Andy  0:00  
History 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. One of us is about to be underwater though. Transmitting across the internet. This is Episode 91 of registry matters. Happy Saturday night, Larry. How are you?

Larry  0:21  
doing? Great, Andy, how are you?

Unknown Speaker  0:23  
I'm well a week. It's not Saturday, is it?

Larry  0:26  
It is not.

Andy  0:27  
We had some technical problems last night and we had to shut it down. So here we are. It's Sunday. And

Larry  0:32  
and it's going to be very late before this gets edited and out. So those of the of our regulars who who sit patiently on Sunday afternoon waiting for it to come or Sunday morning. We apologize. It's all on me. For desperate,

Andy  0:47  
I wasn't gonna bring that up. You press the button,

Larry  0:50  
press the button. But then our tech team couldn't figure out which button to press all I know I did, I can figure it out. And I still don't know about and you pushed? I'll show you after the fight.

Andy  1:00  
Okay, I would actually like to know what you pressed because I was baffled for what an hour and 15 minutes of trying to poke at your machine, though was

Larry  1:09  
so was my my regular tech support from from from here, she was baffled.

Andy  1:15  
Very good. Got a bunch of articles, and we got a deep dive on on some legislation. And then we have a, like a listener, kind of like a workshop thing going on. But first. Larry, this one is super duper fun to talk about this one. I still don't know how we get here. But for the first time, the Maryland Court of Appeals said it had to grapple with applying the state's child pornography law to minors who consensually engage in sexting. And when we get there, you're going to give it a little bit synopsis. But we're going to bring Brenda Jones who's the executive director of fair, which is the National affiliate there in Maryland, what is going on here, this deals with with

Larry  1:57  
a relatively new phenomena when you're as old as I am. But for the last 10 1015 years, the evolving technology has made it possible for teenagers rather than showing themselves to one another in private. They've showed themselves to one another through sending an image through their phones. The vast the term of sexting and through the decades from the 70s when the pushback became to protect children and minors from from being having their images being abused by a stranger by by transportation, which was largely in postal those days. But by transmission of images, the laws have have failed to keep pace with technology. So now, a person who trans transmits images of a minor, even though it may be the battery themselves can be convicted of a sexual offense and be required to register. So this was a case out of Maryland, we're going to take a deeper dive into. It's from their court of appeals, which when you hear core repeals you think of intermediate court, but this was actually the state's highest tribunal. So this is essentially the is the Maryland Supreme Court. Okay, all right, have a have a have a ruling that came out on the 28th. But late breaking news, in terms of it probably came out Friday afternoon, or whatever, we've just got a chance to dive into it over the weekend,

Andy  3:22  
I'm still I'm still completely baffled by the notion that you take a picture of yourself and send it to somebody else, and you have committed a crime that you couldn't really be committed of. It's just, it's just so weird to me, I do make the analogy, and I don't know how right it is that if you were to attempt to commit suicide, that they would then turn around and charge you for murder. It's like, to me that feels like the analogy. It just seems so stupid to me.

Larry  3:46  
Well, it's not quite quite the same analogy because the suicide, if it doesn't work, then you're alive. If it does work, you're going at it. So it's it's it's it's but but an image that sent out on the through five can be re transmitted. And what you may intended as a private image of yourself, in this case, for example, became fairly widely disseminated. So that's the that's the issue of what was trying to be addressed by the law that this person was prosecuted under let's that we don't want these images out circulating. Because next thing you know, old geezers will have access to pictures of teenagers. So we can't have that.

Unknown Speaker  4:24  
We don't want people that your age having pictures of pretty much anybody. That's right.

Larry  4:29  
Five years old as I am, you shouldn't be.

Andy  4:35  
And then we have a new patron, Larry, and I'm super excited about having new patrons. We're welcoming Nate to the Patreon family. Thank you very much for signing up. Nate and I can't extend enough thank yous and appreciation for you and all of the other patrons and all of our listeners, but our patrons especially thank you again, may welcome

Larry  4:52  
that we're at 99, right?

Andy  4:55  
Yes, we are just about to cross 100.

Unknown Speaker  5:00  
get there by the end of the year,

Andy  5:01  
that could could very well happen. Um, let's start diving into some of these articles. I think that's where we are in the show notes on the rundown. What did I you know, you put stuff in here, Larry, and I do not know where you're headed with this one. And this is Governor Cuomo, right. He's the governor of New York, right? Yes. All right. signs up, Bill reinstating a six year statute of limitations under Martin act. I have no idea why you would put something in there that has relationships to Wall Street on this podcast.

Larry  5:29  
Well, it was for for a twofold. I frequently bash legislators in the south for trying to undermine the when the court Louisiana we've had King Alessandra on and and this is not just unique to him in a particular region of the country. But if the courts rule on something, legislature's often run to fix the problem. So the the Louisiana particularly the legislature goes and tries to countermand what 20 What's up decided should be should be interpretation. So they reward the statutes. Well, in this case, this, this is a feel good thing for the liberals who are in control of New York. And they have decided that the statute limitations on securities transactions, which arguably or less damaging to society, some people make that argument in a way that that they need a longer statue limitations. Well, that's what happens when you start wrecking the statue of limitations. You You doubt the doubt this train of what's next. And what's next. And what's next. It sounds good. It sounds really good when you're going after the vultures worse, or sexual offenders. But this is a slippery slope. So this is this was done as political motivation. Because right now the Trump administration's controlling the DOJ at the federal level, and they're not going to be as zealous as the Obama administration was which they weren't nearly as zealous enough in my opinion on on those who who suck the economy in 2008. With their what their what their fraudulent activities. But but this is this is a feel good reaction to we're going to shell those white collar criminals that we mean business. So they simply changed the law on the statute of limitations because the court had interpreted the way they've read the law, there was a three year so they said, Well, what make it darn clear. So that was the only purpose in there, that we're all that slippery slope with the statute of limitations.

Andy  7:21  
I'm thinking, I'm thinking about the Bernie made offs of that would would there have been transactions that fell outside of the statute of limitations in his whole Ponzi scheme that people couldn't collect damages for that this may help them get some sort of closure, whatever the word would be?

Larry  7:39  
Well, you're bringing up two things you don't but civil versus criminal, I think that deals with the criminal criminal criminal prosecution here. Ah, ok. The statutes that statute limitations for criminal prosecution but with with Bernie Madoff, I don't know that there was any statute limitations problems, because some of those things, they consider them a beer continuum transaction. Therefore, as long as the trends along with the frauds continuing with a particular victim, it doesn't matter that begin date, it matters that it continues. So if they had an account, were holding funds for you since 1979. And here it was to whatever your he crashed and burned of some thousand eight. You know, if he'd been managing your if he had been committing fraud and sending you bad, bogus statements for all those years, and misrepresenting that would have been a continuing crime, okay. And then, and then when you didn't have access to your money, because it was all gone when you went down. And then you finally recognize when people when people started cashing out, that's when the Ponzi scheme collapses, because they can't bring in a new new investors to replace the binary that they've already embezzled.

Andy  8:44  
It's hard to earn 20% interest for, you know, many decades running, and that not be some sort of scam.

Larry  8:51  
Well, that's the, that's the thing that puzzles me about this, these people are very sophisticated, successful people that fall prey to these to these schemes. So you for your investment career being told that there's no free lunch that that you put your life is about about hard work and making wise decisions. And some person comes to you and says I can exceed the market returns, decade decade out. Well, if you've read one book from from Warren Buffett or from from from Graham, or any of the Great Investors, you can't really beat the market over extended periods of time. You know, if I show you a 2025 year period, where they've been getting above market returns, your antennas should go up. Quite a really, really, I just don't believe that that's possible. But I show you these glossy reports. I mean, it looks really, really, and they they're very convincing. We had our members that have already made off here in New Mexico, Doug Vaughn, what the bond company, it was, of course, much smaller. But but but it made headlines here because he was successful in defrauding some very shrewd, sophisticated people around New Mexico with with this scheme.

