 45:50 Yeah. Well, I'm one of those who likes to see evidence, you know, I'm sure I know, I'm with you. I'm hardware defense. And I like to see evidence. And I'd like to presume that people not guilty of anything, unless there's evidence that shows that they are, I don't like to guilt by association and by innuendo without it, it would, it would be inconsistent for me to be as strong as I am for the defense and to say that our betters throw Acosta under the bus without any evidence. I mean, I don't, I don't I don't like the administration that he worked for. But that has nothing to do with whether there's evidence that he did anything wrong. Andy 46:24 Yeah. Um, and not that I know, I know that we're covering this from the side that uh, that we're going back in and, and analyzing Alex Acosta for his actions, and then him stepping down. But I don't think that his current situation of his current current crimes, Jeffrey Epstein, a I don't think the registry did anything to prevent that. And also, that I think I lost my second point, but the registry didn't do anything to to keep him from doing whatever he's being accused of now. And so I'm not, you know, this doesn't help. It certainly doesn't help our situation by him being so high profile, and having more charges him already being on the registry. But that's just one of the bullet points that I want to bring up. Larry 47:09 There's, there's so much the way of possible new allegations and runs was that they've already filed, or these allegations of sexual misconduct that occurred since his previous conviction or the subsequent actions or these actions before, or I'm not follows enough? Andy 47:26 Yeah, I just know that he's been doing like given a lot of allegedly giving a lot of money to young girls to have to do things with him. Larry 47:36 But but but once they became a convicted person, has this conduct been subsequent to that? Or before that? I Andy 47:45 seemed like because these are these are allegations coming out of New York. So I I can't even speak to that. I don't know the answer that question. Larry 47:51 Anybody. Does anybody in discord of our hundred people listening know the answer to the Andy 47:56 I will find out they will chime in here whenever they decide that they want to chime in. Is there anything else that you want to cover about this before we move on? Larry 48:04 Now? It's a moment I think we'll probably pick it up again later. Yeah. Andy 48:09 Well, then from the Tallahassee democrat prosecutor who spark Jackson County drug planning probe resigns as whistleblower. I don't think that they make these titles very, like they're hard to read. They almost sound like Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers. It's hard to say sometimes. This is a, I guess what what has been going on is deputies, in certain circumstances have been planting drugs on people and the body cameras and the other surveillance stuff seems to indicate that they had done this. And so she's whistleblowing about this. And it has created kind of a stink. And now she has she has resigned out of the whole thing. Larry 48:46 You don't say that a lot sworn law enforcement officer would plant drugs on someone. Are you well, are you are you making that accusation? Andy 48:58 Well, I you know, that the the the header of the article then says 119 cases have been dropped as investigation into fire deputy continues. And she says I don't want to work in an environment that allows this to happen. So I'm going to then assume that the answer is yes. And there's even a picture of the officer holding a little baggie of something in his hand and says, so as it shows the officer as seen on dash cam. So yeah, apparently the COP is planting stuff, and it's being swept under the rug. So the whistleblower persons like if this amount? Oh, Larry 49:32 well, I would just have to say that that's one prosecutor who actually takes through their ethical oath, seriously, to do justice. Andy 49:39 But then but she's also then stepping down out of the whole thing. Larry 49:42 Well, but but apparently she can't do justice. Andy 49:47 If the people that can make changes that can affect the situations, if they then step down, then who man's the fort for the next one for the next person that has drugs planted on them? Well, Larry 50:01 actually looked over this article, so I haven't read it and I'm having trouble opening it. But Was this the elected da? state's attorney? Or was this assistant Andy 50:11 Christina Pumphrey started hearing whispers about Jackson County deputies equity Western Not long after joining the state joining the state's attorney's office. So she's just a prosecutor. She's not the Attorney General, apparently the Larry 50:24 state's attorney, so apparently she cannot make those changes. And even if you are the elected prosecutor, people don't understand the vast amount of power that the police have, and how scary and frightening they are. asked our former district attorney here from Burlington County, Karen Brandenburg, when she prosecuted the cops that short shot James Boyd off the side of the mountain A few years ago, asked her let the death threats, ask her about the untrue things that were said about her by certain police officers. And, and that it's, it's it's not easy to take on the vast bureaucracy of the place. Andy 51:06 It says that after she heard warnings about the officer, she started taking a closer look at the traffic stop arrest. And these aren't like simple drug possession cases. She read his reports and had a habit of pulling the body camera videos and she noticed something was off, among other things is written accounts of the stops didn't always match what she could see with her own eyes on the body camera footage. I know right? All right. Well, I'm done. I'm done. We can shut the podcast down, we have solved all the problems of the world where Larry 51:34 you don't say that that that no police officer would write an inconsistent statement that will what's on the body cam, that would not happen. Andy 51:43 And let me let me tie it back to that that billboard of the Larry Krasner thing. This is like, I mean, these, these people, we are trusting them with an immense amount of power. And then they're going to then run political ads, and then lobby for potentially to make the punishment harsher and lower the threshold so that they can, you know, NAB more people doing things illegal. It It feels it's too much. It's too much like nepotism To me it's too much like it's in the family. It's incest, so to speak. That's how it feels. Larry 52:15 It feels to me as well. Andy 52:17 So I'm not I'm not insane. And how if someone says you can't fix stupid I, so I'm not nothing in my thought process here and how I'm thinking about this. That's on this particular thing. No. Okay, so other things I am considered nuts. So like so then can we set up some sort of government non government agency that can monitor the police just kind of generically like randomly select an audit certain things without having that turned into a political nightmare? Larry 52:46 or difficult? That's always the question of how to police, police police, I should oversee themselves. Andy 52:51 I