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 and we are transmitting across the internet. This is Episode 97 of registry matters. What's going on there? How are you tonight?

Larry  0:20  
Oh, we're just having a fantastic week at the at the Balloon Fiesta.

Andy  0:26  
Oh, tell me about that real quick. Did you do how close are you to they fly over your house?

Larry  0:31  
Occasionally I do depending on how the which way the currency upper level currents take them under in the box as it's called the right the the wind blows and the Albuquerque boxes world world famous. So you can come back to where you launched if you if you fly your balloon at the right altitude. But yeah, sometimes they get very close but it's more of the north side of the city than the south side. So so they really do Come that close to me but I can see them in the right off at the horizon

Andy  1:03  
did you go out and check them out I'm just personally like I would love to go check out that balloon festival with they're just like it's every camera buffs dream to go out there because all the dynamic colors all the super bright colors of all the balloons and the crazy designs at the end up with like a bottle of jack daniels and stuff like that.

Larry  1:21  
The special shapes and it's it's an amazing event and for those of you who have never heard of it, it started in 1972 so this is the 48th one and I've not been involved up I've been here for about 36 of them. And they were in their infancy they were they were had less than I guess when I when I came to Mexico but they started it was a 50th anniversary celebration for KOB radio. The the equivalent of your Atlanta was WSB 50,000 watt and they decided to have some as a DJ still played music in those days and they decided that they were going to say Celebrate the station's 50th birthday by having some hot air balloons launch from Coronado center which is a shopping malls. It's actually still in business and doing fairly well. And they launched 13 balloons from Coronado. And then it was such such a success with with with the people and the spectators that they've they've grown and it salad it just rolls hundreds of thousands of spectators. They they have five or 600 balloon pilots they enter each year and it's an amazing event. It's a big, big economic event for the city.

Andy  2:32  
That's awesome. I think that would be fantastic to see at least once if not more often than once.

Larry  2:38  
Have you ever been in one I have worked in there I've attended and I've not never flown the balloon but I've been out there very close. I think we're the only major Fiesta that actually allows people the balloons. The people the spectators are allowed on the launch field. Okay, so you don't have to sit in the you don't have to sit in the spectators arena which is where they are in earlier years. Before they went to the current site, they're out they, they had him in the grandstands. But you actually can't walk around the field interact with the pilots, watch them, watch them watch the balloons. I mean, it's just amazing experience to be to be at the festival and it's gotten kind of expensive now because everything does when it becomes popular. So cost $15 to park your car there while remember what $3 so of course Brenda listening and four they pay $15 and don't think you think about parking in Maryland is that that's a astronomical parking fee for us here you park here at the airport for anywhere from 399 to like $7 a day at the off site. You might pay $10 $11 a day on the airport. So parking is plentiful here and it's not not not expensive like it is in some Eastern cities. But she said there are several $15 that doesn't sound that bad to me. Right, right. Right, right.

Andy  3:58  
Well, let's let's dive right in. We have some very interesting upsetting and outstanding content. Let his let us start with some of the breaking news. So this is where Galen Bachmann was found to be not safe for society and indefinitely locked up.

Larry  4:20  
Well, he hasn't been he has been found that jury has returned the verdict. I think it was Thursday afternoon or Friday. We can get Brendan here later. We want to dive into this but but they they the jury returned the verdict that he has the sexually violent predator and then I guess under Virginia law, the judge has an option to commit them to it to the to the Virginia behavior rehabilitation center or put them in the community with with stringent controls and treatment requirements. And I'm banking on the of the first option because they spent so much money and I just can't see them saying oh well he's paid, we can just release him to community community is where he was when he when he made the inappropriate contact with the teenagers so I just don't see that happening but it certainly is a possibility. So it's it's it's sad we're looking at a certain appeal and and Norful has communicated to the to the people there that the issue of civil commitment it in this circumstance for the person had previously been their commitment had been sought previously and been denied the jury found that he was not eligible for commitment without a new sex offense they This is the second bite of the apple so that's the appellate issue. It's whether you like gay, Galen, or do you dislike Galen one tries to disconnect from from from there like or dislike and say this is wrong. He didn't hate it commit any sexual offenses. He didn't even break the law. He broke his probation but texting a 16 year old is not against the law.

Andy  6:00  
You said that they will appeal.

Larry  6:02  
Well, the Galen will.

Andy  6:04  
Yeah, yeah.

Larry  6:07  
So what would you

Andy  6:08  
What would you just hypothesize? I mean, what would you suspect if you could just throw out? You know, look at your crystal ball? Do you think that that he would win? Or do you think that it would come down the same again?

Larry  6:20  
Without the Christmas sharp is issue is the second bite at the apple. Clearly, if you try to challenge civil commitment in and of itself, you're going to lose, because the courts have resoundingly said that. It's okay to civil to commit people. So they take the tack that they want to attack, civil commitment in and of itself. They lose that hands down. But if they focus of the on the laser issue here, which is whether or not you can continually seek commitment for a person who has already who you've already had your chance, and you failed, that I think there's some possible traction there. He's probably not the The most attractive vehicle to ride because they, they really, they really poured it on in terms of what they what they put on. And evidence. I had a two week trial practically. And they flew people in from all over the country. You know, they were now adults and they made him look, they made him look really horrible. But, you know, we don't get the choice of people don't understand that. This is the case, there will be an appeal. We've got two choices. We can sit back and say, gee, we don't like Galen. And I'm not saying that I don't like Gala. But But we as the people who out there who's who found this issue important. We could say Well, we'd rather have a better vehicle. Well, he's going to appeal and there's going to be appellate case law. So what do you do? You try to to support the appeal to get the outcome you're looking for which is you don't get a second bite at the apple. Yeah.

Andy  7:51  
And then do you have an update on the Georgia Halloween putting signs in people's yards?

Larry  7:57  
We do have an update for That the bulk lawsuits we ended up we ended up having two lawsuits filed. We had we had targeted two counties in Georgia. And those were butts in Spalding. And we we decided to to file in both counties. And the the the the court that was assigned the case for Spalding County, which is the Northern District of Georgia, that federal court has already granted the request for a hearing on the request for interactive relief say that they can't do that. So there's going to be a hearing and at the moment, the date is escaping me, but it's late October, there's going to be a hearing on on the on the request for an injunction. And, of course, I'm very helpful that the injunction is granted but but both lawsuits have been filed, the parties have been served. And this these machinations are underway

Andy  8:57  
and remind me again, a enjoy There's, I think you say it's a very high bar to achieve an injunction.

Larry  9:05  
It is an extremely, extremely high bar to get an injunction when you get an injunction and you're getting relief that you have not won, and your case. And so therefore, for to ask the court to prejudge your case and give you relief, you haven't won. That's an extremely high order. You have to you have to you have to show that you will likely succeed when the case finally does go to trial. And you have to you have to show irreparable harm. And there's two other lesser important components that you have that you have to show but those are the biggies. And they're reputable harm is so hard because you can't speculate. Right. I mean, we had we had a guy that came to a ga meeting that said was, you know, they share for going to retaliate? They may in fact, do that. But we can't ask the court to give an injunction because the sheriff's may retaliate. We have to wait until they do it same thing they projectiles they come through these people's windows. But until we have someone saying, I'm going to launch a project out to any 3d sex offenders window that has a sign, it's mere speculation that things may happen, but they may not. Right?

Andy  10:25  
Yes, yes. Yes. And did anybody ever come forward saying that they did put the sign up and their house got trashed, harassed anything to do we have like an actual somebody being harmed by this.

Larry  10:37  
We do not have that to my knowledge, but I have not hidden and deep discussion with the legal team. They're happy with the plaintiffs and the hearing on the on the Northern District is October 21 at 10:45am, which is a Monday, so it's coming up pretty fast here. And and the judges Timothy baton and I don't know who appointed Timothy baton but that judge has taken this seriously and granted granted a hearing on the request for injunction.

Andy  11:08  
And how about the the butts County, anything from that side are only for small

Larry  11:13  
ownership small and so far. So they don't have they don't have to give you a hearing on your request for injunction that can that can ignore it or they can deny.

Andy  11:22  
ignoring it does. I mean, like they could just say, No, I mean, like they just ignore it.

Larry  11:28  
Not rules. We've got a finite date, this is going to happen October 31. The courts not bound to robot October 31. They could they could rule December 14 if I want to. And so they effectively deny it by refusing to route one just like by Can you do the urgency passes plus Halloween passes. And but I do not know. The odds are always a long shot on getting a job to believe it's a tough standard. And I tell people I would rather be surprised to get the injunction than to tell you the odds are good Did not get it, it's much easier to come back and say, Wow, they did a fantastic job. They got the injunction is just great. They exceeded my expectations. And that's what I'd rather be reporting in a couple of weeks.

Andy  12:11  
If I can throw out an analogy is that similar than to the Supreme Court when someone asks for cert that they just they don't deny it, they just never respond. And then you're left with it, the lower level that

Larry  12:24  
they rule on certifications, they get a one line order saying your application for cert has been denied. They answer all requests Hall request or occasion for service denied.

Andy  12:35  
Interesting, okay, I was just trying to see if that was something vaguely similar, but apparently not. We do have a voicemail message and I'm throwing this to you cold. I know that you haven't heard it yet. And but I think you'll I think you'll be able to handle this one.

Larry  12:49  
Hello, Andy. Larry, just want to know you. I think you're doing a wonderful job. Got a question for you and your listeners. Is it better to implement a potential employer, even if they don't ask about being on the registry or not. The reason I say this, and I'm trying to make this short is because recently, I had a

Unknown Speaker  13:14  
job at a

Larry  13:16  
labor company, and it worked for three and a half months. They never asked me about my criminal history, and I didn't tell them then they sent me to another ticket. And we're going to anyway and found out that I was on the registry. And not only did they not send me to the ticket, they let me go. So but I got that three and a half months with work. So I was wondering if you thought maybe that would be better while you're looking for another job or not? Anyway. And

Unknown Speaker  13:48  
good job. Thanks, Mikey.