Andy  9:58  
Very strange, various strange, he's got like all kinds of nonprofits had put their money into his whole, you know, this whole scheme and all that stuff just collapsed. And it's all vapors, and there's not even any, there's no meat left, that you could even recoup anything, it's just gone. Oh, well,

Larry  10:17  
and the nonprofits tend to tend to be vulnerable, because they have, they have volunteer boards, sometimes they don't have a lot of sophisticated people on the board in terms of financial sophistication, not to me, they don't have sophisticated people on the board. But that's that's not their expertise you may have, you may have three lawyers on your board, they may not, they may not do any investing to speak up. And these people don't understand this, and they're under the gun to try to get more money a company gun to their, to their, to their foundation to their operation fund. And these these fantastic returns are very appealing to them, because it helps them make their obligations to fund the organization. So if their promise 18% a year with a whole lot. Wow, that sounds really good. Yeah, no kidding,

Andy  10:59  
huh. Alright, well, let's move on to another article. Oh, I'm sorry. And that one was from LA. com. I didn't even bring that one up. Sorry about that. But the the next article is coming at a CNN. And I'm a little puzzled as to why you would bring this one up to this one seems a little I don't know, off of culture for what we're trying to cover. But it's a West Virginia GOP state senator accused of soliciting or prostitution? I don't know, I don't think that we typically try to like, I don't know, we don't want to bring these kinds of things to light necessarily. But you had a specific reason of why you wanted to bring this up.

Larry  11:35  
I'm bringing it up because the the solicitation for prostitution is certainly not one of the most heinous crimes that that one could be charged with. But even assuming that he might be guilty, which that he's not right now. He's only been charged. So the presumption of innocence. I would like to be intellectually honest about the witch hunt is it's doing I mean, they're all these calls for him to be thrown out of office and thrown out of the Senate. He hasn't been convicted of anything. He's barely accused of this action through it through through an undercover operation. They were running in Glendale, West Virginia, which I have no idea where that is. But hey, he was charged with what's which is relatively a minor crime. And he's not been he pleaded not guilty. And it carries a maximum of six months in the county jail at $100. Fine for first time offender.

Unknown Speaker  12:34  
Yeah, it's pretty pretty petty punishment for

Larry  12:39  
pretty petty

Unknown Speaker  12:40  
six months and $100 fine. For for barely asking

Larry  12:43  
someone to engage in sex with you. That seems like a pretty significant amount of punishment. If you sit in jail for six months for that.

Andy  12:50  
I'm looking okay for for what it is I'm okay. I'm wording that then wrong. But just that amount of like the hundred bucks app, whatever, no big deal. But the I guess the six months plus all the exposure him I'm going to assume he's married at you know, and it doesn't look favorably for this guy, obviously. But what should we do, Larry, I mean, I know that when I can't remember the guys name back in the 2000s. There was the the French Prime Minister he got accused of doing something naughty with a with a maid and other sexual scandals. And they have like a strict policy of no perp walks and stuff like that. And they kind of I think they lock this stuff down. I don't think that we could do that in the United States of keeping this stuff off the airwaves.

Larry  13:31  
I don't think we can was a free press. But I think what we can do is that we can pinch ourselves and say this man is entitled to be presumed innocent, until he decides and elects to plead guilty, or until a tribunal I don't know if he's entitled to it to a jury trial. And on offense of that, with that only six months at jail that may that may be below the cut off which but until he's convicted, or decides to plead guilty, he's an innocent person Hello.

Andy  14:00  
But they wouldn't even like accuse him if they didn't have evidence,

Larry  14:05  
right? Well, that's fine. They may have evidence, but it may not be enough to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

Andy  14:12  
And Reasonable Doubt means that's like the highest threshold correct.

Larry  14:15  
That is the highest threshold we have in terms of the evidentiary burden. And he has the right to go to trial, he has the right to force them to come in and testify against whatever witnesses they have. And he has the right to be presumed innocent until the day the gavel falls. And we forgotten that in this country. So that's why this is in here. So even though he's a republican, it makes no difference to me. He's entitled to that same presumption.

Andy  14:41  
I understand. Yeah. And we totally don't do that. I'd like if someone is fleeing from the police, we shoot them. And I know I'm exaggerating, as like, but it does happen. Eric Garner, it just keeps happening that we are we are convicting, accusing and convicting people long before anything happens for there to be due process. And I'm bringing that up to say in comparison to like, we have this whole constitution and you have your first event, you have your second amendments, you are entitled to due process. These are things that are supposed to happen. But we are chopping that short, almost at every corner.

Larry  15:17  
Well, the citizens that elected him will ultimately be the determining, and I don't think it's going to bode well for him politically to I'm just imagining that it's just not going to be a political winner for him. But people do survive criminal charges at least here around here. They do. And Anthony Weiner

Andy  15:37  
then get elected after the original scandal.

Larry  15:39  
I'm not sure on that. But this this, I don't believe he did. But but this is okay. This is this is not for when you when you win an election, to serve the constituents of your district. You are there until the constituents don't wish you to be there anymore. Barring some heinous misconduct. And to my way of thinking, trying to help sex is not heinous misconduct.

Andy  16:07  
Yeah, I agree with you. I agree with you. It's Yeah, somehow our society says that you shouldn't do these things like have sex. It's very strange to me also. Well, let's move on, we're going to head back over to LA com, where you decided to grab a whole bunch of articles for law com this month, or this week, and this one is a judge in Epstein's case should not turn the dismissal into a drama for the victims. I mean, the guy's dead, doesn't that mean, the whole case just goes away? I mean, there's there's no, there's no defendant. So what do you what is the judge supposed to do?

Larry  16:39  
Well, that's that's the whole point of the article is that the judges got a hold of hearing all the prosecution's desire to dismiss the case and he's going to hear from victims alleged victims. Why? Well, that's the whole point of the article. We're asking the same question. Why?

Andy  16:55  
Yeah, what but can you opine? Can you can you extend yourself out his position of why you would then want to hear from victims of a dead guy of an alleged dead guy? Well, the dead alleged perpetrator of Sorry, I got myself all twisted up.

Larry  17:11  
I don't know. Other than speculation, it could be that we have a judge it says last week Judge Richard BB in order to hearing on the prosecutors decision to dismiss the indictment. It could be that we have a judge who feels of that, that they have been empowered to be the moral conscience of of society of the tour just a little bit with those of they're old enough to remember the airline name Eastern Airlines. Okay, well, you will not remember that.

Andy  17:45  
I do vaguely that they went under that's like American. What was the other airline was an American that went down around that same time, Americans alive and well, then nevermind, not that one pan. And that's what I'm thinking of.

Larry  17:57  
So, well, Eastern Airlines think quit quit flying in either 90 or 91. And, and they they say they put themselves into bankruptcy. And as a as a bankruptcy protection, the responsibility is to protect the creditors. Because they have they have they have skin in the game. They've extended credit. Well, the bankruptcy judge I can't remember his name, I think they might have been like, like lifelock. But but the I remember the trustee quite well as they Martin she grew, who the court appointed to be the trustee. And Martin shrewd decided that it was his personal calling in life to save a national treasure called Eastern Airlines because it was in the interest of competition, and the mobility of Americans to have that carrier fly. So he continued to dispose of an and God judge life on FF I've got his name right to release funds, until the carcass of Eastern was almost not enough to do an orderly shutdown. Well, this judge may feel like that, that, you know, we got $500 million, I predicted the estimated value of the state. And he may feel like that has his moral calling to see to what these people have their day in court, even though the person's dead so they can tell their story so that it will help them get a portion of that carcass that everybody's got their paws out together. That's the speculation. I have no idea what's a bourbon? Yeah, but but in all the years I've seen, I have never seen a hearing on a dismissal because the person's Dad, I've never seen this before

Andy  19:33  
I get that the victims of the alleged perpetrator I guess is the way to word that they don't have, quote unquote, closure out of this. Other than that, I'm sure many people are happy he's gone at this point. This just feels totally like some dog and pony show just

Larry  19:49  
don't like that. But it is a dog and pony show. I don't think they're happy. He's gone. I think they were she was actually around. So that

Andy  19:54  
was suffering go through the process.

Larry  19:56  
Well, so they could put I mean, he was not going to get anything simple to fair trial. Right? heading on the trial. But the the article says the procedural rules, federal criminal cases do not provide proposed harmless trials. Okay, so that's essentially what it sounds like this judge is about to happen. Yes. So that's why I put this in here.

Andy  20:15  
Okay, is there is there a procedure for someone? Would that be the defense side to to try and shut it down? I hope

Larry  20:22  
there is. That's bizarre. So So

Andy  20:25  
now we have like complete legal theory that no one ever thought of anything of this nature. So there's not even a process in place to try and shut it down. So someone has to pull a rabbit out of their butt to figure out how to shut it down.

Larry  20:35  
There's a brilliant lawyers working for Epstein. So states are certain that the President had to be thought of they'll think of it.

Andy  20:41  
Interesting, very bizarre, very bizarre. This one actually kind of blows my mind to Larry, this is another the final law. com article. This is Harvey Weinstein sex crimes trial delayed after he pleads not guilty to new charge. Why would the trial I'm confused on delaying the trial because he pleads not guilty. I don't I don't understand what's happening now.