think that that's just a shitty idea, right from the start Larry 52:54 that but that's what they they, they have strong support for that the police or the the they should self monitor. And try I Andy 53:03 don't see how you could do that. I don't even think that you could have an other like, take another state group, you know, police force, something like that, bring them over so that they're not politically tied, they're not tied to the same sort of promotion structure, they're still going to, like, scratch each other's back at least to some degree, because they don't want to look down on their brotherhood. They're not gonna you know, they're going to scratch back on the other direction. Larry 53:24 I'm just simply stating what else should be, yeah, leave and have enormous political power, that they should be self oversight. And not have you tried to bring the radical idea that the citizens that they work for should oversee them, there should be civilian oversight. They go totally ballistic. And they put all sorts of fear mongering out about how that that people who don't understand police and will come in and neuter their powers. And that will make them so that no one would want to be a police officer. And then you'll be subject to all these criminals who will take that the way of our key, and the police generally when that argument was a public, because in order to have civilian oversight, you have to make a political decision. And the political decision is you have to tell the people that you pay their salaries that we're going to tell you how to police. And the police do not like to be told how to police. Andy 54:16 They do work for the public, right? Unknown Speaker 54:19 I know, it's an amazing concept every other place. Larry 54:22 You get to the employer gets to dictate the terms of the work, but the police feel like that they should dictate their own work terms, they should get to decide what equipment they use, they get to decide their standard operating procedures, they get to decide all this stuff. And somehow another that people's employ them, which is used to the city, the county at the local level, that they should but out because they don't understand what they're doing. And I don't I don't share that view, I believe that we can tell them what equipment to use, we can tell them how to deploy, we can tell them whether they ride bicycles or where they walk a beat. And we can tell them what they arrest for and what they give citations for. I believe that we can do that. But my view is not in the majority. My view is in a very, very small minority of people who share that view of what we can do with the police the police, when but public opinion that they should be able to determine all these things. So you're the crackpot I'm the crackpot as far as that goes. Andy 55:11 All right. On that note that we have to flip the table. Ready to be a part of registry matters. Get links at registry matters dot CEO. If you need to be all discreet about it, contact them by email registry matters cast at gmail. com. You can call or text a ransom message to 7472 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 for 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 without you we can't succeed. You make it possible. Outstanding and we are back from our long. So we take like a 30 minute break right there. Larry 56:09 Or like close to an hour. Andy 56:11 Okay, um, let's see here. let's let's let's cover this one really quick of this. of this one. I the the Brittany Zamora sentenced to 20 years in prison for sex with a teen student. Are you ready for that? Larry 56:26 Can't see a problem with it? Keep going. Andy 56:28 You know, I often think about my own personal reflection here being you know, a young adolescent in my late high school years that if a 20 something year old teacher we're hitting on me, I would be ecstatic. The difference here, at least for this is this is a 28 year old teacher and a 13 year old boy. And we do often talk about teachers and they get incredibly light sentences. So this is someone that has she's gotten 20 years in Maricopa County, which is Jar Jar, jar, Pyros. hometown, she got it, she got hit with a pretty strong sentence. Larry 57:04 She she did and that was the purpose at least I want to talk about this. It illustrates the harshness of of some states, I'm assuming in order to be a teacher that she had no criminal record. And she said in her statement, other court, you know that she had not come she tried to live a law abiding life, and that she made a bad choice here. And clearly a bad choice. We don't want teachers having sex with students, and the K through 12 system at any age, even if it's a 28 year old teacher and an 18 year old student. It's just not a good healthy thing to be doing. But 20 years in prison is way disproportionate to the crime. Way disproportionate she'd have been one state over she'd have chosen to teach in in Mexico, they would be unheard of to give a first time offender 20 years. Andy 57:49 Really what do you think? Can you speculate Unknown Speaker 57:51 she would probably gotten probation? Really? Yeah, should probably Oh my God, that's Andy 57:56 a night and day I'm thinking you would say something like five ish or something? Larry 57:59 No. Well, with with with with without any force. And I know anything under ages theoretically for us, but it's not for us if there if it was a consensual thing. here as a first time offender of our 33 counties. I can't think of any county where she would have gotten a significant presence and said it most she would have probably gotten a probated sentence with no criminal history. That's crazy. But Sheba last night was like not a crazy at all. It's actually the way it should be. Andy 58:25 I mean, crazy as in what my mind is of what the normal is in the United States. And so Larry 58:32 yeah, she would, she would likely have gotten appropriate incidents here. And that would be appropriate we can we can monitor her with probation. treatment is probably an order, she's probably got some some some issues related to her sexuality. And treatment would probably be effective in her case, if it was real treat, but not the Kabuki treatment that we have this disguised as a collaborative fishing expedition and both sex offender arena of the treatment providers for they work in college. I'm going to try to revoke the person. But But this would be an adequate Senate, she would surrender her teaching license. Yeah. And she would have a chance to have her record eradicated so that it age of 28. Why do you want to destroy her life? Why do you want to hurt to be a tax leech rather than tax producer? How does that benefit us the society? Would we want her paying as much taxes as we possibly can suck out of her for the rest of her life? I mean, since we have already a demographic problem in this country, every time we disable a person plays a sex offense, conviction, and even a felony conviction about particular sexual offense conviction. We're diminishing the money that we can suck out them exponentially. Why would you want to do that, Andy 59:41 though? So she also says that while she is gone, let's see. I'm trying to find where