Unknown Speaker  13:53  
What do you think? What do you think the proper response there would be to

Andy  13:58  
should you tell

Larry  13:59  
a friend Actually, I love that question because there is no answer to it. I, I would answer which I hate when people do this, I would answer a question was a question. Would you have rather had the three and a half months worth of work? Or would you rather not been hard? I'm guessing that most folks in this situation, we would prefer the three and a half months worth of work. Because if they didn't ask the question, they clearly cannot say they're firing him because of an omission in his particular case, so therefore, they're firing him because he's on the registry, which means that they never would have heard him had he told him he was on the registry, that would be my guess. So therefore, he's three and a half months better off. But I can't say in all circumstances, what's the best thing to do? I would never advise omitting something that's asked one application, I mean, people people, I would I wouldn't advise that because that's grounds for termination. If you either falsify or omit the application, not theoretically, you shouldn't go through the screening. process will tell me the questions that should that should manifest itself. And they should come back to you and say, gee, there's three questions here that that weren't answered, would you? Would you be so kind to answer those? But I think in his case, he was better off doing exactly what he did do.

Andy  15:15  
Yeah, I'm inclined to say, it's almost, to me, if, if the employer won't hire you because of it, did you want to work there anyway? Should you tell them should you have to tell them? No. But if on the on, you know, on the down the line to three months at they find out something happens? And they should? Can you? Um, yes, you would have been better to have the work, but it seems like it would have been better to try and develop an ally with someone that would help you along the way that maybe provide some level of cover for you. Something along those lines.

Larry  15:49  
Well, that's an interesting theory, because theoretically, the three and a half months of doing good work, would develop an ally. You think like, the thing you almost

Andy  15:58  
do like you weren't on honest with them you didn't necessarily lie, but you weren't. I've been I guess if they live on the application saying, Are you a felon? And you say no, but but,

Larry  16:07  
but he said they didn't ask that. Why would you volunteer information that you weren't asked? I agree with that too. I if I asked you are you that a lot of people get asked about their financial men even even credit reports are run in the hiring process. But if they don't ask, would you go in and say well, I want to tell you guys I do hang out at the casinos a whole lot and I do pretty much this way my paycheck over within a day of having it and I want you to know I could I could fall prey to to poor attendance that I may have to put my hand in the cookie jar. Why would you volunteer information that sought solicited?

Andy  16:46  
Yeah, I just in almost every relationship that I've developed with people in the last five and a half years, as soon as I end up past some initial milestone, and you know that some sort of arbitrary Mark That I set up, I almost invariably tell them because a it's a significant part of my life dealing with the challenges of it. It was it's a significant gap in my timeline of like, Where were you from? Oh, eight to 14. And just to provide me some level of cover that I make some crazy weird excuse of like, oh, sorry, I have to go. Your children showed up that like somebody it's just not some sort of random weird excusing of various situations.

Larry  17:28  
Well, I I agree with you on a personal relationship, you probably it is at certain intervals and I'm no expert in personal relationships. If I were I would have I wouldn't. I wouldn't be alone at this stage of life but I would say a personal relationship but this is an employer sets the rules so if what they want to know right, and they didn't establish that as a rule was something that they wanted to know. And clearly we can look in the rearview mirror we can see that they that they did not receive the information. Well, because after becoming aware of it by whatever means I became aware of it. They, they said, We don't need you any longer. So it would take a lot of stretching, in my view, to think that after three and a half months, assuming he's doing a good job not being a slob, and this just just saved, that's the part that sometimes people don't tell, they will say, well, in three and a half months, I was absent for days without an excuse. And I was tardy for other times, and then I got into an altercation with a customer and I punched his lights out if they left, if he left out critical information, but assuming on the positive side that he was a reliable employee. All that was for naught because they the minute they found out he was on the registry, they fired him. What would make you think that if they found out before they saw these splendid skills and commitment that they would have said, Oh, well, of course, we're going to give you a chance. If they won't give you a chance after after working reliably for three and a half months? Why would they give you a chance without knowing anything about you?

Andy  19:01  
Certainly, and I can almost guarantee you that this listener will be writing back to tell us. Now I didn't do any of that. And but just but just as speculate and hypothesize on both sides of it. I'm totally with you that we don't know the whole story. We didn't see it. We didn't hear it from you know, you don't have any way to confirm the story anyway. But so there, there's our opinion, registry matters is spoken, and go forth and prosper.

Larry  19:26  
Well, I'm assuming that a person who had who had all these sinister things that they could have fired them for would not have filmed that question. And but perhaps they would have I'm assuming that that it's exactly Christy and pure that he was like, oh, certainly discoveries on the registry, there was nothing else underlying determination. If I'm, if I'm a human resource manager, and I've got a marginal employee and I find this out. If I didn't ask them initially, I'd say well, you know, we've been looking for something well, my goodness, it looks like something here it is materialize. So

Andy  20:01  
Perfect. Let us move on to this first. It's not even an article. It's a This isn't a Court of Appeal from Florida, the second district. This is a man who, as best as I could come up with the story, he is on supervision. And he says he was at home, his handler comes out to his place at 615 in the morning, knocks on the door and says, Hey, we need to see you. And he never answers. And eventually then that triggers them to lock them up. And he's challenging him having his probation revoked for not answering the door and he says that he was asleep that he had taken some medicine maybe and that he was knocked out. And so there you go, so so make sure you answer your door. And that way you don't revoke your Ryan Ryan's funny Ryan's and Jerry's like 6:50am what the WTF bitch I'm asleep at 650 right. Yeah, but if they come to your door at two o'clock in the morning and knock, I probably You should wake up you might not be happy about it. But yeah, you probably should wake up

Larry  21:06  
well, this this this is a interesting case because if we say that you have an obligation to answer your door Well, this guy was under community control which is a form of custody in Florida that's it's a little higher than than being on regular probation but it's it's an alternative to being the pretty teacher that was having sex with the Her name's escaping me at the moment but probably the most gorgeous teach our member that ever be a being put in sex offender registry in Florida. She, she, she was put on community control and there was speculation because he was she was too pretty to go to prison. But uh, but this is this is where the court looks at, yes, he could have been in violation he could have not been home. But what the court is saying is you need to actually do a little bit of work. Because it also could be that he was home. And he could have not been able to answer the door. He could have been in the shower with showers are pretty loud. He could have been for indicating I mean, he could have been passed up from from the effects of alcohol that we don't know. So to conclude a person doesn't answer the door is somehow got home and a violation. It's just too much of a job. So the court said, No, you don't get to make that that quantum leap. You get to go out and look for a little evidence to corroborate your belief, and you didn't have any. So So therefore, they they put it back on community control.

Andy  22:36  
And so what other reasons might there be that he didn't answer the door? I think, you know, the handler says, Well, you obviously weren't home but before the doing like the pre show, research, whatever we we came up with, I don't know half dozen other reasons why you might not have answered the door.

Larry  22:54  
I just went through so I'm gonna make it a bit passed out because he was drunk. He could have been for decades. He could have been in the show. Our band disposing of contraband that he did he was rapidly flushing the toilet. I mean, there could have been a number of things he was doing that he did. He could it could have been dead. I think we can conclude probably that he wasn't dead. But uh, but but but but this is an example of probation officers not wanting to do any work. If you think your charges not following curfew, you build a little evidence, you put a surveillance team on them. Most of the larger probation supervision units have surveillance, that's what their job is. And you request the officer says, I want to put Andy under surveillance. Why do you want to put him under surveillance? Well, x y&z has happened and I think we need to get gained something, okay. All approved surveillance for three days. And, and they can they can do that. Or they could have waited to see if he comes out of the house and they could have said, Why did you answer it, so don't worry. We want to come in Look around. But they just wanted to jump to the conclusion that he was not there because he didn't answer the door. And the court in this case, correctly said, You can't do that. Right?

Unknown Speaker  24:14  
Ah,

Andy  24:15  
here we go. It was not

Larry  24:17  
yet well, but they thought I got you. And it turned out that they didn't get it.

Andy  24:22  
And but then just like we were talking a few minutes ago about retaliation in the Georgia thing, so I'm going to then suspect that his handlers are going to then if he's one minute past, whatever his curfew is, or if he has one, they are going to be nailing the screws to they are going to be hot on his tail to try and make him mess up.

Larry  24:42  
Well, you could you could assume that or you can't be like Brenda, and you could think that they have their purists, the wind driven snow, and that they're going to be respectful of the court's opinion, and they're going to try to be more diligent about doing their job and they're going to learn something from this. I tend to be more skeptical. And I tend to take your view that they're that they're probably not Not going to learn anything. And they're probably going to be angry that they didn't succeed in revocation. And I suspect they're going to be very carefully bartering him his trash can. I suspect his cell phones going to get checked out very frequently, I suspect they're going to be all over him, because they failed their reputation. And that, that doesn't, that doesn't go over. They take this personally. And that's sad. Because when, when I was in the landlord business, I tried, I think we even had that pre show banter. You don't take this stuff personally, when, at some point, when someone else March you go back, so I can't believe I'll let that one get past me. You know, he, he, he's pretty good. And then you go back and you you correct what you did. That allowed him and the probation officers to say, Okay, I see what we did wrong. We didn't have enough evidence because we only have to have the greater weighting of the evidence. You don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt in a revocation because the standard of evidence is so much lower in this case, according to opinion, the violation has to be proven by the greater weight You have the evidence, which is a standard I'm not familiar with, but which which would be probably equivalent to preponderance, meaning typical scale slightly, where that scale is weighing in favor of. That's all they had to prove. A good probation officer, we go back and say, Yep, they got us on that one. Here's what we do next time. We waited out that we sit out there we wait. And we see what happens. If the vehicles not here that we put that our own notes, there was no vehicle if the person owns the vehicle. And that would be an additional cooperation, it wouldn't prove anything. But it would be additional evidence, and then we'll wait and see if they come out. They will call this job and find out. I mean, there's a number of things they could have done to find out the whereabouts of this person other just assuming he was at home.

Andy  26:43  
Now Now, speaking of being lazy, it's not like NASA wasn't hiring when they were doing their job hunt, and that's how they ended up being probation officers. I don't want to begrudge any of the dozens of probation officers that would listen to this program. Just that it is not the highest end of jobs. Maybe they just do enough to, you know, to make sure they get their paycheck to do as minimum to get as much out that they can out of it?

Larry  27:10  
Well, I would say there would be someone in that business that would be that way. And I think it has a lot to do with leadership. You know, if I'm in leadership, I'm going to be telling those people. We want to, we want to rehabilitate these people, they have to live at our communities with us. And we want when we discharge these people, we want them to be better unit, step one, and we can lock them up. We can take the hard dose approach, we can Valley as many people as we can, but eventually they're going to come out. Yeah. And if you type them out in prison, and they don't get any mentoring, they don't get any rehabilitation. Are we better as a community always try to look at how we better are we better as a community. So I would be instilling into my training, that we're better as a community if we rehabilitate these people to the maximum extent possible. So Our job is not to find flimsy reasons to violate people. Our job is to find out if people are doing what they're supposed to do, and if not to figure out how we can inspire them to do the things that will make them a better unit.