Larry  20:59  
Well, it's a bad charges and more and more complexity and are made some rulings that's that that's that's changed the nuance of whether someone could testify that says that the change to the charges was intended to open the door to actress to testify against one to two for an actress to testify. That's beyond the statute limitations. So they've apparently they were presently following you a diet but but but at least he's free on bond. I was just about to bring that up. And he's at least able to participate it as the fan. So I'm like Epstein was was going to have, but I get on boarding how fair this trial is going to be.

Andy  21:36  
I think that one's doomed. I mean, he he's already you know, before anything happens, he was, I don't know, top dog in Hollywood, so to speak, at least one of one of the top dogs, and that's obviously his own company, booted him off. And, you know, untold fortunes being spent on the attorneys to try and defend himself. I'm kind of curious. So how he got out on a million dollars bail. And what you would do if you didn't Epstein didn't get out of

Larry  22:03  
the different set of the systems. He's not in federal court.

Andy  22:07  
So Weinstein is just at the state level, so he was able to get his way out on

Unknown Speaker  22:13  
on bond. So he's, he's he's a New York State court.

Unknown Speaker  22:17  
And what what these notes Wait a minute,

Andy  22:20  
I'm sorry. Those were federal charges for Epstein. Those weren't those were issued. Right.

Larry  22:25  
Yeah, they were. He was he was charged federally. Okay. All right. I remember whenever you remember what I talked about the bill Reform Act and the prior to 1984 before the era was passed? I think so. Yeah. Yeah, we had we talked about that it that a huge number of federal defendants are subject to some type of confinement not as heinous as what Epstein was subject subjected to. But it's it's very rare that a person doesn't have eating anything confining them while they're pending trial and presumed innocent. I think we've got listeners that can vouch for that. I know I know Brenda had some experience with that but but the the confinement, Epstein was a very hardcore, tough correctional facility and in New York, but but this guy's under under state rules, which are apparently a little bit more were a little more lenient than he was charged in state court.

Andy  23:19  
All right. Off to the appeal. We go. I like this article, Larry, this one's fun. Pennsylvania county Oh, $67 million. After a man finds his arrest records on mug shot calm. As I understand it, this individual whose last name i'm not i'm really not even going to try and pronounce the names but it's Taha is the last name. He got arrested and then just did a short period of time and in doing his little plea deal, so to speak, he got his record expunged at but then I think it was 13 years later, he ends up on mugshots calm, and sued. And so my understanding then is he can't sue mug shots because they are not part of the criminal history record information act for Pennsylvania. But he's able to sue the city or the state for for letting those records go. I

Unknown Speaker  24:07  
think it's I think it's a great thing. He should be able to sue mugshots.

Andy  24:11  
I mean that's bogus. That's that's garbage information that someone then says, Hey, okay, you'd like to get a job and they go look up at mug shots, and they find Oh, hey, you arrested and now you get denied a job, you get denied housing. There's just a cascading Domino effects that that shuts you down.

Larry  24:27  
But if the state is releasing that they released it by mistake or intentionally, mugshots would not have been the one who had who had the Darrow there on their part that it's there you go, I gotta vote voter is a registration list. From the county clerk, you assume that these are registered voters and mug shots would have assumed Not that I have a respect for these people that provide information and sell it. But they would have would have legitimately been able to claim that we assumed that that he had this arrest record that was not expunged. If it had been expunged or sealed, we wouldn't have gotten it. All right, that would be the reason why they got dismissed from the lawsuit. But But it's important, it says about one in three working age Americans have a race of some sort, including non conviction arrest.

Andy  25:11  
Yeah, if you just ended up at a club where a drug bust goes down, and they just haul everybody in and oh, you weren't involved. So they let you go. But you got arrested and booked?

Larry  25:19  
Yes. And it says if if, if they were a kid under a drinking under age of 1819, that shows up. And so it's one of those things where we're going to have to have a discussion in this country about rest, arrest records, and criminal convictions. But more importantly, the rest are arrest records that do not result in a conviction, or that has been sealed and set aside.

Andy  25:42  
And then he goes to then he goes to mug shots to try and get the information removed, and they charge 400 bucks. And they say a business model that added up to 2.4 million and removal fees over three years. So they're making a you know, million 8.8 million bucks a year in removal fees.

Larry  26:00  
That's crazy. Well, well, it takes tech staff time to go through it and purchase our system. Do you expect them to be doing this for the goodness of their heart?

Andy  26:09  
I I would think that from from I mean, I the guy did get arrested? I mean, like that part isn't really necessarily in question. But they're just this is just a feeding frenzy for buzzards to come up with something Oh, hey, man, I found you on this thing. And it's just garbage. It's it's tabloid kind of stuff. It's paparazzi

Larry  26:29  
can't believe that a person, as much of a capitalist as you are would be wanting to interfere with the free market of people doing there's an entrepreneurial spirit of figuring out how to to earn money off of these tax payer created records that have been created on the public dime. And for them to come in and get these use your pennies or for free and to be able to sell them. I don't know why you have a problem with I don't know why you would even have a problem them charging hundreds of dollars to remove the record that they got for free. What on earth

Andy  27:02  
charged them to remove the record they got for free? I like how that gets killed. It gets word. Interested in the integrity side? What

Larry  27:10  
is what do you try to? Are you trying to destroy this country?

Andy  27:15  
No, I know you're playing with me up. I just I'm baffled. Like how are you supposed to move forward? These people are just being bottom feeders. Really? I guess? Is that the way to put it?

Larry  27:26  
Well, don't we it? Doesn't our system, in general permit a lot of bottom feeding? Isn't that what we do? Certainly, though, we have businesses and argued there's an argument for both sides. So we don't need all the hate mail. But our businesses that provide payday loans, and it takes astronomical rollover fees every week that they charge you 35 or $50, to read to rewrite a $250 loan. So that should be coming next Friday. I mean, aren't they bottom feeders?

Andy  27:55  
I have heard, I've heard Yes, they are totally bottom feeders and put the thing the thing that makes it that somewhat different is the predatory nature of it. And and I I'm with you I don't know, like should should government protect people from making bad decisions? And I think the answer that is no. But at a certain point, I guess Yes. Because you shouldn't let people make completely agree just stupid, stupid, stupid decisions.

Larry  28:19  
Shouldn't under what theory? Or is that in the constitution?

Andy  28:23  
Certainly not in the Constitution. But if someone's if someone's able to hit you up for what turns out to be like, 1,000% annual interest, you are never going to get out of that cycle. You're just doomed.

Larry  28:35  
Bar. But I but but I would argue and and and here, but I'm not. I'm not taking aside for that they would, they would argue that the traditional resources, the way of credit are not out available these people because their credit has usually shot yes or not existed if it's not shot, but their credit is often shot because they've been they've not been able to manage credit report, possibly, they will tell you that in order for these people to survive, that we provide them the bridge that keeps them from being evicted and helps them make it and we're actually doing something good. And you would want to stand in the way of folks being helped by the only resources they feel like they have left out there to them.

Unknown Speaker  29:19  
I know that they are like, quote unquote, the lender of last resort.

Unknown Speaker  29:23  
Wow.

Andy  29:24  
Alright, so so mugshots gets the steak, according to Larry.

Larry  29:28  
Well, they're they're really taking their free records that they've got that were created at taxpayer expense. And they're merely selling them and the removal service. That's pretty creative, isn't it?

Andy  29:39  
Tell Them All right, I'm going to try and make this comparison. And I want to beat this dead horse that bad. But the the advances that NASA, the research that NASA does, as I may wear this wrong is supposed to end up in the public domain. That's how we end up with velcro, for example. Is there is there a parallel there that these records are at the at the state and the county level? And they end up that these people got it for free? Is there some sort of similarity here that this is the yin and yang of it that the public benefits from NASA? And I'm not going to say that the public benefits from mug shots, but that's where I'm headed?

Larry  30:11  
Well, there is there is a benefit to a small group of people who, and that is a good analogy, people, people that say that I did everything for themselves. I did this all myself. I think dick cheney said it when he was when he got his going away money from from what was it that that drilling company that the big drilling company didn't mean? blackness not Blackwater, is it? No, no, no, no, no, this bigger than that. But anyway, he, he said, and I want you to know the government didn't have a damn thing to do it. Like really dig that you actually do believe that you believe, however, you believe that Halliburton would be a success it is. If we didn't have 20 aircraft carriers at great public expense, projecting power all over the globe, so that Halliburton can operate in these faraway flung places that are in unstable and stable parts of the world, you actually believe that they would be the success they are today. Really? Vice President? I don't think so. Right. But people, people don't associate any of their success to what what collective collectively has been provided by our collective contributions. We we succeed, because we've put into the system together. And we have an orderly society. We have national security, we have public health, we have infectious disease control. We have infrastructure, we have ports, we have food inspection, we have all these legs that we collectively contribute to. If we remove all those things, I don't care how hard you work. All we have to do is drop you off in Somalia or South Sudan. You will not make the money you make here.