it is that Oh, while she's gone, she wants to earn a new degree in prison so she can start another career when she is free once more. Larry 59:55 Good luck in Arizona. I agree. Andy 59:57 I know right? Good luck anywhere. We only recently somebody talked that they are starting to pilot test bringing Pell grants in. So unless she's got resources on the street for someone to send in correspondence course, though, she's screwed. Larry 1:00:09 So now before i get any hate emails, I would be saying the same thing if it were a male, I know that the study would look at it differently. Because Traditionally, the women teachers have gotten lighter sentences just like a tabula fe and people that have been high profile sensationalized cases, they've generally gotten lighter sentences. But how would we say the same thing we don't want to destroy 28 year old males life if this was aberrational behavior, and it's not indicative of who they are? And we would want to try to say VD 28 year old so I would not be saying anything differently if it was a 28 year old male, Unknown Speaker 1:00:43 right? It wouldn't make the news like this. So that's for sure. Larry 1:00:46 So I don't think Andy 1:00:49 we should move on over and talk about Kevin Spacey. Do you think you know, and now that I think about it, this is the Kevin Spacey thing is similar, but it's the juicy smallest thing is, you know, there's parallels there of the way the evidence comes about. I suppose. I have a little news clip coming for this one. Unknown Speaker 1:01:09 Go ahead. They did you skip a clip. Andy 1:01:12 Oh, shoot. I did. Hang on. So let's back up. We're going to talk about our good friend, Antonin Scalia. We have you provided a clip for Antonin Scalia on the Second Amendment. So yeah, I'm sorry, I Larry 1:01:24 didn't mean to skip that. And plus, plus, we got some important music to play. Oh, Andy 1:01:28 man, I don't have that ready. Like I'm gonna have to put that in after post. Okay, here's Scalia. Unknown Speaker 1:01:33 Let's turn to an issue that is in the news right now, with the massacre in Colorado. Andy 1:01:38 Obviously, this is a little bit old, Unknown Speaker 1:01:39 and that is gun control. You wrote in 2008. The the opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, the majority opinion that said the Second Amendment means what it says people have a right to bear arms. Question. How far does that constitutional right? Can a legislature ban semi automatic weapons or candidate ban magazines that carry 100 rounds without violating an individual's constitutional right to bear arms? What the opinion and Heller said is that it will have to be decided in future cases. What limitations upon the right to keep and bear arms are permissible. Some undoubtedly are because there were some that were acknowledged at the time. For example, there was a tort called a frightening, which, if you carried around a really horrible weapons just to scare people like a head axe or something that was, I believe, a misdemeanor. So yes, there are some limitations that can be imposed. What they are, will depend on what the what the society understood were reasonable limitations at the time, there were certain location limitations. Where What about these technological limitations? Obviously, we're not talking a handgun or a musket, we're talking about a weapon that can fire 100 shots in a minute. We'll We'll see. I mean, obviously, the Unknown Speaker 1:03:15 the amendment does not apply to Unknown Speaker 1:03:18 arms that cannot be hand carried to keep and bear. So don't apply to cannons. But I suppose there are handheld rocket launchers that can bring down airplanes, that will will have to be yours. It will have to decide that if you're a textual very carefully. my starting point, and probably my ending point will be what limitations are within the understood limitations that the society had at the time, they had some limitations on the nature of arms that could be born. So if we'll see what what those limitations are as applied to modern web, Andy 1:03:57 Larry to do it, a desert eagle is now desert eagle is a is a is a pistol. That is a 50 caliber. And it is, I mean, effing huge. I mean, it is a giant round, it is what they use in sniper rifles to take out engine blocks. So when he says, Well, I guess you couldn't have a cannon at Desert Eagle is basically a hand cannon. Larry 1:04:19 Well, the reason why I put this clip in here is, is I wanted people to hear him say several times, we'll have to wait and see, when people when people ask about whether something something can be done or not. And I say we don't know. We'll have to wait and see. They look at me, they roll their eyes, and they do all kinds of contortions. We we truly don't know on some things. It's like, we'll have to let the cases go up on appeal. And we'll have to see where the limits are. The former justice delight, Justice has indicated that there are limitations on weapons that can be carried by individuals individual right is not complete and absolute. But we don't know where they are yet. They haven't been defined yet. We'll have to let states and activity and the National Rifle Association will challenge those. And they'll be appellate case law. Something else will eventually go to Supreme Court. They'll grant cert and we'll find out. But that applies in other areas that we talked about. What what can be done. We just don't know. We don't know about polygraph how far they can go with polygraphs? We just don't know. Because the cases haven't gone up yet. We haven't draw those boundaries. What we do know is that the 10th circuit on polygraph that said that something that will a person cannot be compelled to incriminate themselves. And I think they said that briefly in the Seventh Circuit. I think we wrote about that recently and talked about it in Seventh Circuit. But we just don't know what the answers to all these things. So when someone tells you we don't know, we truly don't know. You heard the Supreme Court Justice saying we don't know. So that was why I wanted that to be in there there are where the Second Amendment can can go in terms of now he seems to have invented a limitation there he says you have to be you have to be able to carry them wait well to bear arms it I don't remember seeing anything in the in the Second Amendment says you have to go to carry it. So he seems to have invented something that's not in a text it says the to have to be hand carried words that anywhere read Andy 1:06:11 it does that by chance was that with the bear arms means? Larry 1:06:15 Well, maybe it does. That made it but but but but just if you're going by the text alone, it doesn't say that you can you can bear arms that can be carried with a raft of the Constitution. We're all arms carried, or did they drag? Some did they might have had them? They might have me so I don't know where he got that from? The other thing? text? Andy 1:06:36 I'm sure I'm sure it is in your area to that people do open carry like, you know, going to the restaurant or whatever. Yes, that is that intimidates me. Pretty bad. So he just said something that you can't have some sort of head shop or whatever the hell he called