Andy  28:10  
But we've certainly that we talked about, like the probation, the original charter in the 70s. Is that right? As I recall,

Larry  28:19  
yeah. Well, that was their that was their design. Yeah, that progress. It goes back a lot further than that. But that was the original intent of probation. And it has evolved out to where I want to see how quickly I can get you.

Andy  28:30  
You did I gotta reduce my caseload. The best way for me to reduce my caseload is to lock all us back up.

Larry  28:35  
It's how quick of a ticket can be to prison. And that's not good for the probation system. That's not why we have a prob should have a probation system.

Andy  28:47  
Let's move on over to an article from the crime report. Can a victory for South Carolina's poorest defendant set a national roadmap? Please drive the bus on this one? If you would,

Unknown Speaker  28:56  
sir. Well, it could

Unknown Speaker  29:02  
That's the only question.

Andy  29:04  
Absolutely. So we can move on to the next one about the from LA calm. Now let's go back.

Larry  29:10  
This is this is just a continuation of our discussion about the inadequacy of the public defense system. And and this is the case i don't think South Carolina I just barely looked at it before the show and threw it in here. But but the ACLU and South Carolina has been pushing to, to get better representation and they, they want a victory. So there's really not a whole lot more need to be said other than folks, it's our responsibility. If we're going to charge people with crimes. We have to order our constitution provide them adequate defense. And if you don't like the cost of that, perhaps maybe I'll tell you police to quit bringing so many charges against people because it's expensive, and that's what we have to do. And that's the constitution you put your hand on the Bible and say that you believe in and you have to do it.

Andy  30:00  
I wonder if there's not a disconnect there is that the DA is part of judicial as the Do da part of executive?

Larry  30:10  
Well sharpen your question a little bit more because the the as a player, one of the the three prongs of Yeah, sure, just

Andy  30:19  
but if cops or if cops are called to the scene of a crime and they do the investigation, they how much how much Liberty do they have in actually booking charging etc. at their level? I mean, I guess I would call that is that would that be like the first rung of the ladder? Do you think

Larry  30:39  
Well, well, they have a great deal of discretion in terms of they can, they can often arrest people for crimes that they that they witness they can often the secure on a on a low level judges signature they can as security an arrest warrant for someone and they can hand that case over to the DA but The day ultimately decides if they're going to move forward with it because the DA assumes control. What's the case? It's handed off to them? Yeah, I don't profess it. But But well,

Andy  31:09  
yeah, I'm looking at the various different stop gaps along the way that, you know, a cop pulls you for, you know, somebody even wrote back after we talked about the speed limit thing. They said they got pulled over in southern Virginia for like three miles over. So a cop pulls you over and they can say, oh, you're doing nine miles over. I don't give you a ticket, oh, you're doing three miles over, I do give you a ticket, they have that level of discretion. I realize a tickets probably not going to trigger you seen the DA, but after your 30th ticket, you're probably going to end up seeing the DEA, the DEA decides, well, we're not going to, we're just going to we're going to do some diversionary tactic, you're going to go and you're going to see some sort of driver counseling, whatever. And that completely avoids any sort of prison system. But another da goes, we're going to nail the screws to you. And we're going to, you know, we're going to prosecute you and we're going to send you the court

Larry  32:00  
What what is your question in there?

Andy  32:03  
I'm just, I'm trying to see you said, Can the police stop, you know, charging people arresting people? that would that would be the first step of the pipeline to to dismantle it or or, you know, slow down the flow. So that indigent defense people there would be more resources because there would be fewer cases that the the the public defenders would be needing to see. I was just my question originally was, what level of discretion do the police have in charging and, you know, and all that of the process?

Larry  32:36  
Well, they have they have as much discretion as I choose to have. police agencies also have political considerations. If you if you work for for the police department, oftentimes you're under the discretion of a mayor who's elected by the by the by the voters and if the voters want to see heavy handed enforcement, you could take an example of reverential our What about better grown communities out here at the ranch of police are no horse aggressive on traffic and notorious aggressive enforcers because the the people that town demand that they want they want aggressive enforcement. So what discussion The police have is what discretion they're given by their command okay. And they're coming command often leads all the way back up to the city hall to the mayor's office into the city council.

Andy  33:24  
Right so it shit rolls downhill as the expression goes is the DEA

Larry  33:28  
driving that also know that they did the DEA is the last on the wrong the DA DA doesn't have an investigative bodies out arresting people when's the last time you've heard of him that got arrested by the DEA when

Andy  33:40  
I get that but I'm wondering if the DEA is talking to the the the sheriff's that are driving, you know, hey, we're going to arrest people for this. These are the things that we're actually going to prosecute. I'm wondering if it trickles down even from that higher up on the echelons?

Larry  33:54  
Well, I've heard da say that we won't prosecute certain things like harassing phone calls that we had a Jay New Mexico that said in Albuquerque said I don't want to prosecute those cases you did that it's too low for property, and it consumed too much time. But for the DEA to tell the police what they're going to spend our resources on to investigate and bring to them. I don't know that that happens. I don't know that it doesn't happen. It seems like to me that that's going to be more of a police function of how they want to allocate the resources that they they had the case fall over the DA when they think they've got what they've got enough to the DA still says yes, we don't want we don't have enough or, or Yes, I'll take this case and go forward.

Andy  34:32  
And I don't want to, I don't want to beat this dead horse for too much longer. But it would then also like it's completely disconnected from the finance side of it, that they know what they are supposed to charge people with as far as crimes. So they are just executing on their job of doing those things. And we the people should vote to have fewer laws that would get prosecuted this way. That way, the police don't have to make those decisions.

Unknown Speaker  35:01  
That's on a convoluted

Andy  35:03  
Sorry, I put all of this that we the people are the problem that we vote for the politicians that make more stringent laws than the police and the DEA are sort of forced to then prosecute the laws that we the people asked them to go make illegal things.

Larry  35:19  
Well, I take it a step further than that. I say we, the people give the police too many resources, yes. Which means that in order for them to justify those resources, they have to do things I would not do without those resources. So I continue to say that the way you stop the enormous amount of police work is to stop the enormous number of police that we have on the streets. Now that goes contrary to the hype about the crime rates through the stratosphere and that, you know, I completely reject that, because I say it's the safest time to be alive. But But people are fearful because they don't know the real facts. I believe that is such a dangerous time and I just I just don't know how to combat ignorance because people believe that crime is rampant. What is the best time to be alive?

Andy  36:01  
Yes, I'm completely with you know, and that's kind of the direction I was going to about them having so many resources that they're running around with full SWAT gear all the time. And you know, they buy the tank in wherever that was in Tennessee. I think it was. It just it seems excessive to me that they are supposed to be to serve and protect I think it is. But I showed Ryan a clip there's a movie called transformers. You may have heard of it. It came out about 10 or 15 years ago, but the car said to like, dominate and enslave and I kind of feel this way about the place at this point is that that is they're not necessary. I'm not saying they are not trying to protect and serve but they are very much in slaving and dominating.

Larry  36:45  
Well, it's like novels track of I've looked at the latest Bartow county budget for what the Sheriff's Department has for the sex voter registration tracking unit. That was either five or six full time equivalent detectives Track not hurt sex offender. So they had a caseload of over 100. They may have more detectives now. But if you've got six detectives, you have to go before the county commission to get your budget every year for that particular unit. If you're not making any cases, and your command staff says, Well, how many cases that the section? None. Also, you still need six? Oh, yes. Well, what are you doing? Nothing. I mean, they're under pressure if you've got six detectives to produce some prosecution. So that's why they're waiting with the stopwatch when you go to your 91st day, and I generally poo poo The thing about radiation, but that is one instance where they are actually waiting with the stopwatch and otherwise isn't radiation they are hoping that you violate. That's why our Department of Public Safety refuses to carry out the law that says and it said since 2013, that a first class letter will be sent to the personally 15 days before renewal date, and they want those violations. happen. So since the department public safety is a part of the law enforcement apparatus, they don't follow the law. And they make sure that they violate people. But what would the county commission say if after the second and third year in a row when when they came in and said, Well, here's this extra unit do? Well, we haven't made a single case. Do you think they'd be inclined to continue to allocate six detectives?

Unknown Speaker  38:21  
I would, it seems like they would allocate fewer.

Larry  38:25  
Well, that's the whole point of making. So the fact that they have the resources is what drives prosecution. Let's bring that course I want I don't want it in in law enforcement, all because it's a civil regulatory scheme. But while we're making that transition, let's bring that detective down to one. Yes, have one detective rather than six or seven or whatever they may have now, and then you will actually be following and if you're following the law, and you're sending out those letters and they get returned as undeliverable, then that one detective opens an investigation on that case and says, Oh, well, we received a letter that says No longer those residents and you could go knock at the door does Andy live here? And no, he doesn't? Oh, do you have any idea? And then you have probable cause to go out and conduct an investigation, rather than going out with your goon squads with seven detectives at the door with, with with with their gut, their, their, their hands on their triggers. I mean, it's so intimidating. And so over the top where they do these residents verifications, and it's all for show, it's all for show. That's all it says. It's just like the airport security. The TSA does when they grab your crotch and they they go up and down and they go up and down. That's all for show. Yes, that that's not keeping you any safer.

Andy  39:44  
I got I got a quick little tangent for you. Did you hear about the lady that made it all the way on the plane without boarding pass or ID or anything?

Larry  39:50  
I did and I published a general rule about general rule for that. So what's the general rule? I would say if you if you manage To be good enough to pass the TSA checkpoint, and their layers of security before you get past and enter the concourse area if you manage to get past without either identification or a boarding pass, and then you manage to get on an aircraft without a boarding pass. As a general rule, when a person says you have my seat, I would surrender that seat and look for another vacant seat on that aircraft. If there's not another vacant seat, I would go to, I would exit the aircraft and I would hope that I could pull the same magic again because unless you're completely certifiable, you know that you you believe it. You don't belong of the aircraft. So you build it, the person saying you're in my seat probably has a valid document with this as their seat. So you should probably surrender that seat and hope there's another open one that would be my general rule that I would recommend.