Andy  31:53  
People are leaving. Is it Venezuela? And they are walking to like Chile. I mean, I can't even fathom them how that goes because the government is collapsing over there. I can't even imagine how that would be.

Larry  32:05  
Oh, but all right. We've had a political show tonight.

Andy  32:08  
All right. I'm sorry. We'll stop. Um, how about we talked about the Washington Post? Because that's not a politically charged debate on its own, is it but out of the Washington?

Larry  32:18  
What do we have from the Washington compost?

Andy  32:20  
Ah, see, there you go. You said it. Prosecutors say he's been wrongfully in prison for 24 years, but a judge won't allow a new trial.

Unknown Speaker  32:29  
I

Andy  32:31  
I'm really, really baffled at two if the person is innocent. If the prosecutor says yes, we left up, this person should be free. How does the judge not then go? Okay, let him go? Well, it says right

Larry  32:45  
here in the article, the judges race on prosecutors missed the deadline to file a motion by approximately 24 years come. Circuit Judge Elizabeth Hogan said court rules require defendant the Mark Johnson to follow this motion for a new trial within 15 days of his can, even though the prosecutors only uncovered new evidence supporting his innocence in recent years. So she's following the letter of the law at night. I thought that you were actually so believed in following the letter of the law. That is what the rules say. Right.

Unknown Speaker  33:13  
That's what I hear people say that they are

Larry  33:15  
all right, well, then aren't aren't we have that category that we believe we should follow? Don't follow the rules. The rules are say that he's he's beyond the scope of following following that motion.

Andy  33:28  
I there's no position in here that the government takes it goes, whoops, he forget all that stuff that's written down on the piece of paper, this is the right thing to do. Well,

Larry  33:38  
not being not being fully apprised, and the vehicles that can be used. Clearly, the judges interpreting that as being a vehicle that's not available, there's usually other vehicles that can be used. It may be that habeas corpus is as time barred, it may be. It may be that Missouri has a petition for rid of corporate Elvis, which is an old, old ancient rip, it could be. There may be other vehicles that could be used. But but but in this particular instance, that vehicle is as apparently not going to take to achieve the result.

Andy  34:11  
So in the case of these different vehicles that you talk about, someone could file one. And then the judge goes, Nope, sorry, that can't be used. And it doesn't matter who's on the other end of that. It's a it's the most sympathetic kind of defendant on the other side of that. And the judge says, I'm sorry, we can't do that. That doesn't work here. So try it again.

Larry  34:32  
Well, the judge is supposed to be neutral. So the judge, the judge, could telegraph. I mean, courts do that from time to time we see their rulings, they say, we would prefer this to come to us all using this vehicle. declaratory judgment, for example, is the best vehicle to use. When you're challenging the requirements of of sex offender registration, people often try to challenge it as part of their conviction. And remember, the Maryland court system said we'd like to see this comfortable, some declaratory judgment. Did they ruled in favor? It may be that that this coming through the right process, if there is a process there? Again, I don't know if there is the process that stands the reason that there would be a process to cure manifested justice. So there would be some grit that could be filed. But apparently, a motion for a new trial is not going to do it. That is just bizarre that use

Andy  35:19  
that. And then and then there's an economic toll on that on that, too, that they're spending whatever, 30 or $40,000 a year to keep the guy behind bars that shouldn't be there, then you've lost the income potential, the human capital, the tax revenue, all that stuff. It's like everything's going in the wrong direction for for a wrong that was committed 24 years ago.

Larry  35:37  
Oh, well, the courts are also worried about the flood gate, if you if you grant this outside the rules, the scope of the rule, then all of a sudden, where do we where do we where do we draw the line on what what the rule for, for this vehicle is? So so I can I can understand why I don't necessarily agree with it. But I can understand their reasoning, that they that they don't want to open a floodgate of people saying, well, chaos, my convictions wrong. Also.

Andy  36:02  
I'm just I understand what you're saying. But this one has, like everyone saying, except for the judge. And I'm not saying that the judge is saying, No, he shouldn't be let out the judges just saying that. We don't have the vehicle to let him out. But he's the top prosecutor. I'm assuming that's the DA of what does it Missouri, is saying that this guy should not be guilty. What about, um, the only way to open?

Larry  36:26  
The judge is not saying you shouldn't be out saying I can't grasp your emotion. Right, right.

Andy  36:31  
So is there some sort of Avenue where like new evidence gets brought up that they could open up a new trial or retry?

Larry  36:38  
Well, apparently, like I said, we just go for both or so we're just looking at this article. And apparently, there isn't such a process. But it stands to reason that there is, yeah, and they're going to have to find it there. It may be called notice. It may be. It may be the federal courts, he may have to he may have to file habeas corpus petition, if he's not time, Bardsey, again, we've run into the issue of the anti terrorism but effective death don't yet when you get into federal abs, you have one year for when your conviction becomes filed. And you've appealed it to the highest tribunal in the state to file a petition in federal court, so he may be time board federally, but but there if there is such a vehicle, that he may have to resort to executive clemency, if the prosecutor were to approach the Executive Associate, the governor of Missouri has that power, and says I really would appreciate you consider a part for this person. date and the way he did it, it would be hard for me to imagine that the governor was saying Nope, not gonna even consider that.

Andy  37:43  
very bizarre, very bizarre. Can you this, this, this writ of what is that word you keep using? Cora Cora Novus? Can you give me a very, like third grade level? Explain like I'm five is what I want you to say. Can you translate that for the dumb of people like that me and the audience? What

Larry  38:00  
is it? It's an extraordinary read this, it's not even available in all states. But I know it is available in Arkansas and some states. And it's, it's designed for this very situation, where that where there's where there's actually an essence, and it may be that it's available in Missouri? I do not know. Okay. But but but like in Arkansas, there's only like four grounds that you could, that you could race it. Right, reuse that read for. And I can do a little research and probably find both those four grounds are but but it's not. It's not. It's not why they use because it's probably pretty narrow, very narrowly tailored for the purpose that you that you can fall one of those, otherwise they would be they would need to be here, but we can't have that.

Andy  38:41  
Right? No, we wouldn't want that we wouldn't want innocent people out of jail. That would be bad

Unknown Speaker  38:46  
was, well, we don't want

Larry  38:49  
we don't want a floodgate of perpetual litigation on connections.

Andy  38:53  
Yes, I understand that the person has already been convicted. You don't want just everybody just bringing up saying, Hey, I'm innocent to try me. I know I understand what you're saying there. Well, I don't know that we've ever had an article from BuzzFeed Larry. So this is from BuzzFeed news. And we're going to bring Brenda Jones from fair at the Maryland affiliate to have a little discussion about this one, but I'm still baffled by this stuff at teen sex. This was our feature thing at the top. A teen is a child pornography for sexting a video of herself to her friends a court ruled I like this is if you saw the movie Inception This is totally inception. So why don't you to bed at around and see what comes out of this? Welcome. Welcome, Brenda, first of all, Howdy, howdy.

Larry  39:41  
So, you people up there and Berlin are really strange people Mirlande moral.

Unknown Speaker  39:46  
Don't blame it on all of us.

Larry  39:50  
This case is one we've touched on last summer. I don't remember the episode. I don't know. We can identify what we had. We had discussion last year do remember when that was had to begin July of last year. We talked about this specific case, but it was at a lower level of of appeal.

Unknown Speaker  40:07  
I do remember it. I don't remember when it was.

Larry  40:09  
Yeah, we had? Well, I remember because I was having a lot of fun with it was about the time the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled that that a person that had a juvenile education from Colorado had to register.