it as an intimidation weapon. Personally, I find anybody with a weapon on their hip is intimidating. Larry 1:06:55 Even the police. Andy 1:06:57 Definitely them. I know that they're loose cannons to begin with. Plus, they have extra rounds. They have tasers, they have handcuffs. I mean, they have all kinds of extra shit. Plus, they have radios. And they're going to get all their boys on you too. Larry 1:07:08 Now that when our podcasts like we're going to be I know violence now from saying that. Andy 1:07:12 I know. I know. I know. I know. But that argument that that just intrigues me of, you know, so what they thought about weapons back in the 1700s, early 1800s. And how that covers us today, you know, so right to carry arms, right to bear arms. And he's talking about something of it being the size that you can carry. I was speaking to one of our listeners that happened to be in town this week, today. And you could have a Tactical Nuke in a backpack. So I mean, you could have a nuclear weapon in your backpack? Oh, Larry 1:07:42 well, well, like say, we'll just have to wait and see where the limits are, there will be a flow of cases that will assert will be requested by the Supreme Court. And we'll have to find out. Because as more and more democrats get control of more and more legislative bodies, particular it's a city level, there will be more and more prohibitions enacted, because that's all you can do at the local level. If you don't have any national power, which the democratic national power right now, then these cases will immediately these statutes, these ordinances will immediately be challenged. And eventually the Supreme Court will give us more guidance in terms of for those limits are in terms of where the where the where there, where they can actually limit the right of the individual to carry. We just don't know yet. And when when someone someone tells you we don't know. is truly because we don't know. And then I get I get so many anger stares, when people ask me about what what's the quarter saying? We don't know. We're gonna have to wait and find out. Andy 1:08:40 Yeah, of course. Yeah. No, we can't get in the heads. I even asked Paul doodling at the conference because he clerked for Gorsuch. And he and he actually even like, shut it down, said I'm not gonna talk about any sort of like confident, you know, private conversations that we had. I was just, you know, can he illuminate anything of you know, since he was a person, one on one with the guy, but he were used to he declined to let me Larry 1:09:02 have that may be one of the commitments they make when they get a clerkship is that they won't talk about their relationship with with justice. I don't know because I've never had that privilege. But that may be one Andy 1:09:13 big you could go toe to toe with the Scalia. Larry 1:09:15 I would have a lot of fun with Scully. I really would. I mean, like, well, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but they play went toe to toe I would love to like it that what he just said about I would like to start with justice. Where do you Where did you get that text that has your text lyst? Where is that in the text? Andy 1:09:32 I do. I do have a request for you. Then as we move through the Scalia Eclipse I and I see that running for some length of time. Can we then move on to the next kind of justice? Can we move to an RPG Larry 1:09:43 again, we don't find this much on her. Yeah. And and and she's not as articulate Scalia. It's fun to soundbite because he says funny stuff. Yeah. And though no one comes close to him. When you find the clips are not as entertaining. articulate. Andy 1:10:01 Right, right. Right. Right. Larry 1:10:02 No, disagree with him all you want, but he's very articulate. Andy 1:10:06 Certainly. Yeah. And you also wouldn't, you know, you could disagree with the policy, you would have a hard time. Same thing. Same thing that I say about you, Larry, like you could we could disagree on our politics, but you're going to have to really come to to the table with a lot of like, solid points with evidence with you know, not just like, because I said, yo, it feels right, damn it. You're not going to pull that off. Larry 1:10:26 The last lot of like cell buddies clear, but we can look for some from, you know, what look for Thomas, who he's never said anything. Andy 1:10:33 I know, right? He only recently penned a decision for the first time like a couple months ago, and he hadn't done anything in 10 or 15 years or something. Larry 1:10:42 Like that might be an overstatement. But he doesn't. He does normal argument. And he, he very rarely says anything. So we'll have to rule him out. Same with Alito, he has a client but but we could probably get a lot out of Briar if we look for it. But But Scalia is just because he being attacked lyst an original list. It makes it makes it fun because what I'm looking to do is to make people make sure you understand if you say this is what you are, well then there are downsides to being there are upsides also. But they're also downsides like the recent decisions. We've talked about our Colorado our Nebraska, Rick, Rick, Colorado and other states where us there Well, that's a straight tax lyst decision. You know, you are personal Archie, Andy 1:11:23 the last time I checked. All right, well, then let's move on to I have a couple articles. I have one from the BBC. And then here's a YouTube clip on the good old Kevin Spacey to unexpected testimony in the case against after Kevin Spacey, his accuser admitting to waiting 15 months to report the alleged incident, prosecutors had said it was only three months. That was just the beginning of the questions that unraveled today including what happened to the accusers phone. Here's Lindsey Davis. Unknown Speaker 1:11:48 The case against Kevin Spacey in jeopardy tonight. His accuser taking the stand today but then invoking his fifth amendment right after questions about whether he had deleted text messages. Leading the judge to strike testimony from the record spaces lawyer pounced is the sole witness that can establish the circumstances of his allegation on the night in question. This case needs to be dismissed and I believe it needs to be dismissed today. The judge seemed to agree saying he wasn't sure if the case would continue or collapse. The accusers mother, a former Boston TV anchor admitted today I deleted a few things, but she said she did not delete any texts relevant to the night in question. Another issue, the accusers phone is missing. The House of Cards stars accused of groping the then 18 year old and Nantucket in 2016 59 year old actor has pleaded not guilty to a charge of indecent assault and battery. Just last week, the accuser dropped a civil lawsuit against spacey. As for that missing phone, a state trooper testified today that he returned the phone to the family, but did not get a receipt. Now both the accusers father and mother testified that they don't know what happened to the phone. The judge said another hearing for the end of the month, David. Andy 1:12:57 So like right at the beginning, it says that the the accusation was from three months ago, but in fact it was 15 months