Andy  40:51  
I think that's fair it but if it's a 99% book flight, you're going to bang bouncing from seat seat to seat someone's going to notice you at some point.

Larry  40:59  
Well, it It's assigned seats. But but like Southwest, there's no assigned seating. So with Southwest, what you could do is first come first serve. And then if it's if it's completely sold out plane, then there eventually when they have one person standing, they're going to say, well, gee, we we have exactly 130 seats sold, and there should be seats for everybody. So at that point, they're going to start looking for everybody's boarding pass. Like I say, everybody, please hold up your boarding pass, we're going to come to the cabin. And at that point, you're going to need to exit the aircraft. But But you'd have a better luck with Southwest because you don't need to have a particular seat. You just need help there. So there's an open seat on that flight

Andy  41:36  
or wonderful TSA somehow let her get through screening and everything else along the way.

Larry  41:41  
Every everything every system failed along the way and, and and it's a remarkable I would want to know how she did it. I would be I would not be interested in prosecution. I'd be interested and figured out how she pulled off his feet.

Andy  41:55  
Excellent. All right, let's move on over to law. com the Connecticut law Tribune State High Court upholds constitutionality of sentencing child to 40 years imprisonment. How do we get to the place where a 14 year old gets a 40 year sentence and tried as an adult?

Unknown Speaker  42:14  
Well, because it kills somebody.

Andy  42:17  
Couldn't we easily argue that a 14 year olds brain isn't quite developed in while you may want to confine them for some kind of sort of extended period of time, but not put them in adult stuff? Right.

Unknown Speaker  42:28  
Well, that stops the people Connecticut decided.

Andy  42:33  
Isn't that the Live Free or Die place? Or is that New Hampshire?

Larry  42:38  
I think that's New Hampshire. Oh, my bad.

Andy  42:40  
All right, then. I don't know what Connecticut's slogan is.

Larry  42:43  
So but, but yeah, this is it. I couldn't help myself. This actually appeared in a crumbled daily justice briefing, but it appears that the decision actually was rendered back on August 23. So it's over a month since out, but it just popped up on my radar this. Yeah, yes yesterday. But But I put it in here because it talks about the evolving standards of decency. And those who believe in an evolving standards of decency, and I tied this to we're going to hear from the light, Justice Scalia later today about the evolving standards of decency. This is the end they the he's not such a young man. He's in his 30s. Now, but this is a person who, who, who committed a horrible act at age 14. And then Connecticut has since made it more difficult to to sentence him to that outcome. But he would still be eligible for a tough sentence. And this is him making the argument that that debt based on the fact that Connecticut made it tougher to put juveniles in adult court, that the standards of decency have evolved. And the court said, well, they have evolved But they've evolved precisely along the lines of what the statute says PA 15 dash 84. And they said, therefore, under 15, under PA 1584, you can still get the sentence now you're eligible for parole that which you weren't previously before the members was made. So you're eligible to be paroled after 24 years, which is not that many years from now, because it's been in for quite some time. And they said, so therefore, we decline to invent something that the lawmakers didn't put in there. And the reforms were just judges here. And they they made the reforms they wanted as reflected by the people's will. And we're not going to evolve beyond that. That's, that's, I mean, this is those of you who are text lyst out there, you should be clapping. And you should be applauding and you should be so happy that you don't have accorded Connecticut that this is a state's highest court. The Connecticut Supreme Court isn't legislating from the bench, and they're not interpreting more than what the law provided for to give people breaks beyond what the elected officials dish should be disobey music to your ears. Those of you who are texture lyst

Andy  45:06  
will tell me your left the view on this should the court have stepped in and super legislated.

Larry  45:13  
I'm not a big fan of super legislating. One of those were in rare circumstances. But But this i'm not in favor of having the whole thing and Connecticut's flawed. I like our system for putting a juvenile and adult court is exceedingly difficult and seldom happens. So under our system, he never would have been the adult court. You remember I tell the story about Cody Posey, who was 14 at the time and all he did was killed his father and his brother and sister. And they could not put him in adult court under our stringent standards here. So we take care of the whole problem on the front side, we make sure that it can't happen because they have to show that the juvenile is not amenable to any rehabilitation anywhere in the state. And they have to prove that by a very high street. Android and I forget what it is. But Ashley could probably tell us next time we have her on but but but no, I don't believe that in this case that they should legislate from the bench. I believe that the legislature beta JA adjustments that the people wanted. And this guy, he's getting the benefit of that change. And he's wanting more than what the legislature prescribed. And so therefore, he does he loses I'm like, say the textual list of the people who don't want legislating from the bench. They should be applauding. This is exactly what you would want.

Andy  46:30  
I do want to point out, though, that you are, you're not just passively involved in your legislative process. You are. You are pretty high up on the ladder of people driving these, the way the policy even is developed. You're part of that whole, as you call it apparatus. Is that Is that a fair way to to articulate it?

Larry  46:54  
Well, I wouldn't put it quite that strong. Connect connected enough humility I know more than the average person does in terms of what's going on here at night, I'm very closely and I'm able to get information faster and more efficiently than that most people like I can I can tell what's happening from but but the average

Andy  47:13  
Joe just knows that we go to the polls and we vote blue or red and be damned. I'm not voting for the other team, because they're terrible group of people. I mean, that is, I think a very large portion of our population considers politics to that degree. So Team Red votes this way. Team Blue votes this way. That's who I vote for. That's the end of the whole conversation doesn't matter that these people kind of push down these sorts of policies. These people push down those sorts of policies. People typically don't follow it that way.

Larry  47:48  
So well, we were still focused on what the court didn't do. The court did not legislate from the bench, right?

Andy  47:57  
Correct. Correct. But and so back to but the legislate the the the law specifically stated a thing, your law states something different where they wouldn't be able to do this to begin with. The reason why your state is different than Connecticut is because of people such as yourself that are very heavily involved and there are probably people in Connecticut that aren't as involved and they want to approach things in a different way.

Larry  48:23  
That is That is correct. And I can't take a lot of credit for the for the juvenile justice system we have here today. There was a whole lot of people that worked on this very hard a couple decades ago and and we saw the light for four other states have seen the light that that that's the time to save people and to do your best and rehabilitation. So there's been a lot of effort put into our juvenile system. Now there are people saying that we're just too lenient that the that the juveniles are doing some heinous things we're hearing about the super predator again, because we're to relax on juveniles and and this this is this is a The potential for an overreaction when when when when one juvenile does something heinous, then, you know, everybody that suddenly becomes all we've got a tidal wave of general crime. Well, we've had several high profile geo geo law cases. And it seems like that that, that the media is really focused on that. And that's causing the public to demand that we'd be a little tougher on juveniles.

Andy  49:21  
Interesting. How about we hop on over to a article from the Marshall project? And the it looks like I'll 800 different Democratic candidates and what their various criminal justice policies would be because there are I don't know, are there still 20 people running something like that after you have dropped out in

Larry  49:44  
only put this in here, just so that people who might be open minded enough to look at the article that it won't spend a lot of time on it? To see what things that they say that they're for? might actually should be things that Democrats are for because we've got an audience that tends to lean toward the conservative side, which means that Democrats are are crappy people as far as many of our listeners are concerned. And you might look at this and find out you agree with more than what you think you do. You know, do you support decriminalizing illegal border crossing? Do you support the death penalty? Is should sentencing include mandatory minimums almost all of our people that say mandatory minimums are bad? Well, we got mandatory minimums because of that was the that was the stylish thing to do back when, when when crime was how everybody's agenda back in the 90s. So and that became a bipartisan thing to be tough, and boy, did we get tough.

Andy  50:45  
And this obviously then profiles where each of them are. Let me just one thing that I know offhand is like Bernie is in favor of people being able to vote even while they're still in prison and then the various different positions the candidates, it's kind of like A neat laid out article like very visual and things are kind of moving around to do little bubbles with like the cartoon bubbles over their people's heads as it rotates through them.

Larry  51:10  
Yeah. And they mentioned in there that how that they did a Trump directive to seek maximum penalties, some of the some of the Democratic candidates but certainly unravel that if they were to win, you know, because he issued that directive right after the jeff sessions that would seek the maximum penalty and all the enhancements we can on on prosecutions. And so that is really not the right direction to move on, on crime in my view, but that's, that's where we are

Andy  51:40  
interesting. They lump everybody into one big category for to eliminate the death penalty. They all are in favor of eliminating the death penalty. Saw it said

Larry  51:51  
it's it said that almost immediately new manifestation could go through this to try and reverse the 2017 Jeff Sessions memo that requires federal prosecutors to Seek the most severe possible penalties. By contrast, under President Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder or ordered federal prosecutors in 2013, to exercise restraint and charging to limit the number of people facing harsh mandatory minimums. So that's a contrast. Yeah. And that's what I would expect. But But anyway, like say, I didn't wanna spend a lot of time Yeah, yeah. No, give people a chance to look over it. And, and I know that, here's what people tell but but I say, look, what you say your form criminal justice is not what the part that you support is for they said, Well, I have to look at the bigger picture and I said, Well, so does everyone else. We all look at the bigger picture we don't just look at I don't know anybody else. Just our criminal justice alone. I don't look at I look at the bigger picture. I kind of resent someone thinking out look at the bigger picture. Look at I look at public health. I look at the social safety net, look at crime. Look at the environment. Look at all the economics I mean, I look at everything that you look at what makes You think you have the monopoly on looking at the bigger picture? I like the bigger picture also

Unknown Speaker  53:06  
definitely don't you

Andy  53:08  
know I'm a one issue voters. That's it. I just want good good streets, though

Larry  53:14  
so but I've had so many people tell me well, Larry, I have to look at the bigger picture and so that's precisely what I do. I just look at the bigger picture slightly different than you do.