Unknown Speaker  40:22  
They ruled on the

Larry  40:25  
using a textual interpretation. And I looked at the Maryland court of special appeals, which is there an immediate Court of Appeals I have ruled and June of last year old to save case that that that the juvenile SK was at that guilty. And they denied her appeal on one ground, but they they granted it on the other they said that that the mechanism by which she transmitted it that was not covered by the statutory language because the the outdated language did cover a cell phone video that the language was written in terms of think in terms of video cassettes on the technology next at a time. And we talked about that. And I said, Well, all the listeners out there are big tech journalists. And so they should be they should be shouting from the mountaintops that they've gotten to recent appellate level decisions that are textual in nature, because they went right by the well that's this case. Both parties filed for asking the highest court, which is the Court of Appeals Oberlin take a look at it. And so they granted that granted the cert petition and they reviewed the case. The case of SK so this is the case of it re SKI just released on August 28. And, like all teenagers SK sought to impress and humor her closest friends. During the 2016 2007 eight year. The 16 year old female maintained a group chat on her cell phone for text messages with her best friends and the group chat with us about other things to send silly photos and videos and effort What up each other to hang out together and trusted one of the key messages private as part of the one up competition and SK sent a one minute video of herself performing fellatio on a male and later in the school year when there was a falling out by Martin vitreal friends the video for distributed other students at the school and share with a middle school resource officer as result the state attorney for Charles County Juvenile petition alleged criminal charges under Maryland's child pornography and an obscenity statutes Now where is Charles County? What would you be able to highlight where that is it? Marilyn? I've never heard of it.

Unknown Speaker  42:29  
I believe it's the southern part. So

Larry  42:33  
so so it because I'm horrible. It's not It's not an urbanized area around Baltimore.

Unknown Speaker  42:39  
Charles is definitely not an urbanized County.

Andy  42:43  
It is. Yeah, it's uh, it's on the interior of the Potomac River southwest side, like straight south of Washington. It's a pretty big County, though.

Unknown Speaker  42:50  
Yeah, it is a big County, but it's largely,

Larry  42:53  
yeah, many people were 37,001 46 146 All right.

Unknown Speaker  42:59  
And that's 146 thousand 946 people

Unknown Speaker  43:01  
mine. My my mind shows 159 but it's still not alive. Okay, I was in 2017.

Andy  43:08  
Okay, yours is more data than what this is. My intent here is to, to try and help our listeners when they hear that we have these crappy laws to try and like what questions would be asked by the you kinds of people, Brenda, of the expert, kind of Larry people to try and figure out what questions Who do you try to get? Like, how does this whole process how does this brainstorming session even begin of how would you try and make this change that this does not happen? Because this is asinine?

Larry  43:34  
Well, what's what's asinine about it? They're following the law. Andy,

Andy  43:38  
I, I understand this is stupid. This law is stupid that you like you're going to settle this 1617 year old girl with all this baggage and overhead that the registry causes and

Larry  43:51  
but but but let's do a deep dive in that but but but it is the law was charged count one filming in mind are engaging in sexual conduct violation of CR 11 207 A to count to distributing child pornography in violation of cr 11 207. A four count place displaying the an obscene item to a minor in violation of CR 11 two or three be one. Right that all of those that

Andy  44:17  
are her.

Larry  44:19  
No, no, that's not her. She was she was performing fellatio on a on a juvenile male.

Andy  44:25  
Yes. It she she she filmed it. She's the juvenile that filmed it of herself. A Yes.

Larry  44:32  
On another minor? Yes. Yeah. Okay, that Okay. So now we're having we're having a discussion here about the law. Now the law was designed for before we had cell phones. And this is a case where where there had been no updating of the law to reflect the evolving society. But at the time that they've drafted this back of the they started drafting. I think Marilyn, I read through the session started drafting direction doctrine providers back in the 70s. It was relatively rare for adult very many teenager for filming anything back in the 70s. Now they

Andy  45:09  
would they would have gotten the equipment from the school from the AV department, whatever. Yeah.

Larry  45:14  
But but but but but this, this hasn't been updated for a long, long time. But if you look at the statute, she did fill my mind or engage in sexual conduct. She did distribute that she's the one who sent it out, according to all the evidence in the case. And she did display it. So. So what you're what you're saying, as a prosecutor should just put their hand on the Bible and say, I'm going to enforce the law, and then they should just ignore this all together. And that would be one approach. Or, or we could say that the court should ignore the letter of the law. It does. It people are prohibited from filming monitors, gauging sexual conduct, and distributed that. So the courts can say, well, the legislature did not really mean that and work on work, going to second guess. And we're going to insert our moral values here on what the law ought to be. Or they could do with this court did the court said, Well, we don't like it. And we like the legislature to consider changing it. But she is a minor, herself. But she did film a minor and she did distributed. I mean, we don't understand why. What does all this Hocus argument I mean, she followed the law.

Unknown Speaker  46:21  
I understand. I will comply. Now.

Andy  46:25  
I understand what they're saying, You're still pulling

Unknown Speaker  46:27  
your hair out.

Andy  46:28  
I just think this is stupid. No, I understand that they drafted in the 70s, where the equipment, the technology, none of that existed, and they are protecting children from most likely adults doing this filmmaking, I totally get that this, we have cell phones, we've had them for a good while now. 15 ish year, you've had the capacity to do this sort of thing. And for our adults that are writing these laws to not have seen this coming. We talked about the thing in Colorado, not not terribly long ago, where there were like 200 videos and pictures being shared around vaping didn't prosecute. So this is essentially the same thing, just one person. And all you adults that go do this loving stuff, didn't pick up on this and fix this to prevent this from happening.

Larry  47:10  
Well, but let me let me defend all of us adults. First of all, there's very few of us adults that do this, because most of the people that are doing it are hiding under rocks and not and not actually showing up. So we have a very, very skeletal staff showing up the law enforcement apparatus is well represented. I can't imagine that the law enforcement apparatus would show up and ask this law be changed, because as far as most people because we're concerned, they would have your reaction when no one would ever prosecute someone for this. So therefore, the prosecution is overworked, shorter staff, and the criminals are running rapid in society. And they have so much to do that they would never break a charge like this. So therefore, we don't need to worry about this. So now that this has been illuminated, I suspect that this would prevent present an opportunity to have that discussion. But if you had gotten round the walls of the halls of Annapolis, trying to find someone who wanted to change this, if you if Brenda, for example, had said, Well, I'm going to start spending my non existent time trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist before this actually became apparent that it does exist. And I started talking to lawmakers doors that wake up the possibility that you know, since technology has evolved, that miners are going to be prosecuted. How would you feel if your teenager got a prosecutor for a sex offense? They would look at her and they would roll their eyes? And they would say, why don't you come to me with a real problem?

Andy  48:32  
All right, Brenda, you're walking down the halls of Annapolis figure it out?

Unknown Speaker  48:36  
Yeah. I'm walking around the halls of Annapolis. Yeah, I would not have had any idea not being a professional anyway. I didn't know that this this kind of thing could happen based on the current laws. So I wouldn't have been walking around in previous years. But But Larry's right. If If without this case that has now you know, hit the hit the news. I don't think I would have had any any standing to walk around. I think they would have been rolling their eyes and say what go Do you have anything better to bring to us with with this? And and I might be able to walk around and see if I could find some sponsors. Say, don't you want to? Don't you want to fix this? Do you really want our teens getting prosecuted for this? week I wake it see if we can make some make some progress on it this coming year?

Andy  49:35  
Well, every morning, are you able to go to another state and copy their their bill their lead?

Larry  49:41  
Yes, you can try to transpose them. You could you could copy ours? Oh, we have we have a complete carve out where we're juveniles can't be prosecuted for this. As far as I know where that we only stayed all of them, all of them other than New Mexico to have this lesser cry. I get them treatment and counseling, and they divert them from them? Are we just playing out say they're not eligible for prosecution? That would be the one I would start with. But what you'll have is you'll have your attorney general, and you'll have the law enforcement apparatus justice, we had pushing back mightily against that, because they'll say that this is a slippery slope. And this is it. These kids need to at least be brought to our attention so that we can make an individualized assessment if they need this type of intervention, and what level of intervention. So therefore, you're taking away a tool that we will, society will be to generate the chaos if we don't I mean, that's

Unknown Speaker  50:32  
kinda hyperventilate.

Larry  50:36  
But I'm not hyperventilating. That's exactly what the Attorney General did. in your state is that's exactly what he did. And he continued, he continues to do that. He continues since that passed in 2016, he continues to go around the state and his crimes against children unit, putting a presentation saying how vulnerable our kids sorry, because now they can send these pictures had God only knows what's gonna happen bad next week, we can't bring them in the system. But I would start with that, realize you're going to have a very significant pushback from the law enforcement apparatus, because they're going to want you to believe that they will prosecute people, and that they will use prosecutorial discretion. And that only the most egregious only the most egregious

Unknown Speaker  51:27  
Yes, exactly, exactly.

Unknown Speaker  51:29  
Yeah, that's the point.

Larry  51:30  
You need to take the power away from them, they will not use it responsibly.

Unknown Speaker  51:36  
Yep.