ago. That's right off the bat. That's the first thing that caught my attention. Larry 1:13:07 Yeah, this case is likely to collapse. Andy 1:13:10 And so here's a guy that had been given. I think the number from like Netflix gave Kevin Spacey and this was like a crapshoot, they I think they said, Here's 100 million dollars make this unprecedented show called House of Cards, which I think is a White House story. And I mean, it is it's off the charts successful and this guy has been then removed from Netflix and all the shit he's lost his career out of this off of an allegation that is going to then the whole thing is going to collapse. And all this on just a fabricated story, essentially, Larry 1:13:41 I don't think we can go that far to say it's fabricated, but what we can say is that the evidence doesn't support the allegations. And and people lose sight of the fact that that the burden is on the Kinsey by to prove space is not supposed to have to prove anything. Andy 1:13:56 But in the process even even still. So it's it's reasonable to say that he did group the guy, but it doesn't mean it was an unwarranted or on on appreciated and approved groping, then all the stuff comes out because Kevin Spacey is worth a truckload of money. so here we can go maybe stir up some shit, and maybe we can get him to settle. And spacey says, No, I didn't do it. But in the aftermath of collateral damages is he's effectively a ruined actor. Larry 1:14:27 That could be likely the case and and that's where there's no justice for, for for the person who suffers as harm. That's where the scales that got out of balance have gotten out of balance, because he the person that brought the accusations probably doesn't have any financial resources to speak out. And that's that's meaning that if if you have the case totally collapses. It should extend extent that you would have any redress you generally don't prosecute restored me and for bringing charges and you are civil on the civil side. Sometimes you can end up having to pay cost if you brought a frivolous case, but prosecutor can be completely immune. So there's not gonna be any recompense to spacey for his reputation. All the state's going to say as well, the case collapse. Yeah, we didn't have the evidence, and then they go go try to find some other case where they have the evidence. That's what they're going to do. Andy 1:15:20 Right. Yeah. Just like, so innocent until proven guilty. However, reputation completely destroyed in the process. Larry 1:15:29 And this, they have mob rule that is kind of where we are we Yeah, we we forgotten. And I wish for once I would hear a police and law enforcement agency, because they do it when they're when their officers were accused of a crime. They always say, well, you haven't seen the whole story's not out. You haven't seen the whole story. I wish I could live long enough to hear a law enforcement say, we've brought our charges against this person. We believe they did it. But they will we'll have a story to tell. And we haven't heard the other side yet. And they're still presumed innocent, although we think that we have the evidence to convict them. I'm waiting for that day. Unknown Speaker 1:16:10 And you know, we just have it. Larry 1:16:12 I bet I'll be waiting for a long time. But they certainly they certainly an officer has no hesitation to say we haven't heard my side of the story. Right? You've heard it's all just a new window. And you wait till the buy side comes out. But they never say that about the people they accuse, I never say, well, let's just wait to hear their side of the story. Andy 1:16:31 I also like when you do those little marketplaces and you? Well, I think we're now down to our feature segment, Larry, which is very complicated and very emotionally charged. And this is a story of two under aged people engaged in some drunken activities at a high school party. And, of course, only one of them is going to get to charged. But this is a drive the bus, I'll ask you questions as we go. But this is a I don't know, this is disturbing. And it seems like kind of like kids doing kids things. And yes, there's some damage in the end of it. But ultimately, the super damage is what's going to happen to the boy in the case. Larry 1:17:17 Well, this is a case out of the state of New Jersey, Andy 1:17:21 oh, New Jersey, sorry, Larry 1:17:22 why do I say Colorado? Probably cuz I have stuff in the case. And and the red shoe matters file related to Colorado. But this particular one is that a new jersey? It's the it's the case for the judge said that he was from a good family. And so the issue on this case is the the juvenile male who was 16 at the time of the of the allegation, there was a motion put forth by the state to transfer to do what they call a waiver in New Jersey, to move him out of family court and into adult court where he will be subject to adult penalties. And the judge denied the state on that waiver. And on June, July 32,018, after a several day waiver hearing a family court judge over the course of approximately two hours and 65 transcripts pages denied the waiver. Now what that tells me as someone who works in the defense, that New Jersey has a process to determine if a juvenile can be waived up to adult court, because you wouldn't have a several day hearing if it was something where the prosecutor just checked the box instead of moving them to adult court. So we can infer from this that there's a process and for the judge to take two hours to read his reasoning. That means that there was a fairly about a fairly specific significant amount of evidence taken in that hearing that there was testimony and evidence but the charges arose. The the juvenile initials of GMC that hee hee hee hee took advantage sexually of a female who was who was supposedly unconscious, that's the allegation and the prosecute Kieran Monmouth County wanted to try this youngster as an adult. And the judge denied the motion. And he made some very, very insensitive comments and append the process which in the end, the decision of I've made some highlight highlights in the in the document some of the stuff that was said, and, and one of the comments was that he he had, he had good family support, and came from, you know, he was a good student. And he basically was saying he has a future. And that that did not set well with the community. So there's been a very, very strong response against the judge. And this could turn into another judge Persky situation, which was the one in California with Brock Turner. Yeah, because of the judge, the judge said that, that he took those factors into consideration. Now, not fully, fully up to up to date, I didn't do enough research to know exactly what the standards are New Jersey typically have a personal juvenile to adult court. But in the opinion, it doesn't look like it's as significant as in my state. And my state is pretty significant. You have to go through a lot of hoops to move a juvenile to adult court and so to mean ability hearing, and the juvenile has to be the tournament that are not amenable to rehabilitation of any facility or resources that are available anywhere within the state. And that's a pretty tough, tall order for the prosecution to meet. So it's very difficult to move a person to a juvenile court and those long term podcast listeners will hear it may say that even Cody Posey, who, who was the juvenile 14 year old, who killed three people, his father and his mother and sister, Sam Donaldson's ranch here in New Mexico, they couldn't even move Cody to adult court. And so that's that, that tells you a little something about the barriers, right? Well, I'm assuming that you, George, these barriers must not be quite as high. But there must be some barriers there. You wouldn't need several day hearing. And, and what what, what really disturbs me is that people don't understand that family support is a part of the immutability process, if you're, if you're taking a person that you're not going to send away for life, and you're possibly going to put them in a juvenile facility for a few years. And here, we can keep them in a juvenile facility or 21. You might not want to keep them till they're 21, you might want to keep them to their 20 and have some community supervision. The level of family support and how good of a student they are, where they are, as an individual, as that would be a relevant factor to consider a person who's in the crack ghetto, who, whose whose complete failure and their studies, it has absolutely nothing going for them, they're probably not going to be as amenable to rehabilitation as someone who's been excelling in academics, and who else a good strong support system in place. So that would be a legitimate factor. Now you had to be very crafting how you word that when you issue your findings, but I don't know why people are so angry about that being a consideration that that boggles my mind that that you would not understand that a person who has a good strong support system would be more amenable, likely more amenable to rehabilitation if they've demonstrated that they that they've been able to comply with discipline. He had some aberrational conduct here is that as appears he did, he did some stupid things. 16 year old boys, and it was it was pretty obnoxious. Not only did he have the sex, allegedly, but he videoed it. And he distributed. Unknown Speaker 1:22:38 Yeah. And that was that was seems to have been done post intoxication too. Larry 1:22:44 Yes, well, but but but but we've heard presidents of the United States brag about stuff they've done. And that's okay, though. If we can cut slack for people doing locker room talk not clearly, if he actually did it. This is not locker room talk, if this young actually did this stuff, and apparently, the evidence is pretty compelling that he did. But a 16 year old is not going to have the same judgment, that someone who's older in terms of knowing the ramifications of that, we would certainly want to have a have a significant intervention with him, but to decide to write his life off to put him on adult court because of this to me with with without at just because of the severity. And the distaste, when I said the allegations, if that's your sole deciding factor, then you don't need a process, you just say just give the prosecutor a box to check. So I find the delegations to be horrendously serious, therefore, I'm checking this box and they're going to adult court, what's the purpose of having a process? Andy 1:23:43 So I wonder, though, is it? Is it insensitive to say that they both they both went to the party, probably knowing that there was going to be alcohol? So, um, I guess actually, the question that wanted to ask you first was, can we cover the content, septum rape again, at the judge said it in this also about what would be the quote unquote, definition of right Larry 1:24:05 now the New Jersey statute of what he but Andy 1:24:09 that's true, okay, Larry 1:24:11 that's still in my mind, distinguish between sexual assault and rape and my mind, there is a distinction. So, you know, the judge, the judge seems to, to give an opinion that those who do crazy stuff where they're intoxicated is not that's not a traditional right. But that seems to be well, his his choice of words. Andy 1:24:33 Yeah. And you do have it highlighted on page three, it says in my mind, at the traditional case of rape, all right, where there are generally two or more males involved, generally at gunpoint or weapon clearly manhandling person into an area where there was nobody around. But in my mind, that's what I think of rape. Also, I don't think of this as being rape when people are complicit in what's going on. And I'm not saying she was complicit, because if she he was drunk, but and I don't want to victim blame I'm really I really struggle with these things and figure out where to draw the line because she did drink you know, you are human, you did drink the alcohol. Did you not think there would be no consequences for for what happens after that? But that's victim blaming? Larry 1:25:15 Well, yeah, you just set off I record comes advocacy organization that's out there to descend on us. But the the, the person being intoxicated educated is no justification to go forward with a with a consensual. In fact, a mature mind would say this is exactly the wrong time. But that's a mature mind that doesn't have sexual urges that might could come to that conclusion, I would say that there's probably males out there that are much more mature than a 16 year old. sure that when someone gets intoxicated, they probably have gone beyond where they should have gone and gotten away with it. And I'm not justifying it at all I'm saying totally is completely wrong. I don't want to have sex with anybody who doesn't want to have sex with me. I want them totally into it to be if they're not totally into it. It's not it's not any fun. But that's that's the way I look at it. Of course, since I'm sold now that there's not a whole lot of people that are totally into having sex with me. So that's not a problem. There are graveyards, there are graveyards that have willing participants, were you. Really, I didn't know that. Unknown Speaker 1:26:17 Yeah, it's called a necrophilia. Larry 1:26:18 I'm not familiar with that. Andy 1:26:23 Well, my dad did on a funeral home growing up so not not personally, but I've heard stories. But Larry 1:26:28 remember, we've got a 16 year old here. And everybody claims that the mind of a of a male doesn't get fully matured to 25. Okay, well, he's nine years less than fully matured on his on his on his brain development. If I take you at your word, that that's where the words of mine fully developed. And just, if adults are going to exercise for discretion, I think we could cut a little bit of slack without justifying his behavior. But intervention can take place, he doesn't have to go to prison for the rest of his life, to make a strong statement. That's what people confuse here. Somehow another if you don't send this boy away for the rest of his life, you haven't provided justice, obviously, just the opposite. If you sent this boy away long enough, that we get him the intervention that he needs. So he recognizes the gravity of its behavior, and he never misbehaves again. And he goes out works and pays taxes for the rest of his life. I'd say it's a win win for everybody. Unknown Speaker 1:27:26 Right? Larry 1:27:28 Baby? I'm just looking at it wrong. Andy 1:27:30 Sure. Do you think that there's any component in here about the moving it to adult court based on race? It's all hosted from someone else in reading a thread. So I just wanted to throw it up Larry 1:27:42 hospital that comment and again, I don't like to make accusations without evidence racism, so serious thing and it does occur. But racism is something that should not be played as a card without evidence. Because it diminishes the claim when it when it when there is we have no evidence of that here. Okay, system, systemically, we know that, that the income and the clout of minorities is generally less than the majority, generally lyst. I've known some some people in the minority. In fact, there's a young man dead now that got a very good outcome here. He got a conditional discharge for some very significant crimes are in Ferndale County. And he used to be my server at Applebee's and he and he ended up in a Fortunately, he did not respond well to the rehabilitative efforts of the additional discharge, and he got back into drugs and dad at 24 years old. And so we don't have any evidence of that. But what we do have evidence of that he was from a fluid background, and generally people with a from a foot background can muster the resources to make the arguments where coach only I doubt a person with a public defender would have been able to have a several day hearing through that process of of transferring him to adult court. Because the public defender system and most states and property, Georgia is so overwhelmed that they just wouldn't have had that type of resource to devote to it. So So I would say that, that being the luck of the winning go very lottery, he came from a background that he probably would have race would have played a factor because of his influence. But I don't think that without any evidence, I'm not willing to say, well, the judge would have denied that if he had been a black juvenile. I don't I'm not ready to say that. I don't have any evidence that supports that. And I don't want to throw that out there. But I did hear it on the listserv. Sure, I did see her. Andy 1:29:25 Yeah, I just I just wanted to approach it just to see. Because I mean, there was one person that was saying that this is the most of her important behavior that could be possible and this person should be thrown under the bus and then have the whole bus department drive over it. Larry 1:29:39 Well, and that was one of our state advocates. I'm not going to name a name, but that was our state advocates that said, Andy 1:29:45 Yeah, I know. Larry 1:29:47 And, and that really distressed me because I'm so hard wired for defense that I can't imagine that someone who's an advocacy would take that posture to throw a 16 year old under the bus and say that because of of, of exercising some very poor judgment that we should write off this life. I'm not ready to do that. Right? Andy 1:30:08 Yeah, no, I understand. I understand. Yeah. And I think one of the affiliates was like, hey, it's a minor. That's just the end of the conversation. Larry 1:30:16 That's the end of the conversation, because he's a minor, Andy 1:30:19 correct. Like he should be in juvenile court. And that's just the end of it? Larry 1:30:23 Well, and I don't take that hard. I don't take that hard. I think that the system we have in our state is probably the best one, that that you do a full evaluation on the state Stein if the person can't afford it, and you figure out if they're amenable to any resource we have. And and after, after that, inquiry has been done, a judge makes the decision on availability. And if they're not amenable, they go into adult court because they're gorgeous. But I don't like for people to be the deep end cordial, but just because of what they've done, which is what people are clamoring for here because this is a distasteful thing. Having someone intoxicated, having sex with him and making videos. That's very distasteful. Sure. Sure. It's It's It's It's It's beyond distasteful, it's a poor behavior. And and that can't be condoned. But even a juvenile court, he's not, it's not being condoned. Right? It's not as if he's being told, well, you did just fine buddy board, we're going to hold you for 30 days, and you can go home and forget this ever happen. That's not what's going to happen if he's treated as a juvenile. Andy 1:31:26 Um, the one thing before we wrap up that I wanted to bring up is one of the things you know, they do sort of like home surveys, or, or even if you're doing an interstate compact, they check out to see if you're stable, you know, job family stuff to do an interesting compact, they do a similar kind of check if you're going to be released from prison early. So how isn't that sort of the same thing? Are you going to go into a stable environment when you get out of prison, so here, this kid is growing up in a stable environment, white trash him on the front side, Larry 1:31:56 that was kind of the argument that I was making it, it is a relevant factor, and I can't help the world is the way it is, and we have a lot of disadvantaged youth that would not have that support structure. But that doesn't mean I mean, I'm going straight into the conservatives to their philosophy, we wouldn't want to bring everybody down to the same level, just because some people are there, what we would want to do would be to try to build those people up. And that would be an expenditure of resources to give the people that are from the disadvantage back background, who are living in the ghetto, who would not have the support structure to give them, we would have to provide resources to make them have a better opportunity for rehabilitation. But it doesn't mean to not rehabilitation to anybody else that happens to have those. To me, that's the craziest thing I've heard. Andy 1:32:41 Right. And so that was the the other side. So if this person came from a family of not so much means that person then gets to get trashed, because they don't have that same level of support versus this person that does have the support, they don't get trashed. It doesn't seem fair either. Larry 1:32:55 It isn't fair. But I'm saying that's the reality of life. I'm not, I'm not saying it's fair or but. But if a person it has, has no support system, it's tougher to rehabilitate them as a juvenile, you need the cooperation of the parental unit, that's a part of the rehabilitation plan. You keep them in a facility for a while, did you read or write them into community, you very rarely, in our state, we very rarely hold them and the CYSCY children, youth and families to Part One of the acronym is we very rarely hold them to their 21st birthday. We hold them for part of the time and then we began to reintegrate them into community and the stronger their support system is, the more easy it is to reintegrate them and oversee them. If you've got nobody to work with you at CYFD, then you don't dare not an attractive candidate to reintegrate doesn't mean you don't try, but it just puts them at a disadvantage. I don't write the rules for life. Yeah, I understand. I tell people, I didn't set up the system we have, we have a system where we have had, so we have helped not. And you know, they chose the wrong parents to be bored with. Andy 1:34:03 So somewhere along the path, you said, Yes, I would like those persons and that person. And yes, that's who I want to be my parents. That's how it works. That's Larry 1:34:10 great. You, I mean, if you choose your parents correctly, you got to go to better schools, you got to Andy 1:34:15 have got to be like going to the site gotta be going to the pet smart, where they do the adoption day, and you get to look around at the people coming through and you wag your tail and be all cute to the one that you think is going to be the right one. Well, in the Larry 1:34:27 case of an animal, you do get to choose your own human to a degree. But of course, they're so desperate that they choose anybody that seems nice to him to get out of those cages but but but that's that's the disadvantage of our of our of our system is that people who have the misfortune of growing up in these very bad situations, it's more difficult to rehabilitate them, even in the best of models. Now, we don't give up trying here, okay. But but but it's more difficult because you don't have that support that you need from the family. It's like I hear these conversations about what they would not be teaching that the kids the parents or teach that, that that ain't for the school as well. But there's parents who are not capable, who are so dysfunctional, they barely can survive through the day with their crack fix, or whatever they're doing. They're not going to teach their kids about safe sex and all this kind of stuff that you think that would be doing. So I guess you would just prefer to leave them out because the parents ought to be doing it. The truth is the parents are not doing a lot of things they ought to be doing. And a lot of cases these kids have not had the parental supervision and guidance that they should have had, and they've misbehave. And they've acted out because of lack of parental guidance and supervision. Well, does that mean that we write them off? No, it just means it's more difficult. And we have to provide a greater level of rehabilitative options for them. We may have to spend some precious money of the taxpayers to have more facilities and more coaching and more mentorship for those kids who come from from broken homes and from dysfunctional backgrounds. I said the tax word Andy 1:35:59 I know right now. So I ran off everybody with the victims advocates comments and earlier, we ran them off because of this comment. Now we're off to we're going to be down to zero before next week. We're Larry 1:36:08 Well, we're pretty close. Now. I heard. How did we do in the last week? Well, actually, we didn't do nothing last week. So we had zero listener. So Andy 1:36:17 I did that. So I could pad the numbers better. And so it's a two week span that I'm tracking statistics instead of just one. Unknown Speaker 1:36:22 Alright, so Andy 1:36:24 are we done, Larry, have we run off everybody? And we can be done? Shut up close up shop? Larry 1:36:28 I hope so. And I think we should just tell folks that we're sorry, we missed you last week. But absolutely. Vacation was an order for for my co host here and he has family and he has things that distracted him and I was glad to have a week off but we certainly missed being here. I did. Andy 1:36:46 I did. I did. I like I was like, What am I supposed to do Saturday Saturday said? That's right. And then I was like, I don't have to do anything. Larry 1:36:54 Oh, we don't we don't miss very often. No, I Andy 1:36:57 have no intentions of doing the haze. I'm not a slacker. That is not true. Someone in discord says that I'm a damn slacker. I'm gonna like hurt you. person. I'm Larry 1:37:06 Larry. We're gonna we're gonna disconnect them from our end. Yes, we Andy 1:37:10 we've been trying to figure how to use that. Yes. Captain crazy. You can find him on Twitter. Captain crazy. We're going to disconnect you on our and I have methods and ways of doing such things. Oh, no. I guess we shouldn't disconnect every piece of patron though. He is a patron? Well, I guess we better not disconnect that one. Damn it. Okay. So if you want to be disconnected from our end, you have to not be a supporter. All right, then, Brenda, then that means you're on the chopping block. All right, then, Larry, where can people go to find the podcast? Larry 1:37:39 Oh, let's see. I think that's registry matters. dot CEO. Andy 1:37:42 Do you have any idea why I named it CEO? Larry 1:37:45 I have no idea. Why don't you? Me? Neither. Andy 1:37:47 I have no idea. I don't remember why I made it a CEO, not a.com. I have no idea. How about the phone number. We didn't get a voicemail this week. Larry 1:37:54 I love that. 747 like the airplane. 22744? Seven, seven. Awesome, awesome. Awesome. And if they want to send an email message, send it directly to Andy at registry matters cast at gmail. com. Andy 1:38:10 And also, if you haven't, if you wanted to go to Larry, I will certainly send it. And then about supporting the podcast. What is the best way? Larry 1:38:17 Oh, well, now once they were taking me up on it, so I'm going to quit saying so just go Go to patreon.com. And feel inspired to make a financial commitment of his little bit dollar as little as $1 or any amount that your budget will permit. Andy 1:38:35 Outstanding. And that's right, that's patreon.com slash registry matters. Larry 1:38:39 That's what I believe it is yes, Andy 1:38:41 yes. All right. Well, then we're going to get out of here, I'm going to go get a frosty from or a blizzard from Dairy Queen. So I'm not going to stick around. And I hope everybody Larry 1:38:49 out of the people join us for the recording because that's that's I like to see hundreds of people here, Andy 1:38:54 you would have to go check out the show notes there in every from every episode, you can find there's a there's a link to the discord server if you want to come hang out. Larry 1:39:02 And if you want information, if you happen to live in Tennessee, what we talked about earlier about the bite the temporary restraining order, we have the order at Arsenal, whatever that website is we have the order of order available on our website. Andy 1:39:15 And it just I saw.org and you'll find it. Larry 1:39:17 And we have an article that Sandy and I have written about it. And then we do we have the audio of that interview with Mr. McNally yet. Unknown Speaker 1:39:27 Yeah, I released everything today. Larry 1:39:29 Alright, so you could actually hear it the second hour of the of the conference call where we focused on Tennessee. So that's what you should do. We can't give your legal advice, but read the order. And if you have any concerns, contact the agency that told you to move to leave home and we believe you might be able to return. Awesome. Andy 1:39:48 And so with that, Larry, I bid you adieu and I hope you have a wonderful weekend and I will talk to you soon. Goodnight everybody. Thanks. Thanks. Goodnight. Unknown Speaker 1:39:56 Bye. Unknown Speaker 1:39:58 You're listening to FY PO Transcribed by https://otter.ai