Andy  53:24  
Yeah, just people I don't know but there are certainly a lot of people that are one issue voters that is for damn sure people either they pick whatever their little pet peeve issue is and nothing else matter. We could scorch the earth but as long as we got that one issue know there are some

Larry  53:37  
people out there that they would vote entirely on abortion. Yes, UZ issue

Andy  53:43  
I was thinking Oh, but I wasn't saying

Larry  53:44  
you if you if you say that you ban abortion, do you have their vote no matter what else that you're you stand for? That's the sole deciding issue for them. And then those people when you when they have that boy, we don't go I read hold now. But when those people when you engage in a debate with him, and you say, Okay, well, what do we do with five or 600,000 children we would force to be carried to turn on an annual basis, when we've got that medium foster care that are long term that can't be placed, what would we do with them? They never will answer that question. They will they will come up. Well, the adoption, I'll say, Okay, well, let's be optimistic adoptions will take care of maybe a fifth of a more fourth on what will we do there? And they never will tell you. They they will not tell you what the answer is to deal with all those that would be born if you forced all pregnancies to go to term. And so that's what I would like to have a discussion about at some stage, but not on this program. But I'd like for what else people who feels that way to engage be and tell me what we're going to do with those unwanted children.

Andy  54:46  
I agree I would be I would not be opposed to having it on and you know, we could segment off the content if we needed to. Anyhow, how about we move on over to this is a governor that I wore a certain kind of color on my face when I was a teenager in college from from PUHSV. Virginia Governor says he restored civil rights to 22,000 felons. This is Virginia Governor Ralph Northam says he's restored the voting rights and other civil rights to more than 22,000 felons who have completed their sentences since he took office last year. What's your point here, Larry?

Larry  55:22  
My point is that that there is a trend where people who have been disenfranchised are being Rhian franchised, and I'm encouraging you to vote. And this is a case where the previous administration of Governor Terry McAuliffe, he had done a blanket restoration and the conservatives challenge that said he didn't have the authority with it not to do a blanket he had to do an individual restoration one by one. So this is this is the individualized restoration of of getting people back on the voting rolls and there's just such a paranoia and the conservative side about letting felons vote somehow or other, they're going to vote democratic. And I don't understand that because most of the conservatives, most of the felons I deal with are conservative, and they wouldn't vote for Democrats, your life depended on it. Sorry, I just don't know where I don't know where the fear comes from. But but but but anyway, this is just a great thing for those 22,000 that have been restored. And, and the process is happening around the country were barriers removed in Florida by the public referendum. And now the conservatives have come in and tried to put build all these barriers. Despite the public voting, I think it was substantially in favor of restored people after they've done their time in Florida. They're putting these things that have to pay all their court costs and everything that they did may have not paid before they can actually be restored to vote, because there again, they're afraid to take hundreds of thousands of Floridians are going to vote for the liberal do gooders and there's just no evidence to support that. There's just not

Andy  56:57  
as I recall, in Florida, it was somewhere on two thirds to three quarter voted to remove amendment four and then the legislature came in behind them and started trying to tack on things to keep them from voting.

Larry  57:07  
Yes. So my memory serves, I wish the conservatives would come tell me what their fear is, of course, I tell them what their fear is that they're gonna vote democratic, but I wish they would show me some evidence of how the how they've concluded that that these, this tidal wave of new voters are going to vote democratic.

Andy  57:30  
Very much so. All right, then from STL. Today, calm St. Louis post dispatch advocates call for Missouri to join other states in lifting time limits on child sex abuse lawsuits. I want to jump to the very end of this article. If, if I can remember when I was reading it at lunch today. It says in about the fifth the end paragraph, the Missouri Catholic Conference testified against efforts to remove the civil statute of limitations because it could open the church to lawsuits that are difficult to defend because of lack of evidence or clear memory. There. I rest my case.

Larry  58:07  
That's that's my, not my whole point. But that's one of my big points that this is a trend we've talked about on the on the podcast several times. And all I'm getting a pop ups and yeah, and the stories I tried to open it, but I've already read it, so I don't need to read it again. But this is this is one of those things where in a civil lawsuit, you're not facing loss of liberty, that is true. But you are facing loss of property and everything you've worked for. And the standard of proof is far lower. Because it's a civil case. You don't you don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. You have to prove by preponderance of the evidence. And you have you have these people coming back decades later, decades later, saying he did this. What can you do? What can you do? There's nothing you can do to defend yourself again. Yes, this

Andy  59:01  
I don't know I think about it. I constantly refer back to me sitting on the jury trial for a DA guy and making and a, the quote unquote victim was suing him civilly that he forced her compelled her extorted her to take some nudie photos. And in exchange for not prosecuting, blah, blah, blah. I personally believed the officer, but there was no evidence. So I like I think I was the, the, the jury foreman at that point to and I was like, there's no evidence. I agree that he probably did it.

Unknown Speaker  59:38  
But we have no evidence. So I, we voted and he was acquitted. Because there was no evidence show me the pictures.

Larry  59:48  
So Well, that's a rarity that you actually made evidence.

Andy  59:54  
That was I was like, how can we just take if the two of the people are of equal in their words, and you would then believe the DA guy more because he's a more respectable citizen than a than a person that is constantly caught up in drug charges and so forth. But again, back to the evidence side of it. That's just that's just how I came down on it. And I convinced the other 11 people that we should not convict the guy.

Unknown Speaker  1:00:21  
You don't need to convict 11 you only need is convinced one.

Unknown Speaker  1:00:26  
Fair enough.

Andy  1:00:27  
Fair enough. But we came back with a unanimous Yeah, I guess that would be hung jury. But we we came back with a unanimous decision and not guilty. I'm with you. I understand. Yeah.

Larry  1:00:36  
Yeah. And that's the best version because then the state doesn't get a second chance. When you have a hung jury, the state gets another choice. And as as I've as I've discussed this with people, the case gets better for the state. Because when you're putting on your second prosecution, you've had the opportunity to pull the jurors and find out what you didn't. What T's and eyes You didn't deal with, who was not credible in the witness lineup. What evidence they would like to have heard that would cinch the deal? And would you put your second third and fourth trial onto the finally the court shuts it down and says this case was dismissed with prejudice. If you have a second or third time a jury, the state gets better get some better outcome. It doesn't. It doesn't work to benefit the defendant take a long trial the second third time

Andy  1:01:20  
because they learn what they didn't do appropriately or correctly and they can then hone their their skills and sharpen their saw to figure out the better way to chop it

Larry  1:01:28  
down. Absolutely. And the defense doesn't know how they what they don't get to be there when they're pulling the jurors for the prosecution's Poland your defense can do their own thing they can pull the jurors as well. But but the the the state benefits from it because they want to try the person again, they want to find out what they did wrong. And what why it wasn't convincing enough it and then they put on a better case the second time around.

Andy  1:01:54  
There was another quote in there I want to say from some law professor that said That are like entire judicial system is based on being able to have some sort of fair trial. I can remember I guess it was at the, I can't I can't remember exactly what it was. But there was a statement made in there that our whole system is based on that you have to be able to defend yourself with with evidence, and you have to have that robust kind of trial thing going on.

Larry  1:02:22  
Well, that those of us who believe in our adversarial system, I'm not sure that the majority of Americans at least a significant number of Americans believe in the adversarial system anymore because if they would not be so willing to abolish the things that make it an adversarial system, it's not an adversarial system. If you if you bustles a defense and you don't let them do vigorous cross examination because that's really victimizing the victim. It's you know, if you if you're not allowed to call witnesses are relevant. I'm not so sure there are people really do support the adversarial system anymore. I don't know what we're moving towards, but it's certainly not an adversarial system which we given the opportunity, the resources to adversarial system is a very fine system, but we don't have that anymore. Agreed.

Andy  1:03:08  
Um, there was something else I was just kind of scrolling through the article, but this one, like really jumped out at me. You're a fairly smart individual. Larry, do you know how averages work? Right?

Larry  1:03:18  
Not really, but go ahead.

Andy  1:03:19  
Okay, well, Hamilton, this is my favorite person on the planet. Marci Hamilton said the average age for child abuse victim to come forward is 52. For that to be true, that means more or less half of the people on the front side of that have to be true. So somewhere between the ages of you know, whenever like five when their thing actually happened all the way to 52. But that also means an equal number of people on the other side, that means 60 to 70 to 82. That number is complete garbage. There's no way the average age is 52. I call bullshit right there.

Larry  1:03:54  
Well, I'm not sophisticated enough to call that bullshit based on that, but what I could call it is that maybe It is maybe it isn't. But we cannot have our adversarial system working effectively. When you come forward at age 52, for something happened when you were seven, sir, sorry, we can't we feel bad for you.

Unknown Speaker  1:04:13  
Yes,

Larry  1:04:14  
it is tragic. But we can't do anything for you because it's too late. The person who we would potentially put in a cage can't defend themselves. Because you waited too long.

Andy  1:04:27  
Yeah, that there's an expression that people say that everyone says that they're above average driver, which is impossible, because then the average of move and everyone would become average of quality driver. There's no way that the number is 52. So but I'm with you. Yeah. There's no way that you could turn around and have a fair trial for someone 30 4050 years removed. Well, even probably 10 years is probably really hard to do without some sort of hard evidence.

Larry  1:04:54  
But you don't dare ask the victims advocates that it when when they're advocating for this you don't dare suggest that because they become righteously indignant, if you ask them what you do believe in, in fair play, and you do believe in what you tell by victim that you tell this person whose life was ruined. You've tell them that. I said, What if I'm not in that part of the discussion, I will decide that tries to make sure that people get due process. And what you're doing is going to record the hope of them getting due process. And I'm sorry that what happened? Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. But we can't give the person due process who you're trying to put in a cage we can't. So therefore, we can't give you what you want, which is a an open ended statue of limitations. Sorry, sorry, the answer is no. But I'm in a slim minority. If you were to pull their average, I think you'd be pulled the average voter. When you emotional eyes the questions that what do you think a person who's committed a sex offense against a child? Do you think that after a period of time They should just get away with it. And that's the way you would ask the question. Of course,

Andy  1:06:03  
it's certainly a leading question that way, that's not a fair way to you.

Larry  1:06:07  
Yeah. And of course 99.87 to 5% would say that they should get away with it.

Andy  1:06:14  
And you Yeah, you would certainly find that most people would say that they should not get away with it like ever. You should you should hunt them even in their grave and lock them up after they're in their grave. But that's then the slippery slope of where do you cut that off for what crimes does it apply to burglary? does it apply to just all of the other crimes? I will in Maryland, it does.

Larry  1:06:37  
All Philadelphia nll fellow that rhymes, or, or, or fair game.

Andy  1:06:41  
Well, that's Brenda Skelton. Get on that, Brenda.

Larry  1:06:43  
Yeah. Well, she didn't know about it till it was too late. Because I was surprised when when we found out that was the case. But I said, well, what's the statute limitations and we started looking into it, but we asked the former chief public defender she said there isn't one.