Andy  51:38  
I've taken I've taken to your side layer that I very much like the position that you take is like, oh, they'll do it, they'll, you know, they'll they'll use prosecutorial discretion. Now they won't, they'll take the opportunity to put another notch in their belt say, Look, I'm tough on crime, and I have all these many XYZ convictions. Doesn't matter that it's a 1617 year old girl just kind of doing something stupid. But

Larry  52:00  
well, there are some good prosecutors who would not have prosecuted this case out there. But we don't need a society where I think I used the term. What is it the vaginal, ovarian lottery?

Andy  52:16  
PS The Avengers?

Larry  52:17  
Yes, yes. So you don't you don't need an ovarian lottery in terms of whether your kid gets prosecuted, because the prosecutor there in that jurisdiction happens to be more reasonable. Because you wouldn't have known that your prosecutor that you voted for because they promised you law and order and all the things that sounded good, you would not have never imagined that they will turn that Arsenal on you. And once they turn it on you you don't have the ability to change the trajectory, usually unless, like a case of Colorado, where so many people rose up and said, No, we can't have that. But but in this case, this this teenager was represented by the public defender. So I'm, I'm guessing from that account and the opinion that she did not have huge amounts of wealth available to her.

Unknown Speaker  53:04  
That would be probably a good assumption.

Unknown Speaker  53:07  
So

Andy  53:09  
if you're saying that if you roll it to like that Colorado thing where they had all those kids, and it was a pretty affluent community that they they had the money and the political power and the representation to keep the prosecutor from going after him where this chick didn't have it so much. I would say I would say that there's no doubt about it. When you have when you have more economic power, you have more political power.

Larry  53:31  
But the Colorado case, the Colorado situation was referenced in this opinion, the opinion the opinions for the for the legal junkies, that's a good read, I've highlighted various sections throughout. It was not even a close call. It was 621. There was only one did see that it was all in one dissenting. So so you you've got the whole court, almost a unison saying that. Sorry. We don't we don't make the laws. We barely interpret them. She is a person she did do this. We don't understand what the hoop was about. Brenda,

Unknown Speaker  54:04  
what else? Hey, I'm, I'm waiting with bated breath to get that legislative language and see if we can gear something up. I'll try to talk with my folks and see if we can get something launched.

Andy  54:19  
The one other thing that I wanted to that was in the article says Maryland is one of 22 states that has not passed legislation to amend its child pornography statute since the advent of sexting the court noted. Seems like you guys are a little backwards.

Unknown Speaker  54:32  
We're a little behind. Well, yeah, yeah, I might just review the whole shebang. While we're at it, just to see what's there. I there was a bill last year, that was the I mean, the one of the things I don't know if that passed or not. Do you know where you were looking at it? I think? Yes. Yeah, there was a bill last year that just clarify that it was clarifying or adding moving pictures to pictures. So they didn't have the language they were making sure that you are understood that when they were saying pictures that included video, because there wasn't anything in there about video. Now I have no idea what the story they were telling, like, gee, the videos are, you know, nobody can prosecute for inappropriate video because it doesn't say video, it doesn't say moving pictures in statute. But apparently, somebody felt the need to fix that. So yeah, we're well, well for the,

Larry  55:25  
for the legal eagles, and the junkies do go read this. On page 12 highlighted, we do not find any ambiguity in the text. And therefore it is our duty to interpret the law as it's written and applies plane meeting to the facts before us. And then they cited a 1987 and 1965 case. And then the bottom that page, we refuse to read into the statute except for miners who distribute it will matter. And also we believe SK adjudication, as delinquent under car must be upheld. So now, you Texas, you should be proud of this court. They did not invent any law. That's not there. There is no exception in the statute for minors, and they didn't legislate from the bench. They didn't create an exception for minors. So this would be a proud day for those who believe in textual interpretation.

Unknown Speaker  56:14  
If we want an exception for minors, we have to go put it in there we do.

Unknown Speaker  56:19  
Brenda, I have a sort of off the wall question for you. Are you sitting on your porch? Are your windows open? And are there crickets crickets?

Unknown Speaker  56:27  
There might well be crickets I've got my headphones on, but my microphone might be picking some

Andy  56:32  
crickets out. So I keep hearing a little chirping chirping. All right now. Well, thank you so much, Brenda, I hope that you and Larry can formulate a strategy to knock their teeth out and make this so that this doesn't happen because this is asinine. caught us assassin.

Unknown Speaker  56:46  
That's pretty crazy. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you guys. Sure.

Andy  56:51  
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 747 to 274477. Want to support registry matters on a monthly basis, head to patreon.com slash registry matters. Not ready to become a patron, give a five star review at Apple podcasts or Stitcher

Unknown Speaker  57:25  
or

Andy  57:26  
tell your buddies that your treatment class about the podcast. We want to send out a big heartfelt support for those on the registry. Keep fighting without you. We can't succeed. You make it possible.

Larry  57:39  
Well, I don't understand it sounds like to me, you're not in favor of the law being enforced.

Andy  57:44  
You know, I do feel that since they said that they did not find any ambiguity in it, that they they did their job and they didn't color outside of the lines. And they did then say you guys maybe want to go revisit the statute. So like they did their job, but they said hey, go back and fix this. I just I guess it feels more right in them doing it. But it's still seems like this is just garbage that this girl is going to be saddled with this for

Larry  58:12  
years. She's not she's not settled with it. She was adjudicated as a minor her record failed and she's not registering. So she's done with this. Okay, but but but the

Andy  58:20  
arms a little bit of relief.

Larry  58:22  
Yeah. Well, they aren't. Well, I mean, she's, she's fully rehabilitated. As far as this, she was just doing this to help others. Okay, she did not he did not need to do this to help her help herself. But the the the irony of this is that the special court, the intermediate Court of Appeals decision was better for her that what she ended up with the highest court. And the point I'd like to make is everybody says, oh, boy, you better forget just to the Supreme Court, we better get this to the Supreme Court. I can't wait to get this to the Supreme Court. Sometimes the intermediate level courts actually have a better grasp on it just because the Supreme Court, that doesn't mean that they're going to be more favorably predicted opposed to your way of thinking. And in fact, we find our intermediate Court of Appeals here in our state to be more favorable to the criminal defense and this then states Hi, stripe, you don't. example we have thanks to light justice Daniels, who just passed away early this morning. Thanks his bail reform, we have a model very similar to the federal system where people can be held without bail. And the decision to decline. release was overturned by the Court of Appeals. And the state of course appeal to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court reinstated the trial judge's decision that he was to be held. Just because they're the Supreme Court that does not magically make them got to see it your way or be predisposed to your way of looking at things. Now I'm just glancing through this about the in the footnotes in footnote 24. It says a response to the court of special appeals decision. Delegates see to will CT Wilson from Charles County and Bruce House Bill 1049 2019 session, which would have decriminalized the distribution and manufacturing of child pornography about person younger than 18. And during a hearing on the bill to house Judicial Committee delegate delegate Wilson testified that introduced the bill because he disagreed with the decision that the state's attorney for charles county to pursue SK the bill did not make it after the after, after the march six 2019. Hearing the committee took no further action. So that would be one for Brenda to take a look at and I thought I had seen this in here. But I couldn't give her a built number one we talked about this prior to coming on come in to do the recording. All right then. So take a look at health Bill 149. That did not get out of committee. Okay.

Andy  1:00:38  
I don't know that I've read very often mentioned read it read it's a very interesting website. It is a they call it themselves. They call themselves the front page of the internet. And this documentary, it came back up on my radar. I've watched the documentary before but it is where a US prison warden goes over to check out the prisons in Norwegian, Norway. And I so it came back up on my radar. And there's a bajillion comments, and I only brought it up to a if you haven't seen the documentary about the prison systems over there, and how different I mean, not even close in comparison to this United States. But some of the comments in here are just fascinating. The way that people right, and I don't know where these people are coming from. But let's see, I move my mouse around. And I'm trying to find where I got the word my quote was tag debit. They do say something in there about how prison food is better than school food. And I am, I can almost guarantee you that that is not a true true statement. There's no way in the world that prison food is better than than, than school food. Have you watched the documentary there? I'm assuming know that. Have you? Are you familiar with how the prisons are over there?

Larry  1:01:50  
I have I have heard it. But but that's not gonna happen in our lifetimes in this country. Our society is hell bent on people suffering, they're incarcerated. And they see that as the holiday and resort. And that that type of incarceration, that type of treatment, that type of rehabilitation, that is not going to happen here.

Andy  1:02:11  
So is it even just is it even worth trying to look at something like this and try and model even push ourselves in that direction?

Larry  1:02:18  
Yes, it's absolutely worth it, you begin their discussion, and you implement small little bits of what they're doing. But if you were to try to build a prison proposal, President, I don't even care if you go to the most liberal states you can find in this country, and try to propose a prison like that. Good luck with your political career.