Unknown Speaker  1:06:58  
Crazy

Andy  1:06:59  
All right. Then over at the Washington city paper, not a publication I've ever heard of and even growing up in that area, but it could just be in an only an online publication. DC defendants were ankle monitors that can record their every word and motion. Obviously a GPS monitor on your leg would be intended to record where you are. But they have little cell phones in them and they can without any sort of indication to the wearer, that they have turned on the recording functionality. And some guy was at work with his leg monitor on and it's SM said there was a voice that popped on and said hey, you're not where you're supposed to be. And it freaked out his manager and he got fired because the GPS monitoring company hadn't gotten notice that he was allowed to be at work past you know, whatever. 10 o'clock whenever his curfew said this is funny.

Larry  1:07:57  
only ever have finally ever since the humor

Andy  1:08:02  
This is crazy Larry. And there was another thing in there that really triggered me and it said that you cannot sleep while it's charging, I think it said which is asinine to me like you're going to be tethered. I don't know if you remember the meeting but there was a guy. Jason he had his ankle monitor I didn't read like realize he was on an ankle monitor. But he was sitting very close to a plug so they get everything charging. Why you said that the media

Larry  1:08:26  
I didn't even think of that, but you'll see why.

Andy  1:08:28  
My god it was crazy. I didn't realize that that

Larry  1:08:32  
so I thought he was afraid of getting cooties or something.

Andy  1:08:37  
But look, man, I'm all technologically enabled and all this stuff. And even I want you to do this with your phone. You have like a three foot cord and you try and do contortionists X to get your phone plugged into the wall, get a really long cord and get a battery and you can then be on the move and not be tethered to a wall. And you could charge those Duma flushes with that sort of Reagan. Just put the battery in your pocket and keep on moving.

Larry  1:09:03  
Well, this is this is a case of technology has has gotten beyond the law. The courts have not dealt with this. It's a matter of first impression about. I think that the the manufacturer windows monitor said that, that there's that there's a feature that either vibrates or makes a beep when they start listening. But they it turns out, they can actually turn that off. Correct. And so therefore it has the feature, and there's no requirement that it did at least tell you it's get ready to listen. So you go to your lawyers office and say I'll take my peels out to get me and that peels listen to the conversation with your lawyer. So the lawyer is asking that thing be removed until he can have it examined to figure out what his capabilities are.

Andy  1:09:50  
So this is spectacular. Yeah, I this is this is very troubling that they could all of a sudden so that you could be in the middle of taking care of your own personal needs. And they turn the thing on. And just having like, I realized that you should have a reduced expectation of privacy, but I don't think that you should be living your life in the middle of just completely out in the open for the public to or anybody to spy on you and listen in.

Unknown Speaker  1:10:17  
Well, that's ridiculous.

Larry  1:10:19  
I agree you do have while you're under correctional control, but see the problem with this GPS monitoring business is the universe of monitored people has expanded not be people just include people who have who have been convicted of a crime. But everybody who's pre trial is on some sort of GPS monitoring, but I say everybody, I'm not literally meaning everybody, but a huge number of people pre trial have these things. They haven't been convicted of anything.

Unknown Speaker  1:10:47  
So where's your presumption of innocence? Right?

Larry  1:10:49  
That's what I've been saying to lawmakers when when when what I get the chance, I said, Wait a minute. You do believe you. You believe that a person is presumed innocent? Until they either plead guilty or they're there. They're found guilty beyond reasonable. What? Yes, of course, I believe that. Well, then how on earth can you justify all these restrictions on their liberty? I mean, I have a problem with requiring people to do very many things for free trial because they have not been convicted.

Andy  1:11:18  
But the whole legal apparatus wouldn't have descended upon this person. Had they not had decent evidence,

Larry  1:11:26  
right. Well, they theoretically have probable cause. But probable cause, depending on the jurisdiction can be merely a prosecutors filing of an affidavit ever been information on an affidavit, but a prosecutor saying probable cause it it doesn't take much to put someone on pre trial control. And, and I know it's for the benefit of public safety, but we don't have any basis to preserve this. These people need to be kept safe from anything. They haven't been convicted either. What how do we conclude that we need to keep the public safe and boy, this will drive the victims advocates over the edge? Well, Larry, what you're saying is that if they if he beats up his girlfriend, black and blue, then you're telling me that we can't put him on GPS monitoring to keep. Now I didn't say that, for particular wise reason for that alone. For boundary control, if there's an order saying that to have to stay so many feet, that would be an appropriate use of the GPS monitoring, it's not to punish is to keep the person out of the zone, or that they could not continue to harass the witness and interfere with the witness. But But this, I mean, everybody is all pre trial control now. And and, and, and hardly anybody post a bond. And that's all there is to it. Even the states where they have bond where they still have cash bond, you post your $10,000 bond, and then you also report to pre trial. And then pre trial says, oh, by the way, we're going to require a weekly drug test. We're going to require you call it To the QA line, we're going to require that you do this and get counseling work. Wait a minute, I'm innocent. I'm presumed innocent. You're going to require all this stuff while I wait. Oh,

Andy  1:13:08  
yes. 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 744771. 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 fighting. Without you, we can't succeed. You make it possible. Let's move over to Something that somebody sent to me personally. So this is one of our two articles covering Georgia tonight. This is from Floyd count for foot Floyd County Schools. Dear parent or guardian Floyd County Schools is pleased to announce that we will begin using the Raptor visitor management system and all of our schools to strengthen our program of campus safety for students and faculty. This is a whole shenanigans thing where they're going to scan your ID and if you are on the SO list, you will not be entering our campus without our knowledge. This is kind of frightening kind of Orwellian, that you could have done your crime 300 years ago and they're still going to find you on the registry somewhere and they're going to deny you access to the school.

Larry  1:14:46  
So so that's what the SL this is not the sheriff's office. That's

Andy  1:14:50  
no, that's our peoples national national but individual states lyst I don't like using the SO turn. So register, get registered. Citizen.

Larry  1:15:01  
But what if you're not a citizen? What if there? What if there? What if there are four national weather registered? Oh boy, then yeah,

Andy  1:15:06  
I guess that registered citizen thing has a short sighted view of things. Registered persons.

Larry  1:15:12  
Yes, that would be that would be more active a registered person because we don't know that their citizens necessarily.

Andy  1:15:18  
This came to my attention because obviously one of our people is in Floyd County. And this is ridiculous that he is trying to become more engaged in this kid's life. And this very well would prevent him from doing that, that he would have to identify himself as being on the registry to get the permission, even if they don't restrict his access, but then he would be identified and that could lead to the whole shaming thing that many of our people are burdened with.

Larry  1:15:44  
This is this is phenomenal, sweeping the nation. This is your great technological advances. That you're so proud of this anymore. What when technology is available. There was going to be a consumer out there and the real ranch remember I've mentioned real ranch earlier. The retro BX RIO RANCHO public schools adopt this a few years back. And if you go on campus, you're going to you're going to have this system check you out to see if you're on the sex offender registry. And if you are they don't admit you to the school now. I think this person submitted it because it said, said that she kept her her son can't pick up his kids from school now, when we had that discussion, I think picking up the kids from school is different than going inside the school and picking up your kids and checking them out at a at a non dismissal time. But for the life of me, I don't see how this would prevent you from pulling up onto the school property in the school bus and the student pickup zone and picking up your kid because how would they run rapper when you simply drive onto the campus? And your kid is sitting there with their backpack and they jumping in the car? How would that how would it prevent you from picking your kid up that would prevent you from going at a non dismissal time and and saying I want to check my kid out of school I gotta do so and so that would prevent you I suppose. But I don't have This prevent you from picking your child from school.

Andy  1:17:03  
Totally agree. I just you know, then we could deal with the term school campus. I mean, to me that to me campus would mean the entire property of the school.

Larry  1:17:14  
Well, literally, it would mean that but realistically, when you go on a campus you're only confronted with checks when you get into the building very few fair enough schools have the resources where there's a gated entrance where they're running IDs at the entrance of the school boundary Can you can you name it what's the what's the schools you know, that are doing that you can think of off top of your head?

Andy  1:17:35  
Oh, I certainly don't know of any and this is just a little bit of I don't know if this is exaggeration on the on the disability that this is imposing upon the person. Just I you know, I don't know how many we've never I've never seen one of these personally come through our through our system that we had to talk about, but

Larry  1:17:55  
here's well in here, it's it's becoming the norm. They keep the keeptruckin kids safe because people parents are on campus for various reasons legitimately, that they go on campus and they company field trips they did. And this is a system that's being used to keep. I mean, last time I was on a bus, I mean today if we actually had parents on buses back in my day, believe it or not, we had buses back in my day and, and I just, it never occurred to me that a parent would bless the child, old school bus, or some kind of outing where you've got all the observation you have. And of course, we have far more today because there's more cameras under cell phone video, and there's everything everywhere, which we didn't have in the 1960s. But, but this is much to do about nothing because nothing happens at the school anyway. Other than right heaters other than what the teachers and coaches do, I'm not saying nothing happened. But when is the last time that anybody in our vast listening audience can think of when some parent has gone on school campus that was not a part of the school faculty. Not a part of the coaching staff not affiliated with the school says, added anything to a child. I can't think of every hearing of it in my life.

Andy  1:19:08  
Right? I agree with that, too. There's just there's just too many people that someone's going to again, like I use the example someone actually was cracking up they said they got Red Bull no nose when I said something about spontaneously molesting somebody, but I can't imagine someone going to a school and like picking a kid up holding them like a football and running out of the school. It's just not going to happen.

Larry  1:19:28  
Well, well, what went when would you get the privacy? Let's say I guess you could theoretically be on campus legitimately. I give you a hall pass. I guess you could go into a restroom. And you could find a student in there that was skipping class and what to do a smoke jona wherever they do it these days in schools. We used to skip it, go go do but but when you started molesting the kid, at some point, somebody's going to scream right?

Unknown Speaker  1:19:53  
I would think so.

Andy  1:19:56  
That would be my thought that you think it would be really hard to Do it and get away with it without having someone around you notice that someone is screaming bloody murder that no don't touch me in my weird spot.

Larry  1:20:08  
But in every school of any size and I will say every school period, but every school adult at the charter schools around here, they pretty much all have cameras surveillance of the corridors. I know one particular charter schools, the principal says not only do we have it, and all the commentaries, we have cameras in all the classrooms. And she said that she had to fight with our teachers over that because I thought they were watching the teachers and she said don't we're not actually watching the teachers. Were watching the teachers per se, if someone makes if a student makes an accusation that you did something, we just simply take a look at the camera say, well, we don't show the evidence of the other side. It's there for your protection. But with all the surveillance, I can't imagine that there's any justifiable fear of an adult being on campus as a child molester and actually perfecting. It's absurd.

Andy  1:21:01  
It is same thing with all the police misconduct that's going on you know probably 95% of police activity is on the up and up but we do have multiple camera angles of people pulling out their cell phones challenging the police. And you know everyone has a fairly capable recording device in their pocket at all times. And the reason why we have it is because we have those devices not prior to the current era did we have that? Can you imagine what would happen now everyone pulled their cell phones to watch you taking the kid out and they would certainly have your ID covered in a matter of minutes because your face is going to be almost like a 3d scan of it with all the cameras taking from all the different angles. Yep. Alright, so we will move on to I didn't realize that this article is from Lenore scan Daisy, from reason magazine, Manchester teen face a sex offender status for touching a 17 year old on the arm and waist touching someone's arm to get their attention. I would have thought was normal. This is silly. It is in Manchester England. So I think Charles sent it to us because those are his people.

Larry  1:22:07  
Yes. And I was gonna say that that's probably I export to consult with how does this happen and you're sophisticated.

Andy  1:22:17  
And last fall in Manchester, England an awkward 19 year old male student touched a 17 year old female classmates arm on the street during the daytime. He later said he had wanted to make a friend and this rattled the girl and she lost her mind and chart and went to the police and and all this and turns out that he possibly is going to get charged and and and all that and put on the registry in England.

Larry  1:22:39  
This is silly. I think he's been charged if I read it right. I may have read it wrong. It says hearing that Jamie Griffis was convicted of charges sexual assault and part because the accuser now 18 said that she had no doubt that that had she not moved away from him. The first time you touch Harvey would have gone on to touch her breath. But see, that's speculative. He didn't touch your breast. Just touch your arm. That is not a sexual erogenous zone. I hate to break it to you.

Unknown Speaker  1:23:15  
It might be for someone though,

Larry  1:23:18  
but he didn't touch your breath. And first of all, you don't know that he would have I'd be that speculation. Yes. But he, by your own testimony, I find him not guilty. He didn't do two things. Actually. He did a battery at most. At most he did a battery which is the uninvited unwanted touching. Hey, did do a sex crime. You people in England are sick. If you can uphold this conviction.

Andy  1:23:44  
And you don't mean the sick. That means like awesome, right?

Larry  1:23:47  
No, I don't mean that I made this sick the way it used to be before sick became good. So I mean, every time I go, the doctor sounds Sick that everybody say what a great how great that is but would you would you would you go out to the to the millennials and say you're all sick man I say oh wow Thank you

Andy  1:24:13  
Charles said he will see you after class to talk about this

Larry  1:24:19  
about what the article said and then what the just judges said that that there will be no other reason you a fit to be a judges you can't think of video that I touch people all the time I'm glad I'm not in England cuz boy I would be on sex offender registry if I work because I touch people all the time.

Andy  1:24:35  
It is generally used as a like when you shake someone's hand you then reach your arm and maybe touch like around their elbow or something like that's often a way that people shake hands or you know you've had somebody on the back like and God forbid you do all the things that they do in football games or other sporting events and they give you a good old good game. That will be unwanted sexual touching when someone Pat's you on the tushie

Larry  1:24:58  
so Well, he's facing up to a maximum of 10 years in jail and all the righteous Jesus. Oh, that's crazy. So you people over there was no do this. We are here.

Andy  1:25:11  
All right then. Our last article before we hit Scalia is this one is super fun because I think this one is I should ask my handler if I can go attend this event. This is in Covington, Georgia, the Newton County Sheriff's Office and the Department of Community supervision will host their 13th annual sex offender Halloween shuttin from six to 10pm on the 31st what is incredibly exciting about this as the offenders will hear presentations from guest speakers which will include the Newton County Sheriff out covey LQV Judicial Circuit super what they pronounce that LKOVOLKOV. Anyway their Circuit Court Judge, speaker from the Newton County District Attorney's Office, Deputy Veronica Williams and probation and parole officers with the Department of Community supervision upon the end of There, the presentations, the people in attendance will have an opportunity to engage in a question and answer session. This sounds very informative, Larry,

Larry  1:26:10  
I don't have a problem with it.

Andy  1:26:13  
They're going to gather up I'm going to guess something of 100 200 people and put them somewhere. And what kind of presentations are they going to have? They're going to try and do cognitive behavioral therapy and say, doing these activities is bad. Like I really struggled to see what the actual point of them having presentations. I think these would be very, very low bar presentations. These are not going to be high end presentations.

Larry  1:26:39  
Well, I would imagine that Sheriff is L. Brown would be doing this particular sense. He's up for reelection next year. This is my hometown. He's up for reelection next year. What the suspect he's doing this. This is not his first rodeo. He was, he was an underling before he got to be sure for what he's doing is making sure that the citizen Newton County know that he's doing everything he can to keep them safe. And I suspect he would be running a campaign type of speech saying that, guys, I'm girls, I'm not here to punish y'all. I'm just trying to keep my citizens safe and do my duty. And I want you to know this ain't nothing personal, but we just gotta we gotta concentrate on keep the community safe. Just one special day and the kids around. And y'all y'all can hang out here for a few hours and maybe learn something and us I mean, he's a very nice guy.

Andy  1:27:34  
I have no doubt about his his content, but the practicality behind it that we do know that kids get hit by cars on Halloween, and not abducted by any of our persons required to register whatever Brenda told me to it's called that we should probably have more traffic enforcement making sure that the areas where the children traffic are much slower driven and safer for the cars to travel with. tell the kids out?

Larry  1:28:00  
Well, he would tell you he's doing that he would tell you that I've got my deputies out doing that. And I'm here. And the judges here and the probation people here they would be doing traffic control hates. I'm doing exactly what you're saying. That's what he would tell you. Fair enough.

Andy  1:28:14  
All right, well, then I guess we'll just let this go.

Larry  1:28:16  
But But no, it's one of those things where, where it's only the supervisor vendors, which have diminished expectation of right of liberty. And it's a very brief period, what a few, three, four hours.

Andy  1:28:29  
Yeah, this one's four hours from six to 10pm.

Larry  1:28:32  
And I would like for some of those people to call in and tell us on the marathon, what what actually is happening if they if their cell phones are confiscated. It would be a good opportunity for us to hear a real life or live report of what's going on. But on a constitutional basis, it's going to be difficult to challenge us because they can say it's a therapeutic community that this is we do this once a year and we will try to make it a therapeutic experience for these guys to to learn better behavior, right? It's one of those things where it's a public policy that may not be a good public policy, but all bad public policies don't magically become my constitutional. Right.

Andy  1:29:09  
I'm with you on that. I understand. I just personally, personally feel that this is incredibly misguided regardless of what the PR stunt is of keeping the citizen safe.

Larry  1:29:20  
Well, there's his opponent is named Malcolm. And what you should do, if you live in Newton County is you should call it Mr. Malcolm's campaign. And you should say I resent what Sherrod Brown is doing and it was your elected sheriff. Will you stop this ridiculous squandering and waste of resources? What's your position and find out what what candidate Malcolm says?

Unknown Speaker  1:29:43  
I think that's a fair,

Larry  1:29:44  
a fair approach. And and I suspect the citizens of Dayton county and you know, I know the territory fairly well. I suspect the citizens of Duke County are probably pretty happy that this has been done on Halloween and tells people that are paying their debt to society or big closely monitor So their kids can be out trick trick or treating safely. I suspect that that, that he's else getting the enormous support from the community for what he's doing. That's why he's been doing it for 13 years.

Andy  1:30:09  
But based on the the Facebook posts of people from the watchman doohickey sheriff in Bucks County, I happened to see some of the posts on Facebook that were made. And he's like, big share for gaping a shave posting those times in new fenders front yards.

Larry  1:30:23  
Great. Thanks.

Andy  1:30:26  
So yeah, the people likely approve of this activity.

Larry  1:30:29  
Well, if we have any listeners that do County, let us know if if this candidate Malcolm is related to the former Sheriff named Gerald Malcolm from back in my era,

Andy  1:30:38  
you know, to be an all historical and

Larry  1:30:40  
that tends to run in the family. So I asked when I was there a couple weeks ago, asked a couple folks that they had forgotten Gerald Malcolm so nobody knew he was related or not, but I'm curious. They have an account of 100,000 Malcolm it's not a not a real real common last name. So it could be that they're related. But no one no one deal with the folks I asked if it was related. shelf, they said, well, it might be so I'm curious if it's his offspring in any way that's decided they want to be sure.

Andy  1:31:09  
To cover Mr. Scalia,

Larry  1:31:10  
that's your assignment and Newton County figure out if Malcolm is related to the former. Sure.

Andy  1:31:15  
Very good. All right. You ready for Scalia?

Larry  1:31:19  
I am ready for Scully. And the purpose of this is to to Scalia gets bashed more often than that I give him credit for for for good. But I do probably give him credit for good from time to time. And one of the best things he did was he he was a bit of a strong supporter of the Confrontation Clause, and he's a big opponent of the evolving standards of the Constitution development standards of decency. And this clip explains a little bit of why he he doesn't believe much in the evolving standards of decency. So this is intended to be fair to him because we're not this is not intended to be a bash Scalia. This isn't intend to show how that doctrine if it's applied consistently to The outcomes that you would get would not be what you would want in most instances in the case of confrontation is exactly what I wanted is on the defense side. That's exactly what we would want. What would make worse Scalia was, but you don't get what you want out of Scalia Buster time, but this is just to be fair to show how he comes up to his resting.

Unknown Speaker  1:32:20  
Very good. Oh, here we go.