Andy  1:02:37  
Yeah. Here's one of the ones that I did want to find it says the longer I think about that, quote, it says that we are the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. This is the more that I feel sorry for the people living in the States. The fact that people get upset about inmates in Northern Europe, getting treated like actual human being says a lot about the society in the us today. That's my point. Yeah, I'm with you. I'm with you. So I like I said it. There's a lot of good comments. I honestly don't think I saw anybody saying anything ridiculously negative from the US point of view of saying, hey, well, they did the crime, they should do the time, they should be tortured to punish them, blah, blah, blah, blah. But anyway, you can find a link in the show notes to it. So

Larry  1:03:15  
for whatever Wikipedia is worth, we can go back to quorum Novus that way, that way I can. Okay, I can say I'm reading from wikia, this is not my legal opinion. It says the RID OF Corbin Albus, also known as the writer of Eric Chrome. Now, this is a legal order allowing a court correct its original judgment upon discovery of a of a fundamental error. And I would say that, what we want to say was that it again, that we were talking about misery, okay, that did not appear in the records of the original judgment. And then it goes on, and it lists the states that were it's still still available available in this country. It says the RID OF Cordova still exists today in a few courts, United States, and 1907, the rip became obsolete in England and was replaced by by by other means the correcting errors. Now, the states that list here, do not include Missouri. Right? So uh, so to whatever accuracy you can count for Wikipedia was always not on this list.

Andy  1:04:10  
You can pretty much count on it be accurate, unless you're going to go look up George W. Bush's record, I guess it was, that was one of the pages that just constantly, it's a good place to get like a general overview. And if you want to then be more accurate, go check sources and other things, but it gives you a good like Cliff Notes, so to speak version of it, it's pretty reliable.

Larry  1:04:30  
It says assuming this is accurate, if that vehicle is not available, and there was not a maybe executive intervention, only thing that would allow

Andy  1:04:40  
Oh, okay, well that like so the governor could, quote to clemency or whatever that would be.

Larry  1:04:45  
Yeah, it's it's the government possesses part in power. So I'd say not in the case of Georgia, right, I was just gonna part of childhood. She was you prosecuted. If it were Georgia, they were petitioned the board of parts and parole. And they would ask the parole board to view this new evidence to cut the person loose. And they might, Georgia, Georgia would be a better chance of it happening because they have a politically insulated board.

Andy  1:05:09  
Okay, that was going to be my next question. Is this is one better than the other one? And I guess it depends on which side of the equation you're looking at it from.

Larry  1:05:16  
from our side, I'm assuming that most people listening to this I'm I'm thinking overwhelming or not inside a law enforcement that tried to convict people from our side, a politically independent board, or processes far more favorable, that one is not this case, although it sounds good. And the story we read, for all we know, because we didn't dig deep enough into it. This could have been a heinous crime. That was the time of the century. And it may be that politically, that there's so much hatred for this individual that to pardon, or released them or could be their sentence would be, would be would be political detrimental. I don't know that. But if you have a process like Georgia has, where there's a great deal of installation between between the politics of it and the release, people are the race of someone you have the better chance of it actually working the way it was the way it's intended to do but but very few states have the Georgia model. And you guys down there are trying your best to wreck that there's people actually on our side, they're pushing for abolition of the of the current system, which was put into place decades and decades ago, to cure the the perceived corruption of the previous process where you bought yourself apart from the governor. Okay.

Andy  1:06:30  
All right. Do you want to set up the Scalia clip? Or do we just want to run it?

Larry  1:06:34  
It's kind of long, it's not that long? Well, it's at what we've run longer than three but it's, it's it's about a little bit about textual Islam and about the, I was trying to draw draw the, to gather the looking at looking at the text and people like they're constantly getting bombarded with be about textual ism, because it has its it has its drawbacks, times when read the text will serve you well. And and those opportunities, I will pounce on them and say, Well, what she goes right by the text, but you don't want someone who universally says that's all I do is use a textual approach. But yeah, go ahead. All right,

Unknown Speaker  1:07:16  
here we go with some Scalia.

Unknown Speaker  1:07:21  
If If you give to those many provisions of the constitution that that are necessarily broad, such as due process of law, cruel and unusual punishments, equal protection of the laws, if you give them an evolving meaning, so that they have whatever meaning the current society thinks they ought to have, they are no they are no limitation on the current society at all. And the whole purpose of them is eliminated. If the corner usual punishments clause simply means that today's society should not do anything, which is considers cruel and unusual. I mean, it means nothing except to thine own self be true, you know, we think thumbscrews are bad, but you know, if you think thumbscrews are okay, God bless you. It's not calling usual if you don't think it's going to usual. So, you know, I interpreted the way it was understood by the society at the time. And if you don't know, this doesn't mean that there aren't new things that come up, of course, you have to apply the text to new phenomena, which the founding generation didn't even know about. But as to the extent phenomena, whether the death penalty is cruel and unusual, whoever, whoever voted to make it impossible to have the death penalty, or to make it impossible for that matter, to have the death penalty of for anyone younger than 21 years of age, whoever voted for that nobody you make out of the Constitution, something that it was never meant to be. And it's all done by a Supreme Court, which is probably of our of our political institutions, the one least capable of understanding what the current society really wants. We're not supposed to know what the current society wants. That's not how we supposed to vote. So why are you going to be going to entrust this institution with keeping the constitution up to date, if that's what you want to do? What you shouldn't be? You know, even if that were the object, you you've picked the worst institution. Do it the way England does it, if you want to keep the constant, make nothing of the Constitution. That is to say, the English constitution is whatever Parliament says, There is no such thing as a law Parliament that violates the Constitution, parliament is the trustee of the Constitution, if you believe in the evolving cost of that's what we want to have here.

Andy  1:10:04  
Well, there you go. What do you have to say about all that? That was a lot of words.

Larry  1:10:08  
It's a lot of words. But it's, it's clear, it's clear to those who've been following that. He's not a big believer in evolving. We're going to have a clip next week where he talks, he talks about same sex marriage, and how that, that that was an invention and the Constitution is clearly not there. So So textual Islam is it has its dangers and risk. It also has times when you can say, gee, this is good by the text, you can't do this. And believe me, we're going to be using that in our state in our litigation, we're going to say how the text doesn't permit you to do this. We're texting list all of a sudden, but but just to have a rigid belief that you should follow the textual list view. I think if you listen to a number of a podcast, I think some of you ought to be having executive doubts. And second thoughts about whether you always want to actually,

Andy  1:11:02  
I agree with you very much that there do seem to be places where I mean, like the the judges in the in the teen sexting thing, like they just followed what they were given what the legislators wrote. And they just had to judge in that regard. But they can only rule by what the law says. And I guess if there's ambiguity, and the legislators could eliminate ambiguity, if they write clearly enough to make it so that the judges don't have to interpret they just have to follow what's there.

Larry  1:11:32  
Well, they had they had another choice they could have been, that could have recognized the evolving society. And they could have said clearly that this wasn't contemplated. And clearly, it's our job to correct an injustice. And clearly we have the power since we're the court and we asked her to know one other to what he said to himself be true. They could have said, we're going to graph in an exception that just isn't there. But that is not what it takes believes a judge to do. Attacks list and people who believe and and and train of judiciary does not believe that it's their role to fill in the gaps of what what what what was missed by the legislature dismissed greatly in the hands of Annapolis, the people that are likely to represent the population of Maryland. Now, if the value system of Maryland believes that teenagers should not be brought into criminal justice system for doing this, they can fix this. And they can even fix it retroactively. There's nothing that stops them from writing into legislation. But it'll be fixed. Right? Right. Totally free. Anyone who's who's been prosecuted to their convictions shall be overturned and withdrawn. And that's very difficult to do politically, because the prosecutors like they go ballistic. So let's go back a lot of work, go back real quick, all those cases. And to figure out how to do all this. We didn't have any trouble letting the genie out of the bottle, but we're going to have trouble putting it back in. Fair enough. Fair enough that can that can be done.