Unknown Speaker  1:32:24  
Where is that one way street and the dean, where does it say? The only way the constitution the Bill of Rights can evolve is in the direction of more freedom It doesn't say that anywhere. And you will find that it has evolved in both directions process of law equal protection of

Unknown Speaker  1:32:40  
law is not a ratification for cutting back

Unknown Speaker  1:32:44  
on fundamental rights, cutting back on equality, if it if it is to mean whatever the current society wants it to mean. Sometimes it will give you more liberties. Sometimes it will take away liberties another area where I'm sure I came out the way you remember what Like, was with respect to the Confrontation Clause of the Bill of Rights, which a Supreme Court that believed in an evolving constitution had essentially gutted the Confrontation Clause guarantees to all criminal defendants, the right to be confronted with a witnesses against them, which means the witness has to appear in open court and make his accusation and open court and be cross examined. The court had said all that really means is that any hearsay evidence, that is evidence that isn't personally brought before the court, but somebody comes in and said, Oh, he told me so. Any hearsay evidence must bear indicia of reliability. Well, that's not what the Confrontation Clause said. And I'm happy to say what two years two terms ago we went back to, to the original meaning which had been gutted 20 years early, we overrule that earlier case and said, No, the conference clause means what it says, You have the right to be confronted with the witnesses against you. So what my point is, you know, if you fall in love with an evolving constitution, do not think that it's going to involve an evolving just one direction. It's going to involve evolved in both directions. It does.

Andy  1:34:21  
I think the the assumption would be that if it evolves, it's only going to evolve for the better, but that is definitely not what it would do. It would evolve willy nilly in both directions.

Larry  1:34:30  
That's that's his concern. And and he cited a concrete example where the Confrontation Clause had evolved and a not so positive direction to work. confrontation had gone by the wayside and then thanks to state of our state of the case of ball coming, I believe is what he's talking about. Where the the the alcohol case a case of the of the evaluation by the lab technician, the lab technician was Just submitting a report. And the person was coming and saying this is what the lab technician observed and what they found. And and the Scalia said, No, that's not good enough. That person has to be cross examined or their credentials and how they did their testing and the reports not good enough, you can't cross examine to report and I think that's the case he was probably referring to. But but there's no guarantee that the evolving stands are decent, say what makes you think that society can only get better and evolve in a positive direction. That's his point. That's a very valid point.

Andy  1:35:34  
It was kind of funny at the beginning he in watching the video and you can kind of hear it he gets like, like visible visibly disturbed with her push back on the involvement thing, and he starts like,

Larry  1:35:50  
well, so apologize for it wasn't the best quality but I could not find out that's for sure. I could not find that clip anyplace else. And I've been looking for it for a while. So we went was always found, but it was

Andy  1:36:02  
definitely highly, highly, highly, highly compressed. And it was a fairly old i think is from 2006 is when that clip came out. Um, but tell me from from your much more evolved point of view on how all of this works, how do you use square the circle of the quote unquote, like evolving standards of decency with what the Constitution is, is like protecting against? I guess that's I don't know if I can sharpen that any more than that.

Larry  1:36:32  
I don't know the answer of how you do that, because it's either one philosophy or the other. You believe that? That, that it's the courts job to represent society's evolved thinking by judicial interpretation. Or you take the Scalia position that it's society's job to communicate those evolved standards through their legislative process through the through the through the people's governing process, and Scalia doesn't believe it's his job to do that. And His job is, as he says, society is free to evolve all it wants to, as long as it doesn't go believe beneath the floor of what the Constitution guarantees, you can evolve

Andy  1:37:09  
that you go. Well, my question is going to be is that the the floor as you put it, the bottom level of what our society should be?

Larry  1:37:21  
Well, that's the least of the he believes that the constitution provides a protection at the bottom of what you can't go beneath. There are people who believe that the constitution evolves, that society evolves to provide greater protection. Scalia says there's nothing there. But protection for people with disabilities are nothing in the constitution about gay rights or same sex marriage. There's all this, this is some kind of evolved invention. And you're free to do that. through the legislative process. You're free to bestow greater rights and the Constitution provides, but the floor is the Constitution, and I will protect the floor. But I bought, invent rights that are not there. And that's society's job to invent Additional rights. Certainly, he has made we've played multiple clips about him about the death penalty. He doesn't believe the constitution prescribes at prohibition against the death penalty, but he said if you're free as a society to pass all the laws, you want to prohibit the death penalty if you've evolved, and you don't think the death penalty is a good thing to do this play pass a law that says there'll be no more death penalty. Many states have done that.

Andy  1:38:24  
And on a larger scale than that we could make a constitutional amendment to say that that is now the new bottom bar and capital punishment is, you know, two thirds go through all the states all that other crap that goes with it, but we could make it so that the 28th amendment, I guess would be is no more which would be no more capital punishment.

Larry  1:38:45  
We could do that. But but that's that Scalia's solution is simply that that I will protect the minimum that's the Constitution. I will tech protect what the constitution meant at the time and if you People in today's society believe the constitution provides more than either amend the constitution or pass a statute and provide additional benefits. That's not our job wearing a black black robe to decide. And that's what the Connecticut Supreme Court just said, Gee, if you want 14 year olds to be protected, then you need to say that all 14 year olds are protected from adult penalties. You didn't say that. You said all 14 year olds except for this list of offenses. He was on that list of offenses. If you had wanted it to be all offenses, you should have said that.

Andy  1:39:33  
I still struggle with how do you have it? How do you have a not evolving set a standard of decency, and then also have the ability to mend the, the the constitution? There seems to be exactly that.

Larry  1:39:45  
There's no conflict at all. That's exactly how you evolve the constitution destroys the processes that we have.

Andy  1:39:51  
But the idea then is we are supposed to interpret it as it was written back 240 years ago. So what was considered cruel and unusual punishment, then is Not what we probably would consider it today. But we have to read it as if we were wearing a little white powdered wigs. And how are you supposed to change it? If that's not what the level of constitutionality means then versus now?

Larry  1:40:14  
Well, then then you do what Scalia said you pass a law the Georgia General Assembly inside this state has has repealed capital punishment. If your standards of decency have evolved to that level, that you don't believe it is reflective, the Seidel values that you pass along, repealing the death penalty, that's all you have to do. That's reflective of your evolving standards of decency.

Andy  1:40:38  
But then someone challenges something of like same sex marriage where they, you know, stretch the definition of I guess it's the 14th amendment. I think, the equal protection stuff that that then becomes the new standard, but the Supreme Court thinking of things that wouldn't white powder wigs, they say no, that's not how that worked then. So we don't use that rule. Now,

Larry  1:41:00  
well, well, if if there had been nine Scalia's on the Supreme Court, the same sex marriage being interpreted to be a constitutional right would not have come down that way. Because he would not have evolved in a right of the constitution that wasn't there. He would have forced you to go through the legislative process to procure that, right?

Andy  1:41:22  
I do I do get the legislative process. I just I can't see how to get around not having some evolution in the standards. Even you know, we talked about the Second Amendment all the time, they didn't have anything related to an ak 40 716. Back then they couldn't probably even have conceived of the notion of having some sort of rapid fire highly accurate weapon they were dealing with muskets with balls that didn't have rifled barrels. Okay, so we should judge everything based on that. But what

Larry  1:41:52  
will there again, there's a solution all you have to do is pass a law that prohibits the type of weapons you don't want people to possess. Scalia himself has said the Second Amendment is not absolute there would be weapons that would be unconstitutional people would not have a constitutional right tone. He doesn't know what they are because it doesn't know what they are but it's not an absolute right to possess any type of weapon. But you do have the right under Heller to the individual has an individual right to possess firearms we just don't know to what extent the National Rifle Association says any and all firearms if it'll if it'll discharge a projectile practically anything's okay within all right. So so they don't want you to encroach because they see it as a slippery slope that once you go out again this then you come in for the next that you people who want to take our guns away, you'll never be happened to all guns are gone. So they just they just slide everything.

Unknown Speaker  1:42:47  
Yeah, that's not necessarily an unfair point to take. Well, I mean,

Larry  1:42:52  
I worry about slippery slope so I can understand. But the solution is if your standards are nice and safe involved that you don't want people having ak 40 sevens pass the law we did that back in the Clinton administration and it is sunset after 10 years but we we had the assault weapons ban we could do that. right

Andy  1:43:13  
all right. I think we I think we are a very long and we should shut this this thing down there.

Larry  1:43:19  
Well, how do people support the podcast and in fact I received a comment from someone that said that when we send out our podcast of the written stuff that dress don't wait to to follow how we support I said I thought we had that in the notes how to go to

Andy  1:43:36  
the show notes people would find it on the website but it doesn't when the when the notice goes up with the podcast was released. It's just an email message saying hey, there was a post it doesn't doesn't doesn't give a whole big elaborate response to it on so from there they could then go to the website and find it all.

Larry  1:43:51  
But yeah, the but how did how did we grow the site we have not hit that hundred mark. We have to hit by the end of the year or else we're closing. We're closing down

Andy  1:44:00  
So is that is that the formal declaration that if we don't hit 100 patrons by the end of the year so we have like less than 12 weeks we have less than a quarter we have what like 11 weeks to get there. So we have to get another we have to we have to get a good number you can find it if you go to patreon.com slash registry matters. That is how you support the podcast dollar a month gets you all of the extras and goodies that we are going to be putting forth after after we finish up Episode 100.

Larry  1:44:29  
So and then what what else can they do what if they want to talk to you

Andy  1:44:33  
about to me they should dial my phone number and that is nevermind don't dial that. But the podcast phone number is 747-227-4477 I will say it again to slow it down. Someone complained once about me saying it so fast. 7472 to 74477.

Larry  1:44:53  
And what if they want to send you a message

Andy  1:44:57  
they could send a message you should hop on over to discord Talk to me in send me a message or you can send an email to registry matters cast at gmail. com.

Larry  1:45:06  
And then the bestest of all bestest would be the patreon.com slash registry matters. And that is correct. Become a financial supporter at $1. All the way up to I don't think there's a limit I put in 35 years. The other day at it, it didn't tell me some those. You put in certain number of digits. It won't let you go beyond that.

Andy  1:45:26  
I'm sure there is a limit, Larry, but you just haven't found it yet. Yeah, well,

Unknown Speaker  1:45:29  
I put in 35,000 just to see if it would go. It didn't have any problem with that.

Andy  1:45:36  
Very good. That's, that leads us back to the gross versus net thing.

Larry  1:45:41  
Well, I don't think anybody's gonna take us up on either of those.

Andy  1:45:45  
Probably not so sad. But that's all I got Larry and I so very much appreciate you and I hope I can have you back again in the next coming weeks. And otherwise, I hope you have a great weekend and I'll talk to you soon.

Unknown Speaker  1:45:57  
Thanks, Andy. And Good night, everybody.

Andy  1:46:00  
Take care Bye

Transcribed by https://otter.ai