Andy  1:12:59  
Are we ready to do that? This little final little deep dive? I hope I hope you did your homework, I didn't. Okay, well, then I'm going to throw you under the bus and call you out on it. We don't know six months ago, we covered a story where a kid got interrogated by some law enforcement that he he did the same thing that this chick did, then I guess he took a video of him Amai thinking maybe even the girlfriend did it. Anyway, there was a video of them to doing whatever they were doing. And they got interrogated, the boy got interrogated, and they left the room and then they let him go. And he goes and finds the nearest garage, and he jumps himself off of it. Here is like the aftermath of that, that there is a bill that was just signed in the last handful of days with that, and I want to get your as much of the take as you were able to dig into this, that they went back and they to some degree, they fix this, you know, they patch some holes, whatever I'm hoping that you can expand on on all that went down in preventing this sort of behavior by the law enforcement apparatus, as you call it in the future. They did, they did indeed. And it was actually led

Larry  1:14:00  
by a student of the community and then by his lawmaker, his saw, I can't pronounce her name. So forgive me, but representative Stephanie, careful with I guess that's close to pronouncing her name, but but she introduced some legislation and response to, to this tragedy, to place limitations on what the police can do. And of course, this is one of my big things about I don't understand why we are so hesitant to actually tell the police what you're allowed to do. But there's all this great reverence and, and hesitancy to do that, but see, the the the legislation was introduced in the Illinois assembly filed on February 14 2019, by the representative of the process it it's a little different than what we do in our state. Apparently, the way they do it, it's a they've run things Hmm. But through through a different person SS Wait, we don't do all all what what what took place here would have been much more compressed, took place it or would have been much more compressed here the way that meant my process took place, but but there were multiple amendments in the house. And then it passes to house after spots was signed on galore. After the after the amendments, the bill was introduced to in February, February 14. And then by April, April 10, there was a lit the house co sponsors that jumped, likely buddy, liking what was happening. And then and then it passed the House on third reading on April 11. Let's see, by their by their significant number of delegates were on board. And then it goes into the Senate in it and it gets amended again. And we could spend an entire podcast I won't be able to go through all these amendments. But the the language that ended up with with was was was a little uncomfortable for the mother, she felt like that the absence of a parent or guardian, they gave the authority for the school to put a person in place if the parent recording wasn't available to the log comfortable that language but she felt it was a step in the right direction, significant step in the right direction. But this thing went through the Senate amended and then it had to go back to the house because it had been changed. And it had to go back to the house for concurrence because they have to both pass both chambers in a in a bike and will have to pass the same bill. So it went back it went back to the house. And they concurred on on June 1, and it was signed into law with by the governor on August 23. And it was passed by the by a huge margin which made it applicable immediately, it took effect immediately. And we call that an emergency calls here and something has an emergency clause attached to it, that it has to have a have a supermajority it passed with a supermajority. So it's already in effect. So just was an example of a tragedy resulted in some positive movement to limit the actions statewide in Illinois way of calling a juvenile into into this situation with no one there. And interrogating them to whatever degree I don't even know if there was a video exist of what they did to this young man. But interrogating this person without any adult parental supervision. And to the point that he goes off and commit suicide, as I said, at the time we talked about this, you people ought to be ashamed of yourself, that does happen to now, I can be somewhat proud of you that you've actually done something about it.

Andy  1:17:37  
This, yeah, and I totally wanted to highlight this is actually a client of mine that alerted me to this that lives in that town. And she, you know, she was very much in favor of all these things being passed. But I just I just thought it was a neat example that if we can muster the support, I know this is a Super duper high end tragedy that someone would throw themselves off garage, that created the next level of action for this to go through and take place on over with such overwhelming support. I'm sure that we wouldn't get this level of support on trying to reduce residency restrictions, for example, but it's just you know, we the people can make these things happen if we, you know, not if we only try, but other things have to go into play. But without trying, it's sure it's not going to happen unless we try.

Larry  1:18:28  
And I don't know that I agree with you completely that we can I think if we could bring families into this picture and bring them into the legislative process like this young man did. And if we had if we had the articulate favorite family members of registrants explaining the harm that this is causing them. And we brought in child psychologists to explain experts on these things cost money, they're seldom pro bono. Right? If we could, if we could bring in the people to testify, I think we probably could have a significant impact on but that's all wishful thinking, because most people are not willing to make the trip to the Capitol, they're not willing to have their 14 year old testify. We don't have the money to hire experts. And we end up we end up on the short end of the stick because the law enforcement apparatus has all these resources available tip. I do understand and

Andy  1:19:18  
yeah, maybe I over spoke on how little there are certain situations where we would be able to get some kind of relief instead of we have people in Florida living under bridges.

Larry  1:19:28  
Well, it does those peoples oftentimes have families as well. I mean, they're they're the people that end up homeless because of the registry. They're not just single man. Correct?

Andy  1:19:38  
Yeah, I do understand that, too. And do you think that even the people in those situations, like the family is just that they have no ability to help them because they can't live in their house, they're not going to move their house, they may have kids there, etc? And then they just have to throw their hands up and go, I can't help you. There's nothing else I can do.

Larry  1:19:59  
But understand that question. I know that some people do leave home leave home because they their family can't live there without them. Is that is that your question?

Andy  1:20:08  
Basically. Yeah. And then but the and I know that some of them like the you know, the ride the bus, and they'll go hang out with family and be in their neighborhood, they just can't live there. But the family just has to, you know, a fallen soldier, you know, never leave a fallen soldier. But like they almost have to because there's no alternative for them, either.

Larry  1:20:25  
Well, what would what would happen? hypothetically, let's say that, you know, and the years I've been in this advocacy, and we hear all the people are not allowed to be Ramon kids, because people won't let me what would happen if a significant number of those kids showed up at the Capitol and said, I miss my dad, my dad, cat company, me to my ball games? I mean, it is the victims of pretty well, getting tears to fall. If you had people come in saying those things. Do you think the lawmakers would say, well, you should have chosen somehow that affects a better be your?

Andy  1:21:01  
Well, you should have thought better a better about these things before he decided

Larry  1:21:04  
what most crime is, is the is the emotional appeal that could be made. I don't know how effective it would be because it hasn't been done. But I can tell you this, they would be treated well, that would be treated with respect. And you would have people engaged in some serious thinking after they did it. I haven't been able to produce one teenager to go the capital. And all the years I've been doing this I have begged and pleaded and I have not been able to get one person who has an articulate teenager to bring them to Santa Fe.

Andy  1:21:34  
Okay. And as No, and you have your tentacles all over the place. Your I'm assuming like you haven't heard of it being done in any of the other

Larry  1:21:41  
75 states. I've actually coached in Nebraska also, but I've not I've not heard of it being done.

Unknown Speaker  1:21:48  
But Brenda says she had a teen at hers one year,

Unknown Speaker  1:21:50  
one time. Okay.

Andy  1:21:52  
So we have one out of however many states times how many legislative sessions.

Larry  1:21:56  
So but but I think that that to be effective, we're going to have to, we're going to have to, we either have to accept that our strategy is not working and just throw in the towel, or we're going to have to revamp our strategy, which means vastly more resources and thinking outside the box. And we need to look at the tactics they use. And they use emotion and we have to try to emulate what they do. Because it works well for them. Right.

Andy  1:22:20  
Yeah, I understand that too. Wow. All right. I think that's a it's but it's it's it's it's actionable information that I that I was trying to bring to the show for the evening of what ideas people can have in their heads of how are we going to make these things better for ourselves in the future? That was my intent. Maybe maybe you guys could let me know in the comments if I did bring something inspirational and helpful. But Larry, we need to grow the podcast, where can people go on the inter webs to find the show? So

Larry  1:22:51  
that's that's a very careful thing that you have to do. But if you go to register matters, dot CEO, you'll find you you'll find our homepage.

Andy  1:23:02  
Okay, great. And how about a phone call if people want to leave a voicemail?

Larry  1:23:05  
If we don't get another phone call this coming week? We're shutting down because I said that last week. So we have

Andy  1:23:11  
to say that so we're gonna have to follow up.

Larry  1:23:14  
What's the phone number 7472 to 74477.

Andy  1:23:19  
If people want to use that old fashioned email, what can they do

Larry  1:23:22  
registry matters cast at gmail. com. And our favorite way for people to support the

Andy  1:23:27  
podcast, what can they do?

Larry  1:23:28  
They can subscribe at any level beginning as small as $1 per month@patreon.com. And that's p@reon.com slash register. It matters. But even if you just get to patreon.com, you can search register matters. I found that that actually works. It does work.

Andy  1:23:45  
It does. Does does for sure. Larry, as always, I so greatly appreciate your insight expertise, and your brain dumps that you your vast array of 300 years of life have been able to assemble together and that little cranium of yours. Really appreciate it.

Larry  1:24:00  
I appreciate being here and I apologize for the tardiness of the whatever it is I click the toggle switch on my computer and it baffled all the tech gurus to figure out which one I click. There are so many

Andy  1:24:15  
as always, and I hope you have a great Labor Day weekend. And as to you all out there and listener land and have a great night. We'll talk to you soon.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai