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 transmitted across the internet. This is Episode 100 of registry matters. Larry, how are you?

Larry  0:19  
I guess I'm here.

Andy  0:22  
Oh, you're here. Okay. You're going to bring out the curmudgeon already? Right?

Larry  0:26  
Oh, dude, fantastic. That didn't think that think we would do this for the same number of years I've been alive.

Andy  0:34  
Do you know we we actually crossed two years on the 22nd of October. That was one that was released.

Larry  0:41  
I didn't know that. And we had what three listeners on that one?

Andy  0:45  
It may that may be a stretch to be honest with you. But before we get going too far, Larry, I have to play something for you.

Unknown Speaker  0:53  
Ladies and gentlemen, would you please help me celebrate the 100th episode of the registry matters podcast. Brought to you by that tech genius Andy

Unknown Speaker  1:04  
and his co host, Larry, who is king all things curmudgeon and also confirm member of the Lincoln Administration. Congratulations guys on the 100th episode. No one thought it could be done i'm sure yet here we are. Congratulations guys. And here's to another hundred episodes

Larry  1:29  
and we're gonna shut you down if you

Andy  1:31  
have a problem with these thoughts FYPFYFYPFYPFYFYCYPFYPFYPFYPY

Unknown Speaker  1:56  
work on the fly

Andy  2:00  
problem with the songs few songs.

Unknown Speaker  2:04  
We're going to shut you down.

Unknown Speaker  2:08  
What's up, Larry, how are you?

Larry  2:11  
Well, that was kind of that was Darth Vader wasn't it?

Andy  2:15  
That was our super patron Mike in Florida.

Larry  2:20  
Alrighty, that was that was pretty cool a lot, a lot, a lot, a lot of repeats, but very, very funny. There were a lot of repeats.

Andy  2:28  
And before we get going any further, I'll play you a couple more there. They're just pretty short ones.

Unknown Speaker  2:33  
Hey, guys, I just want to congratulate you on your 100th episode of the podcast and encourage you to continue to bring us insightful, well thought out information regarding our legal system and ways we can improve it. I wish you all the best in the future.

Unknown Speaker  2:51  
Are you ready to dive into the breaking news?

Larry  2:54  
I like that one who was that?

Andy  2:56  
Friend of mine that lives up the street His name's Andrew. Andrew

Larry  2:59  
okay. Thank you, Andrew.

Andy  3:01  
He is one of my liberal do gooder friends.

Larry  3:04  
There are no liberal blue gutters in the state of Georgia.

Unknown Speaker  3:07  
I would almost be inclined to agree with you there. But before let's see let's we can dive right into this for the time being.

Andy  3:17  
So I guess the breaking news would be that on Tuesday, the Georgia judge, he he granted the injunction against the butts county

Larry  3:26  
knuckleheads. That would be that would be true the United States District Court in the Middle District of Georgia. Judge Mark Treadwell, I believe is a Treadwell or Treadway anyway. So federal Treadwell granted an injunction against the Bucks County Sheriff's Office for their poorly designed and misguided attempt to reduce compel speech for a second year. And we're gonna we're going to have a deep dive later, but as What were your thoughts about that amazing judicial decision? I know that it was it wasn't a great.

Unknown Speaker  4:09  
It was great. The judge went above and beyond and did all this research for it, and we'll discuss it later, but it is a wonderful opinion.

Andy  4:18  
So I will like it. And tell me this, though, didn't he say that he was going to I'm going to take it all the way to the Supreme Court, by golly,

Larry  4:27  
he has been quoted as saying that and and, you know, this one thing that that that always encouraged people to do is to really think about the ramifications of what they're doing because right now, his his impact is limited to this case in the Middle District. If he appeals to the 11th circuit, it's going to broad the impact because 11th circuit is going to agree with us and and if he's not enough to take it to the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court continues with its unabashed support for first amendment rights, he's gonna lose their He's going to potentially make the same mistake to people that are still having the same sex marriage issue litigate about Supreme Court. He may, he may just help us set the precedent for the whole country. So think about what you're doing Sheriff law.

Andy  5:14  
I like it. Like, I want to read something to you that I sent to you on June 23 of 2017. Do you have any ideas what I sent you on June 23? To 2017? Sure I have that.

Larry  5:25  
I have that right here on my diary.

Andy  5:29  
It reads. Hi, Larry. Let me first say that I completely realize how much work this is going to be on both parts. The amount of technology going into this kind of mind numbing, that is only balanced out by the amount of legal analysis that is necessary to delve into this with any level of authority, along with professional friendship relationship behind it. Therefore, you and I are uniquely qualified to pull this off. In abstract My idea is to have a weekly flexible podcast where a discussion of 30 to 60 minutes occurs about various subjects related to the right industry. This includes news items, SCOTUS legal challenges, legal terms legal strategy, advocacy, etc. The list of subjects is whatever we want, the amount of time to have the discussion is also wide open. Who are we and why are we doing this? I know, excuse me, I only know one other person doing some kind of level of content like this, but no one else is doing this specific thing. Whereas you are the legal expert. I will play part of the facilitator to ask questions to you, my people to understand. Since I am by no means a legal person, I will dig information out of your brain to hopefully bring it down to my people to understand this isn't everything, but it is most of it. I know. It's a boatload digest. My question is to you. Are you interested? or missed? Andy? Do you recall?

Larry  6:43  
It sounds vaguely familiar and what did I what was my response?

Andy  6:47  
Well, I mean, we are here Episode 100. So after dragging you through the mud, kind of kicking and screaming for a little while, then October 22 is when we released the first episode, so it took a couple months to get things Roland,

Larry  7:01  
I can't imagine I would have even answered an email like that in an email, I suspect I would have called you to act did actually answer that.

Andy  7:08  
Uh, the answer may have been something like, sure we could give it a shot. And and can you answer the question of Do you know what a podcast is? Or did you know what a podcast was?

Larry  7:18  
I had no idea. That's what I'm saying. I can't even imagine I would have answered that. I would have probably said what? Right, right. I had heard, rush and different people, Sean Hannity talk about the tune into the podcast, but I had no idea what they were talking about. And I'd heard people say you find it on your favorite podcast app, and I had no idea what they're talking about either. So I would have probably called you and said, What on earth are you talking about is what I would have done?

Unknown Speaker  7:45  
Yeah, I understand.

Andy  7:48  
So to continue with the theme of the evening,

Unknown Speaker  7:52  
hey, Rob.

Unknown Speaker  7:55  
Episode of registry matters. Happy anniversary. Larry and Andy,

Unknown Speaker  8:03  
such a great podcast. always enjoyed it. And I hope to hear many, many more. Happy Anniversary 100th episode of registry massive.

Unknown Speaker  8:21  
Do you know who that was there?

Larry  8:22  
Oh, I think we all know who that that's, that's that's one of our loyal patrons from up in the Northeast Corridor.

Andy  8:29  
Yes. That is Charles from New York, who, who has made claims that he couldn't live without the podcast? I think he has said something along those lines. Maybe that's a too too dramatic.

Larry  8:41  
Well, he managed to make it a number of years before we were here.

Andy  8:45  
Yes, that is true also. But then let's let's back up for just a second. We heard a voice a minute ago and there wasn't any sort of proper introduction Who was that? Who came out during the the breaking news

Larry  9:00  
Oh, that would be Ashley. Right more cloud the New Mexico Liberty and Justice Coalition staff attorney, former prosecutor and now she's come over to the right side, but she had this delusion that she was. She was she was doing. She was doing good work as a prosecutor and you could do more to administer justice. But I mean, what kind of delusion was that, Ashley, to think that you could actually do justice as a prosecutor?

Unknown Speaker  9:25  
It was completely delusional. I went with it for 25 years, but at some point, I had to wake up and here I am on the side.

Andy  9:32  
So I still don't have like a deep dive with you on on that whole detour, maybe like a maybe a Patreon extra that we could do just because I'm baffled by the concept because all the stuff that we cover here just seems to be prosecutors are not our friends at all ever, except for people like Larry Grasmick

Unknown Speaker  9:49  
works because everybody forgets that prosecutors take an oath to do justice, not just to prosecute people and win cases and they completely forget that Oh, the minute there's a newscast Anything else in front of them?

Andy  10:02  
Unbelievable. Well,

Larry  10:02  
well what I can say for Ashley is before, before I ever knew her, personally, that we would the most defense lawyers associations have chat lists that they that they share help with one another and brief library and stuff. And I've been a member associate member of our list for a number of years. And occasionally, there was gripes about prosecutors and cudnn. So there was never any gripes about Ashley. They were kudos from time to time about how reasonable so I think that that in fairness, to say that there are prosecutors who take justice seriously. They do look at the ethic at the case on the evidence and they do decide to do the right thing. But unless they're elected as the prosecutor, they have limited discretion because even those who who allow more discretion, others ultimately there is a boss in the corner office that was limit a corner office or did he have a middle office

Unknown Speaker  10:59  
room has multiple Officers

Larry  11:01  
that's the DA for the Ashley last word but but sometimes prosecutors who want to do the right thing are not allowed to do the right thing. And it's not just them it's it's it's the one the one who has been elected is the one where you have the biggest beef because they they they're the leader and they set the tone for how the office operates.

Unknown Speaker  11:22  
That's very true. Larry couldn't have said it better myself.

Andy  11:25  
Let's uh, to Richard, just to just to throw shout out Richard gave us a one time donation there he was not comfortable with the the Patreon platform but the Richard that's up and he says Harvard up there that way you probably know who I'm referring to.

Larry  11:39  
That was so nice or Richard. Thank you, Richard.

Unknown Speaker  11:42  
Thank you, Richard.

Andy  11:43  
Yep. And let's go into article number one. And this is coming out of nola.com This is a team beat up a stranger he recognized as a sex offender now faces hate crime count. When did beating up a sex offender become a Crime

Larry  12:01  
it's not here in my state as it as it what state is so sorry I didn't catch that one

Unknown Speaker  12:07  
yeah, I'm assuming it's a Louisiana since it's no law

Andy  12:11  
which which area looks like it's right downtown. So it's a south of Cleveland Avenue play one evidence right downtown New Orleans. That is a here we go like you know, we cover this on a pretty regular basis that people either mistakenly find somebody that looks like somebody else, there was a guy that looked like Johnny Depp about a month or two ago in California and then this guy to beat up a stranger. I'm this has to be some sort of like a stepping stone for us to get these cases into court in a larger sense that there's there's literally a public safety issue for anybody that's on the list that they could just get the shit beat out of them randomly.

Unknown Speaker  12:52  
It's titled vigilante justice here. It's interesting about the hate crime though because they're promising it on the fact that he turns targeted his victim and his victim was a stranger. That's a pretty broad hate crime. A lot of the state just have very narrow tail tailoring of the definition of hate crime. But I'm curious to see what he actually ends up either pleading to or getting convicted of.

Andy  13:14  
Would you be so kind to expand on what you just said about a broad definition there versus narrowly tailored?

Unknown Speaker  13:20  
So what they're promising it being a hate crime on is that his victim was a stranger, and that he targeted him solely for the fact that he was a registered sex offender. Most hate crime bills are a protected class statute, meaning you're old, you're disabled, your sexual preference, things like that. So this is a pretty broad reading of a hate crime statute, but we'll take it

Andy  13:46  
right. And what about what I was just saying a minute ago, that this seems to be an avenue to target things in a larger sense about the public safety. I guess you have to have a victim always you couldn't just then transfer this to Take it to a different state. And, you know, if there isn't a crime if there isn't a victim, you couldn't even try and bring challenges, could you,

Unknown Speaker  14:06  
um, you may or may not be able to what actually comes to mind is when you publish on the registry, because this is exactly what happened. Somebody gets published on the registry and they're a victim of vigilantism. A lot of the websites that you see will state that your own you're not allowed to use this for any other premise except for purely informational, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, in an effort to state Hey, we're not encouraging vigilantism. We're trying to keep the people on this website safe. But in fact, they can't. They can't keep them safe, because this is exactly what happens. you publish somebody's picture. Somebody is going to go after him. And I think Larry will actually deal with that a little bit later when we get to the Halloween site, Halloween lawsuit, because that's essentially one of the arguments that the judge makes to

Unknown Speaker  14:53  
Larry. Well, well,

Larry  14:55  
if I were, if I were all this person's defense team, that the People you have to you have to think and and the the mindset of which team we're on. our criminal justice system doesn't have a code beyond where we corporate try to work together for the collective good to come up with a with the best outcome. There's some systems designed that way, that's not the American system, our system is one of an adversarial approach. And so if I were on the defense side, which is where I've always been, I would go regard to the fact that he beat up a sex offender, our job is to defend him and make sure the state does not secure a conviction. So I would just take what Ashley gave me as a gift and I would run with it and try my best because the charges dismissed because I would say that this is an overly broad statute that allows for whimsical to not even prosecution and and it doesn't it's not sufficiently tailored. So that informs the person of ordinary intelligence of how to conform their conduct the law, it's already against the law to beat people up. So So I would say most you've got the simple the simple version of this crime and he's overcharged because hitting him with a hate crime. Your hate crime stash. It's so broad, broad that anybody can be charged with a hate crime. And I would try to derail the prosecution or at least minimize the damage because that's our job in the defense. And I think Ashley would agree with me on that. If we're on the defense side, our job is to wreck the state to train or to minimize the damage.

Unknown Speaker  16:15  
Now, you're absolutely right.

Larry  16:17  
Well, but people, people, they had the Kumbaya idea that we're supposed to, somehow another come in and tells a prosecutor. Yeah, he done it. Yeah, what came with Dennis not our job? Well, we're defending people, our job is to make sure you don't win. And our job is to look for ways to minimize the damage if you do win. And right now, if I want his defense team, that's what I would be arguing that this is a regular battery or regular assault, it doesn't qualify as a hate crime, and that enhancement that he would receive should be dismissed. Now, that's not my personal view. But you have to separate your personal view from your professional view. If you can't do that, I think you should get off the case. What do you think actually do should you stay on a case where you have a personal personal bias That you can't do any job effectively.

Unknown Speaker  17:02  
So you can I think everybody has personal biases. If it's going to stop you from doing your job effectively, ie you hate your client, and you truly can't put that aside, then yes, you should get off the case. Most defense attorneys are pretty good about going ahead and defending their client, even if they feel that they're guilty, because they're entitled to a defense, they're entitled to due process. And it's funny that you say that Larry about being overbroad and, and that would be the defense because that would be a great defense. And as a prosecutor, essentially, I would put this in front of a jury and state. If this person is willing to do this, how many times will they be wrong and do it again? So they go out, they think somebody rape somebody, they think somebody did something, and they go, and they take the law into their own hands. We have laws for a reason. And that's what I would argue as a prosecutor in this case. I'm not sure how they're going to get by the hate crime. I'd have to see the Louisiana statute on the hate crime, but I do think that there's a good idea meant to be made that we need to protect people that are vulnerable. And I do think sex offenders are vulnerable because they're published and out there.

Larry  18:07  
Well, that's a that's a whole separate question. I have, I have every belief. First of all, I would not want anybody to go on a public registry. But if we're having a public registry, and we're going to put a bull's eye on people's back and on their head, we absolutely should have a horrendous penalty for attacking those people. So I agree that that should be the way the law is. But my job is to defend based on the not the way the law should be, but the way the law is be and if the law is be doesn't qualify, this is a hate crime, I'm going to do my best to knock you out of that because that doesn't give you the right to tell you as a prosecutor don't have the right to make the law plus you'd like it to be you have the job to prosecute within the law as it is

Unknown Speaker  18:48  
to shame Larry to shame.

Larry  18:54  
So, so anyway, we would be at each other professionally and we would go out and have a Afterwards that I'd say, to the way it used to be collegial. I think actually, I don't know how it's been changing over the years. But when I first started this business, that the prosecutors were very collegial I mean, we will document we just had would be ending at the courthouse steps. And and we would go on about life, and talk about our kids and whatever else and the whoever won but have no relevance for the rest of the day. Is it still that way? Or is it got uglier and uglier because of the tone of the discourse that's going on out in the country? Or has that changed the working relationship between the prosecution and defense teams?

Unknown Speaker  19:36  
So at least here in most of the counties, and there are some counties that it's going to be that it's never going to be like that, but for example, in our bigger counties, here, it is like that. We go out to lunch, and then we go back into quarter we argue, and then we discuss it later about, Oh, I can't believe that you made that argument. Oh, I can't believe that, that you said this. And we do it. jokingly and it's For the most part, it's really collegial. Because what people have to remember is in order for the justice system to work, both sides have to come to the table and do their job period, whether it's adversarial, whether it's fight everything. If it is going to be fight everything, nothing is going to get done. So it's better to work on this stuff, you can work on it and save your battles. And that's pretty much what causes that collegial ism. Plus, we jumped sides all the time. So it's important that you never really alienate somebody that might be on your team at a later date.

Larry  20:36  
So Well, well, the adversarial system, I think is very confusing to a lot of people because they they think that that that is a defense attorney, you have some obligation to expose the truth. We do not have any obligation whatsoever to expose the truth. And that they said, Well, your job is to get to the truth. Our job is not to get it the truth if we chose this irrelevant the Our job is to defend the person who's been accused, it has all the weight of the state or the federal prosecution coming down on them, and to make sure that they meet all the elements of the crime that they've charged, and that they have sufficient evidence to convict a Trier of fact beyond a reasonable doubt that our clients did did that. Our job is not to say, well, gee, we did it. So how can we work this out? Now, if we can work the solution out that's favorable to our client, with the overwhelming evidence, but our job is not to help the state get to the truth? It's

Unknown Speaker  21:30  
a defect. And

Larry  21:33  
they they say, how can you do that? That's exactly what we're supposed to do. We're supposed to say, Mr. Prosecutor, you took our person in custody, you have the hundred thousand dollar bond said, You're the one who's bringing this charge. How could you prove it? It's not our job to do anything to expose the truth.

Unknown Speaker  21:49  
Right, the burden of proof is always going to be on the state, make the state prove their case, make them lay out all the elements of the crime. Doesn't matter if your client is the guilty or not, all you have to do is ethically defend your client to the best of your abilities. And that again means putting your bias aside. So even if your client is a werewolf, or some evil creature that does terrible things, it doesn't matter, they are entitled to a defense.

Larry  22:17  
And in fact, a prosecutor has a higher ethical duty than a defense attorney does. Yes. And people roll their eyes when I say that the prosecution has a higher ethical, I can't recite the rule verbatim. But they have they have an ethical standard that's even higher. Now. I'm not saying they all live up to it. But they have a responsibility beyond what we have

Unknown Speaker  22:36  
on this side of the aisle. That's because a prosecutor is supposed to also defend the constitutional rights of the defendant. They're supposed to represent the community. They're supposed to represent the victims and they're also supposed to uphold the Constitution. So it's a pretty heavy burden. And one that I wish more and there are great prosecutors out there don't get me wrong, but I wish more of them understood what it is that they ethically needed to do.

Unknown Speaker  23:01  
Let's move on.

Unknown Speaker  23:03  
Well, let's see. onions.

Unknown Speaker  23:06  
Carrots, meaning mustard. All I gotta get some lettuce

Unknown Speaker  23:15  
and soda can get some soda. And

Unknown Speaker  23:19  
well, let's see what else. Oh yeah. Happy 100th Episode FYP from Ryan.

Unknown Speaker  23:28  
So cool.

Unknown Speaker  23:31  
And Larry, congratulations on your 100th Episode FYP

Unknown Speaker  23:37  
Hello, good afternoon was your matters Christian from Minnesota, Minnesota for congratulations on 147 you will be up to Larry's birth 125 correct. You're kidding.

Unknown Speaker  23:54  
Happy 100 very proud of you. Hopefully you make it to two and three and four. It keeps going that way. Again Christian from Minnesota.

Unknown Speaker  24:02  
Have a great afternoon. Great episode tonight and YD

Unknown Speaker  24:15  
Keep up the good work. Well, y'all continue listening.

Unknown Speaker  24:19  
Everybody else does, too.

Unknown Speaker  24:23  
I have no idea who that was.

Andy  24:28  
That was Larry.

Larry  24:29  
I wouldn't have a guess.

Andy  24:31  
That wasn't somebody with NF in the middle of their initials was. See that

Unknown Speaker  24:35  
was.

Larry  24:37  
That was that was there was Emma.

Andy  24:40  
Let's bounce on over to the Boston review article about Halloween and stranger danger. This article is kind of fun because it points out that pretty much the whole thing is just some smoke and mirrors. It's a scam. It's a scary thing. And there's literally nothing to be afraid of from that there's no there's no razor blades or chemicals laced in candies. I mean, there have been a case or two of these things, but it's all bogus. And somehow the public it's in our consciousness in our psyche now, and this, this article, actually kind of a longish article but just blows the whole thing out of the water. Well, there actually were some razor

Larry  25:17  
blades this year, Andy. Oh, I got arrested for razor blades. I'm going to send you the link so I didn't know about that. Yeah, I've said I've never heard of it. But now if this is to be believed, there has been a razor blade incident.

Andy  25:32  
Okay, so out of 300 million Americans 323 30 whatever it is, and an annual Halloween extravaganza where approximately a third of the population is under 18. And they're going to go look for candy at their friends houses. We have one incident and we're going to shut down all of Halloween and do all this trunk or treat and, like completely controlled I. Why can't kids go walk around neighborhoods and go knock on doors and get scared and toilet paper people's houses like I don't know, that's how I grew up. And that doesn't seem that like, you know, it's just an annual thing people kind of lose their minds a little bit and then everything goes back to normal.

Unknown Speaker  26:09  
Let's be realistic too, because the razor blade thing I think happened to her last year as well. And there is 00 tie to a registered sex offender. Nothing to do with it.

Unknown Speaker  26:21  
So right.

Unknown Speaker  26:22  
I love that this article starts talking about Michael Myers and how we sleep turned it into that and the Halloween and the LSD scares from the 70s and 80s. And then the boogeyman and everything else and Laura Palmer, they have a lot of good references in here. And the reality is it comes down to exactly what they're stating, there is zero evidence that Halloween has any impact whatsoever on on people that are on the registration or even people that are on probation, that it doesn't, there's nothing to link the two. This is something that's been created by the media and used as a scare tactic.

Larry  27:01  
Would you say Ashley, this just the media has been a willing partner. But Wouldn't you think it would be law enforcement that created this through the I mean, the media just simply tagged along, but they created these, these multi agency units to go out and they invite the media law. It wouldn't be more appropriate to Brett Brett blames us on the law enforcement industrial complex, that they've that they've created this fear, just like they've created the fear about runaway crime and how dangerous it is to go outside your house. It's law enforcement. And the media, of course, is a willing partner. But if law enforcement didn't have these Gestapo units running door to door say we're checking all these dangerous sex offenders, there wouldn't be a story with her.

Unknown Speaker  27:42  
So I guess it's one of those things which came first the chicken or the egg sort of thing, because some of the media does this. And then we have the whole perpetuation that there's horrible stuff happening on Halloween and all the sex offender stuff. I think the law enforcement actually either do reacts to it or continues to perpetuate it and just blows it up too. So I'm not sure which came first. I'm not sure which is reacting to which, but it is it's a bad cycle that they're just feeding off of each other on. So good

Larry  28:13  
guys. Great point. Great point. Because for all we know, the bat around the story first, say that hires or sex offenders allowed to trick or treat. And the phone started ringing up police chiefs headquarters and sheriff's office saying, What do you mean this? I mean, so Truly, I don't know who started it. But I know law enforcement certainly has done more than their share of if the law enforcement didn't provide the resources. Of course, there's a political price to be paid for that. But if the sheriff of Burlington County did not provide all the resources, there would be no one to follow with the camera would there?

Unknown Speaker  28:48  
No, there wouldn't. But the other thing is, is that they don't and then we go right back to the media, stating Oh, and the police are refusing to do something about it, and then they face the political pressure. So I don't know I don't know who did it first,

Andy  29:01  
but not to jump the gun on the Georgia thing the deputy sheriff I forget her name again. She she was she seemed to be the driving force behind creating that whole thing because the the county decided or the city, whatever, they decided to stop doing Halloween in the square. And there's Oh my god, now we're going to have kids running around the streets. We got to keep this sex offenders locked down. So that's why they came up with the idea of putting the signs out. There's just because they stopped doing the trunk or treat thing in Jackson Square.

Larry  29:28  
And they've been doing that for about 80 years on Jackson Square, but go ahead.

Andy  29:31  
Right, right. But they decided not to it for whatever reason that is Chamber of Commerce said no, we're not doing it. But then they somehow that made the extension that they then had to go put the signs out. Again, in the in that court thing. I don't remember if it was the judge or the the Georgia attorney. Did he bring up saying that? Is there any incidents that you can find where there's been some sort of violation on Halloween and like, No, there's nothing out there. But they still wanted to push this issue forward.

Unknown Speaker  30:00  
Right and we'll deep dive into it but one of the things that he brought up as a result of that was that there was nothing to show that just because there was going to be an increase in trick or treaters because they didn't have that trunk or treat thing going on that it was actually going to increase any incidents that already weren't occurring. So it was really diligent by the judge

Andy  30:21  
told me this Larry from the politic side of the equation articles like this To what degree of impact do they have in in in fighting these silly rules and that happened to us

Larry  30:36  
they have an enormous impact

Andy  30:37  
do they really want I was I thought you're gonna say nothing.

Unknown Speaker  30:41  
I thought he was gonna say that they

Larry  30:43  
did to do it's like the the if I followed the question if I've got what you're what you're getting at but but the like the elected officials are very sensitive to the community. Contrary to popular belief that they go do their own thing. They do not go to their own thing, they go to what they perceive the majority of the people that they hear from want, and they can't, they can't read minds, but they do read emails, they do hear feedback from constituents. And I remember had this discussion after we had our meeting, our first meeting in Georgia, the Locust Grove library, and I said, Well, you know, the representing the will of the people and that will an old are not remember I said, Yes, they actually are. Well, I don't think that well, it doesn't matter what you say. They gauge public opinion about what they hear. And public opinion is scared to death of sex offenders, right. They believe they believe all these really awful things. And if a politician dares to go against public opinion, it will be only a few a sliver that will survive the wrath that will come to them for not being responsive and the same thing for the victims advocates, the victims advocates can come in and they can cry, and they can show emotion and they can talk about some thing and you don't dare question them, and ask them if their memory could be I mean, they come and tell a story they have 41 years ago. Now, I'm not saying that something bad didn't happen 41 years ago, but very few of us can remember it graphic detail. What happened 41 years ago, I will confess I can't and graphic detail, but they will come in. And some of the stuff they'll say, will be just beyond a badge. But you can't dare call them out on that. You can call out the sex offender lobbyist, but you can't dare call it a victims advocate whatever they say. No matter how they say it is to be believed. And anything that they ask for is useful to say Well yes, that's very reasonable. Yes. Oh, they shouldn't have a right 200 almost course they shouldn't have a right to an attorney. They shouldn't have the right teenagers Of course they shouldn't have any right to anything. Yeah, you you have all the rights because you were victimized course we don't know whether you're victimized or not. All we know is that you said self and that's not proved beyond a reasonable doubt. But the lawmakers are very very moved by the stories and the politics is very very risky as far as opposed to concerned there are a few that could survive but not many who can survive if if if you're being labeled as as soft on crime and sex offenders in particular.

Andy  33:17  
But definitely an article like this doesn't take down the whole structure. You know, the Boston review I got to think is a decent decently circulated publication with enough eyeballs I just, I I'm skeptical this does much other than you know, take it down a teeny little notch but I got to think that most people reading this are like, Oh, no, everything happens on Halloween. So I've got to keep my kids safe all the time. And these people are terrible. I'm just kind of skeptical. This article has any sort of impact.

Larry  33:48  
Well, I'm looking at it from the other side of what what the way you're looking at this this article is as saying that Halloween stranger dangerous is as as a bit The public doesn't believe this article. This is like the statistics that I did in the conference in Atlanta, when the guy almost exploded like that movie scanners that that was.

Andy  34:13  
That was probably the last movie you saw Larry.

Unknown Speaker  34:22  
Christopher Walken.

Unknown Speaker  34:26  
I saw that in the theater when I was like two.

Larry  34:31  
So the average person believes that's why children weighs 230 pounds by the time they're in the ninth grade. And because they the community believes in this danger, this Boogeyman and so the lawmaker looks at it and says, Yeah, that's right. But I guess the way to rephrase it is the lawmaker can't dare go tell them. You can't stand in front of group 150 people and say, You people are all screwed up. This is all imaginary and your thoughts Try doing that when you're in a public office and tell me how that goes over what for you but so this this, this article has a tremendous impact on lawmakers in terms of they the ones who think it through this uh, yeah, it is crazy, but it doesn't change the reality of their voters.

Unknown Speaker  35:17  
You know, it's really funny about this too. On that note, talking about not changing the voters is that so you see article after article where they cite the extreme danger that sex offenders are they stopped side all these inaccurate statistics and then you have articles like this that state know 97% are either molested by a family member there, the stranger danger is a myth. But it's funny you don't see that getting repeated. You see the other one where it's like, oh, every single person who walks down the street and counters a razor blade on Halloween sort of thing, but you never see the real statistic actually get repeated.

Larry  35:55  
So well. Well, I'll give you an example. The the he's no longer at all. And I don't think you ever test to run it again because he's in his 80s. So we have a representative here named Tom Anderson and he was republican but one of those who who was reasonable not that you could have very, very pleasant conversations with and he would admit that, that what, what the constituents belief was not true and he in a conversation, we both read NCSL together, we were talking about the sex mentor stuff, and he says, what I help you as much as I can. He did help us as much as he could. He said, I help as much as I can. He said, but I'll be roasted by my constituents. He said, he said, even though we know this stuff isn't true that recidivism is not off the charts. He said we've we just had that Mexico study done at that time. He said, we we've even got into bicycle study that says that, they said, but that's not where the people are. And I keep pointing the finger back at the people because it's the people that have to say so. We live in a representative Republic where the people direct the legislators not the other way around. That'd be they are represented. 10s of thousands of people like here, a senator represents about 50,000. And a state rep represents around covers about 40,000 people. And they try to take into account what that 40 to 50,000 people want. And they don't say, well, FYPFYPDUFY I mean, that's not the web representative Republic works. Yeah. So, but so anyway, but yes, it is a good article, but it's very impactful on them internally. But in terms of translating to, to better public policy, don't expect, don't expect it to do that, because that's not where the people are.

Unknown Speaker  37:39  
One last thing just to point out before we move on, all I wanted to point out is that in the article, it does reference another article that talks about sex offender laws being published in the Boston review as being draconian and unconstitutional. I think it's interesting that Boston seems to be on a wave or Massachusetts actually because I've had some good cases coming They're recently on it. So I think that they are trying to do what they can to persuade the public there.

Unknown Speaker  38:06  
Hey, this is Jeff from Kentucky. Most people will know me as Captain crazy on Twitter. I just wanted to call him and congratulate both Andy and Larry on 100 episodes of the registry matters. Plus, registry matters is the first podcast I ever listened to. And remains to this day my favorite podcast. I had no idea there was anybody out there that pushes back against the oppressive registry. Through registry manners, I have made

Unknown Speaker  38:34  
contact with Marcel.

Unknown Speaker  38:37  
And I am even able to contribute a modest amount every month to the podcast and

Unknown Speaker  38:43  
the registry podcast, promotes your matters podcast brings hope to the hopeless and I look forward to it every Saturday. The listeners attempt to aspire to funny things that Larry says as Larry isms. My favorite is when he will say something terrible that resistors have to deal with Such a homeless registrants at 10 years in prison because they didn't have the dress to register. And Larry will say I don't see a problem with it and

Larry  39:10  
I laughed really hard

Unknown Speaker  39:13  
on my phone

Unknown Speaker  39:16  
and congrats on 100 episodes and as always SYP Andy Larry, this is Justin Patreon member from Tennessee. I want to call and congratulate you all for your 100th episode. This is a great milestone You're doing a great job. I have been greatly enjoying the podcast. Y'all have been turned out great information, great insight. And you're really helping us to better understand the laws and situations that we face on a day to day basis. So I appreciate your hard work. I appreciate all that you have done for us. And once again, congratulations and as always YFYP

Unknown Speaker  40:03  
New Mexico's Liberty and Justice Coalition

Unknown Speaker  40:06  
wishes to congratulate registry matters

Unknown Speaker  40:08  
on his 100th episode. Thank you fellows and keep up the good work.

Andy  40:14  
He almost slipped back into his country accent there, I think at the end.

Larry  40:20  
Thank you. Thank you, Justin. You've been one of our loyal patrons. Thank you for those kind words, everybody, but Justin's been nice to us.

Andy  40:31  
And just before that Jeff has been a patron probably for about a year as well.

Larry  40:36  
So we we appreciate all of our loyal patrons. I was telling john talked to him before we started recording I said I I just it's mind numbing that people appreciate us as much as as the as the patrons do, because as tight as I am, I can't imagine that I would do the same thing. So it's, it's

Andy  41:00  
Well, I got my patreon bill today, Larry and it was $28 and I only $1 of that goes to registry matters. I just do the donation the system works. So $27 I support other people's content.

Larry  41:12  
So well, you're amazing. I don't have any support other than two hours but people

Andy  41:21  
All right. Well, you guys, you people are going to go into this new mexico something or another that I have no, no, no idea what it is. And we will continue with the shenanigans later.

Unknown Speaker  41:30  
Mary, we have great news, don't we?

Larry  41:33  
We do. We have been we have been gearing up for for lawsuits for some time. And we finally put our team in place and we have launched our first lawsuit. And I'm gonna let you carry the most of the lead on it. But I'll tell you that that we are not trying to get people off the registry at this stage. The result may be that people may be removed from the gadgetry. But Mexico lines clear we do not have an obligation to register here just because you have an obligation another state does not that does not create a registration obligation here. And I've even had some discussions where people very close to me who think that it does I say, No, it doesn't. And our law is that you have to have you have to be convicted of an offense. That's equivalent, not even the North Carolina language where it says substantially similar. Ours is equivalent and and Ashley, I see a big difference between substantially similar and equivalent in terms of the legal standards. What do you think,

Unknown Speaker  42:42  
oh, there's totally a big difference. The difference being that when you say equivalent, it has to match up with what the elements of the statute for that particular offense actually state. So if it says you have to intend to do something, then you're out of state conviction. You had to have it intended to do something. And if it requires using the telephone, then you have to require have to have in your particular instance that you use the telephone. So it has to match.

Larry  43:11  
Well, and I'll give an example. I was talking to one of our patrons before the program today, and pay solicited a minor in another state. And some states protect all minors that are under the age of 18. Our state believes that if if you are entitled to have sex, it's 16, which is our age of consent, except for when there's authority over the other person, that it stands to reason in order to get to the point of having sex, you would probably have to solicit, you know, Unless Unless just somebody just grabbed you and they think you're so so hot today that there's no discussion. So in order to get to the stage of having sex, which is lawful, it would stand to reason that there would be some discussion about sex. So therefore, if you solicit a person who is above the age of consent, that is not a registration a fence here, because it is lawful to propose to have sex with someone who's above the age of consent with this person was in a state where that that were where they actually don't worry about too much information. But this person is currently residing in a state where they don't have that protection. They cover everybody if they solicit a minor. So if that if that person were to move to New Mexico, that conviction is not equivalent to anything we have here. Yes, it is a sex offense, but all sex offenses are not registered. So our argument for this lawsuit is about whether or not the person has an equivalent offense, and that's our beef here is that we don't have a process in place for that equivalency determination to happen so Ash is going to tell us more about that about the case. But but that's our beef and and and take it away from here report where we go with this lawsuit.

Unknown Speaker  44:53  
So where we're going with this lawsuit is that this is the first step there is case law. That came out in 2012. And then there's been subsequent case law that states that you are entitled to due process when you move here to see if you meet that equivalent equivalency test. So you don't just show up in the state and they take a look at it, which is actually what they do. But you're not supposed to be if they take a look at and go, Oh, the statue is the same as this statute. So you have to register for 20 years or lifetime every 90 days. What they're doing here is they're doing it that way. The case says that you have to get due process meaning you have you're entitled to notice you're entitled to a hearing and you're entitled to an appeal if you disagree with their translation. The other thing that's happening here is there are about 1000 people that are still awaiting translation, meaning when you show up here and you have to go register, they automatically default you to lifetime and every 90 days or 20 years and every 90 days Or some consideration, oh, you had to register that states you have to register in this state or, I mean, they're making these these requirements without actually meeting the test, which is wasn't an equivalent offense, you get a hearing the case law suggested that's in front of a court, which they're not doing. Basically, you show up at the sheriff's department, they make a determination or they bump it up to the Department of Public Safety, they make a determination and they basically are just going off a grid or metric. So our last thing is to force them to do what the case law said that they needed to do and what statute so they needed to do, which is give people due process. Don't just bring them in and make them register by default for every 90 days or lifetime. And while you're waiting that translation, then it should default to the least intrusive one, which would be the 10 year annual. And so that's what we filed the lawsuit on. It's very specific. That's all Dealing with at this stage and some of the people that we named as plaintiffs may very well not have to register. Some of them may have to register exactly as the way that they're registering now, and some of them may have a lesser duration and a lesser frequency. So it's across the board.

Larry  47:16  
So you're so you guys were saying that people deserve a break when I come to Mexico? So if you had to register an Oregon, Washington chapter register here, I mean, that's crazy talk. If you're a sex offender in Indiana, your sex offender in Colorado, why would that just create a sanctuary a thing where people could just pour in here by the dozens? What, what makes people like you take to do something like this.

Unknown Speaker  47:38  
So let's be real clear that we're not stating that anybody is entitled to a break. We're not stating that we need to become some sort of haven or anything. What we are stating is that regardless of who you are, if you're entitled to due process, which you are entitled to due process as part of this, you have a constitutional right to get your hearing to get your notice to get your appeal. To get all that stuff done, and not just sit on a registry for 10 or more years being published, if you don't even have to register in the first place. So it isn't about breaks it's about a constitutional right to do process and that's what we're fighting for.

Larry  48:15  
What did those people give up that right when they when they committed their sex offense and Oregon? I'll be what why did they come here to start with why? Why can't they just stay where they were they made their creeps up there and Oregon, why they come into the land of enchantment.

Unknown Speaker  48:28  
People move here for all kinds of reasons Larry's family employment, the sunshine, the turquoise skies. I mean, there could be a lot of reasons why you move here, and you don't walk away from your constitutional rights when you are charged with an offense even when you're convicted of an offense. That's why we still have aliases and written and Davis and federal lawsuits because you don't give up all your constitutional rights. And that's what we're proposing. That's

Larry  48:55  
that's the stage. That's the answer I was looking for. We have a full faith and credit Claus, we when you when you leave one state, if that state has gotten away with doing crappy things, that doesn't mean we should emulate the crappy behavior. Just because Georgia registers people for obscene phone calls that have to minors that's not going to force us to register people. We're not going to be driven to enact and carry out misguided policies that you've done in Georgia, you can register as many people as you want to bankrupt your state. But we have chosen not to have as broad a registry as you have in Georgia. And we're not going to be forced to have that our law is it has to be one of our sex offenses on our list, or it has to be an equivalent from another state jurisdiction. And until you can change the law, you did put your hand on that Bible, you did swear you were going to uphold the law. And that's what we're going to hold you to, you're going to follow the law. And that has to be an equivalent. And if you want to try to change the law, you can try to do that that you're right as well. But until the law says something different. It isn't equivalent from another jurisdiction, not just merely just act you have to register and we're going to try to hold you to the That's the whole purpose of this lawsuit.

Unknown Speaker  50:02  
Right? We have laws in place for a reason. We have case law that came out and stated we have these laws for reason. So yes, we are just forcing people to do what they have already been told they should be doing,

Larry  50:14  
that it's not about a break. That's that's not nothing to do with it. When people are registering sex offenders. That's a regulatory framework. And some states may want to regulate more tightly and regulate more people. We don't if you look at the population, they have the analysis of how many per population they had their grid of the 50 states. Were all DeLorean we don't have as many as Oregon hats. We choose not to register as many people here but that that doesn't mean you got to force goes you got to register button the browser that doesn't mean we have to do that here. Exactly. You people done.

Unknown Speaker  50:53  
You people.

Andy  50:55  
You just wait you just wait. I have a surprise on the people front

Unknown Speaker  51:02  
This is Joshua, the host of the decarceration nation podcast. Larry Andy 100 episodes of registry matters is a massive accomplishment. You started out talking about too many is a really controversial topic, but you did it with such earnestness, intelligence and compassion. The we're still putting out new episodes every week. I really enjoyed being a part of two of these hundred episodes. Congratulations and keep up the incredible work.

Unknown Speaker  51:29  
This is Mr. Non this calling to congratulate you guys on your 100th episode. My $1 a month is money well spent. Oh, and by the way, FYP Andy, Larry. Hey, it's Nate from Iowa. I just wanted to give you guys a shout out 100 is a big deal. I want to let you know that if it weren't for you guys. I wouldn't be listening to this cutter podcast. I thought I was all alone out there. Standing on my pedestal. preaching. But I just want to say thanks, guys, and a big fit. Hi, congratulations on episode 100.

Unknown Speaker  52:11  
Rebecca, and I get I don't get on discord as often as I like. But I do like to listen, when I get a chance. Just let you know that I was not a person who knew anything about the registry or the law never gave it much thought outside of like what I've read in the news. Y'all have done a great job showing me my own emotional biases, my own ignorance, of great job in helping me see things through a point of view that I had never really considered before. So keep up the good work. I do try to pass along what I have learned. So I hope you know that y'all are making a difference. And FYP

Andy  52:52  
Do you remember talking to Rebecca, Larry, I do. Good. Just wanted to make sure that you knew who that was. So shortly thereafter, She became a patron also. She is she's definitely one

Larry  53:02  
of those in a big way. She's a do gooder. She's also a nurse. Oh,

Andy  53:09  
did you? Did you hear the the promo that I had Rick do for us on the podcast on the on the livestream the other night? Yes. And you actually if you have you heard this? I don't think so. All right. You might want to mute yourself because you're gonna laugh. All right.

Unknown Speaker  53:24  
I'm muting. All right.

Unknown Speaker  53:30  
rich history matters more than just podcast. It gives one the deep insights and analysis of what's going on within the registry. it peels back the layers of what is obvious to expose the hidden traps as well as the tricks of how to create affect change. Each episode is a deep dive into how we Yes, we can make Jane Do you believe that registers are unconstitutional. Your answers yes like mine, then each of us needs to stop waiting. someone else to do it. And we need to step up the plate to take our fine. We can no longer sit by and wait for other people to find our battles. We need you

Unknown Speaker  54:13  
to step up speak out. But wait, you would do.

Unknown Speaker  54:20  
You start by listening to register matters episodes to learn how to become empowered, how to affect change for each of us in our families that are affected by the registry. For more information, visit registry matters.co or search registry matters where you listen to your favorite bug gauge.

Andy  54:45  
Tell me your honest opinion nationally.

Unknown Speaker  54:48  
I think the only thing that would have made that to a different level would be if he was playing the dueling banjos and deliverance behind is free.

Andy  54:56  
I probably could have done that. But I would have ended up getting some sort of takedown notice somewhere.

Unknown Speaker  55:04  
There, I hope you appreciate, like all the effort that went into this.

Larry  55:07  
I'm sure it was a lot of effort. And I appreciate everybody who took the time to to get those all sounded like phone calls. I've learned to tell the difference.

Andy  55:16  
I'm happy that you've been able to figure out the difference. You did hear that the first one was not done over the phone, right? Yes.

Larry  55:22  
But when when when he suggested we switch from the phone. I said he was crazy, but I can now tell the difference. I'm very glad.

Andy  55:31  
Before we go on to the next article, I think I need to start throwing these out there at you, Larry. So this one is a This one is a tribute to you. And actually since we've been talking about liberal do gooders, and it says a darn liberal

Larry  55:46  
do good democrat podcasters thrown out of office talking such craziness and liberal do gooders on the other side of the aisle. We can't make this happen. They'll they'll tell us when we Want more money for schools or anything for social ills? They say, oh you liberal do gooders all you think of us more money, and all you want to do is throw more money to problem. You liberal do gooders are always out there trying to undermine law enforcement. And then you gripe about what a dangerous society you live in, and then you try to tie our hands so we can't do our jobs. All we're trying to do is provide increase the element of safety. And I think in case of California, I'd like for someone to correct me if I'm wrong, I believe the voters in California through one of their famous referendum processes I believe that they passed the citizens referendum to prohibit the Supreme Court of California from from from interpreting the California Constitution to provide greater protection than the US Constitution because the California Supreme Court got to be under a bunch of liberal do gooders it back I think the Chief Justice when I rose bird, if I remember, right,

Andy  56:53  
that was my liberal do gooders montage.

Larry  56:56  
I didn't realize I had to use that term, so much through the through the hundred episodes,

Andy  57:01  
there was a while and that's only the ones that I could find that we had done transcriptions for I started maybe around Episode 50 or so on. Start, excuse me, someone just said Starcraft and chat so I start saying Starcraft. I'm doing the transcriptions. So there could be other ones out there.

Larry  57:21  
Well, I throw that around because I, I genuinely believe that more of our audience leans towards conservative political ideology and I do that because that's typically the things that a conservative would say. And and I want you to understand that I do very much consider both sides of the argument. I consider if you don't listen to other people why they believe what they believe and it's just crazy for you to think you know what also I do. I do try to understand where people are coming from and what they what they say that's that liberal do gooder is thrown around a lot and and when when they You don't really have a really deep explanation for not liking something, then that's a way to it's a dismissive way to get rid of your, your, your point of view is to say, Well, he's just a liberal dude. She's just a liberal do better. Yeah. And it has a very dismissive thing. So what I say that I'm obviously being I'm, I'm repeating what I've heard from people who are just very dismissive if you if you have a more progressive point of view, that somehow or another that you're, that you're mentally deranged, and you're just you to stop worthy of having. So

Andy  58:33  
I don't know that those are mutually exclusive. They'll there you don't have to be one to be the other one.

Larry  58:38  
But, but, but you know, the people, the people who have who have their conservative views, that doesn't magically make them just because they're conservative. There's some brilliant, brilliant people that are conservative, some of what they believe in is misguided, but they believe it fervently. They believe, people who believe there's still this very day, they will know about how many times we've cut taxes and The budget deficits gone through the stratosphere, they continue to believe if you cut taxes, that somehow revenues go through the roof and you have a balanced budget. They believe that, and I don't know why, but they do. And so therefore, you have to get into a deeper dive with them and say, well, let's just look at the numbers. And and and if you can get them look at the numbers, then you can have a rational discussion. But they've heard that all their their life and they just believe it, because they've heard it.

Andy  59:24  
Actually, you probably don't know this. But when we go through these little iterations of talking politics, we are purposely trying to drive our numbers down to zero.

Larry  59:35  
I don't think we're trying to do that. I was trying to give a real example of what of the point I'm making is that that people, for whatever the reasons they believe without evidence, and then they get mad, that law enforcement is able to get people to believe things that don't have evidence. Well, you need to also look in the mirror and see what you believe, that doesn't have evidence if you're capable of being susceptible to believing things that doesn't that that Evidence just doesn't support. Why would you be so frustrated that others can believe things that the evidence doesn't support? You're just like them. So we all have to be conscious of believing things. And that's why I have the bumper stickers. Don't believe everything you think.

Andy  1:00:14  
I agree with you wholeheartedly. But how do we get? I mean, you know, we're talking about left right politics at the moment, but this extends immediately over into the registry issue of how do we get all of those people to stop thinking that the registry actually keeps them safe, does any sort of positive anything, maybe just have it law enforcement only maybe that would be the most effective kind of compromise. But, you know, they still believe the way that Halloween article described it that people think that there there's going to be some person standing behind a bush snatching your kid as soon as you walk or as soon as you turn your back on them.

Larry  1:00:51  
And I Andy, I don't know the answer that how do we think people would have to want to spend more time doing deep analysis of things and and that would require maybe giving up. Some things are more enjoyable. being informed requires a lot of work.

Unknown Speaker  1:01:06  
So not only does it require a lot of work, but it involves asking uncomfortable questions of, of people. And I'm going to give you an example that, that if people ask more questions, they might have different opinions. So sitting in Atlanta one day and there's a ridiculous amount of registrants in the city of Atlanta, I don't even want to quote what the number is because it's super, super high. And I'm talking to the police officers there who were and I'm asking them about the whole registration and asking them okay, so when a child goes missing in that critical 48 hours, you can undo your system zone in on, okay, a little boy went missing. Let's look at sex offenders that are involved with little boy abductions, and they're like, nope, and I said, Okay, so you can narrow it down to at least the scope of The vicinity like this happened within a six mile radius this child went missing. And you can narrow it down by the offenders in there. Nope. I said, So what exactly is it that you can do? And they said, Oh, we start calling in. And I want to say the number was like 17,000. It was a ridiculous number. We start calling them in one by one. I said in 48 hours you do that? They said, Yeah, there's no way for us to do it. I'm like, but if people started understanding a lot of that stuff behind it, and started asking those questions of the lawmakers in their area and everything else, the education might be illuminating for them.

Andy  1:02:38  
But when the news media publishes all these things, that that just riles everybody up and confirms their bias already, you know, we can't make any inroads with any sort of critical thinking logical thinking anything of that sort, because they're just in their thought bubble.

Unknown Speaker  1:02:54  
I like the term Thought Bubble. It's more of a persuaded by emotion. They're really based on the most

Andy  1:03:00  
Yes. So Larry, when you figure that out, you'll certainly get paid the big bucks.

Larry  1:03:05  
I'll have it figured out by next episode. Very good.

Andy  1:03:08  
Let us move on. I have a bunch of these players. So you just gotta be patient. Let me play them.

Unknown Speaker  1:03:13  
Andy and Larry, congratulations on your 100th episode. Love your podcast. Keep up the great work, and FYT.

Larry  1:03:21  
That sounded like me,

Unknown Speaker  1:03:22  
a long time listener and graduations on 100 episodes. And

Unknown Speaker  1:03:29  
Good evening, Andy and Larry, this is will sending out a huge congratulations upon the 100th broadcast of registry matters. And Larry, I want to thank you for your guiding wisdom. It's really a huge advantage having someone that dates all the way back to a blink and guiding our way. And I have to say it just like you do, we do not support the registry and Things are not how they should be there how they is be. And when they put their hand on that Bible and they take an oath, they're going to serve and protect. And that's by George, by golly, that's what they're going to do. But Congratulations, and have a great one.

Unknown Speaker  1:04:19  
Oh, that's cute.

Unknown Speaker  1:04:21  
That he did a perfect imitation of Larry and put your hand on the Bible.

Andy  1:04:27  
Larry, give us one of those hands on your Bibles.

Unknown Speaker  1:04:29  
I put my hand on that Bible.

Larry  1:04:36  
And I swore I was going to do my duty, and I will protect my community. And that's what I'm all do by golly. And if I have to take it to the Supreme Court, that's where we'll be. And just

Andy  1:04:49  
for reference on that one, he's got, you know, 3000 posts on his Facebook page saying that we support you Sheriff long, all the way. Unbelievable. And how much just out of curiosity real quick, how much would it cost to bring a case to the Supreme Court to defend that? Hundreds of hundreds of thousands of dollars just in legal fees alone and speculating Larry, how much do you think the budget of Bucks County would be?

Larry  1:05:14  
Well, as I learned, the Buzzcocks. I was looking at what his fuel source would be because fuels is this sort of central element for anybody who's thinking about going to the Supreme Court. And under the Georgia Constitution, the sheriff has the authority to spend any amount of money they want to, and they just

Andy  1:05:35  
literally has an unlimited budget.

Larry  1:05:37  
He has an unlimited budget. Now it's limited to what I mean if he were to spend so much money as a bill he had to go up so much, because that's how it would be resolved. It would like if it was a really a budget buster, all the next on the next fiscal year cycle the Commission's would have to increase the mill levy that the county pulls out of their property taxes. Counties typically have property taxes and then in Georgia, they also have local options to XS where they can buy VN additional sales tax that goes to local governments, but that those primary revenue sources, the candidate would have to increase one of those if he were, I don't think spending 150 $200,000 is going to cause a mill levy increase. But he, under the Georgia constitution, he can spend wherever he wants to, and the public is gonna support him on this because, as you mentioned by the Facebook postings that he have those 3000 or any of them critical of him?

Andy  1:06:27  
I don't I don't believe so. I mean, I only looked at a handful, but they were all certainly like

Larry  1:06:33  
so so he's, he's gonna have wide public support. So even if they, if they had to reallocate some funds from another agency, I suspect that unless it was something very critical that the public's going to be supporting them, so so he, he's gonna he's going to be able to help fund us any, any, any, any at every turn, he's going to have more resources than we do.

Andy  1:06:53  
Okay, see, I thought it was gonna be contained inside of the county and that would then cut into some other budget that they would have down the line.

Unknown Speaker  1:07:01  
Well, it kind of does. I mean, even if he's got the unlimited ability, he's still okay. So he can spend these funds. But that may mean they don't get new squad cars, that may mean that they don't get new ammo, that may mean that they can't do a lot of the things that they intend to do. So he will have to take it from somewhere. And like Larry said, if it requires a increase in melody, most people will not vote for an increase on a melody or anything like that, even if it's to fund schools. So they don't want their taxes going up. That's the way they read that even if that isn't the case, so I think it can be contained. I think it's a matter of figuring out whether he thinks he's unlimited or not. Okay.

Andy  1:07:46  
Should we move on to this crazy article for Wisconsin Public Radio, lawmakers consider a pay bump for Wisconsin Public Defenders. This is complete heresy. They should be doing this work based on just their their their their generosity to society?

Larry  1:08:02  
Well, I think I'd take it a step further, why should people they know that they did what they were accused of doing, and why do they even they they all come into court, and they ought to take their medicine. And they ought to say, Your Honor, I'm sorry, I done is guilty. That's what they should do, don't you think Ashley?

Unknown Speaker  1:08:19  
So I actually take it one step further, I think, Oh, my God, just dispense with, with justice altogether, that we just cut the budgets of all the judges, we take away their salaries, and we take away all the prosecutor salaries and we take away the police. Because, I mean, if they did it, just send them into court. We don't need a justice system.

Andy  1:08:37  
We don't need a court. Well, we could just bounce right over to the next article where the cops are also the judges or the I'm sorry, the prosecutors. So it's all on the street and we have Judge Dredd and they could try you and then execute you right there on the street. Problem solved completely, exactly. began due process and the Constitution.

Unknown Speaker  1:08:57  
I know I don't know why we even bothered with the Constitution. I don't know why it's upheld for all these years. But I know seriously,

Andy  1:09:05  
let's move into the seriousness of this that they're going to look like they're going to increase the budget by 4 million over the next two years, I guess is how their their wording this.

Unknown Speaker  1:09:16  
So it's funny that here in New Mexico, they attempted to do this a couple of years ago and somebody that I know that's actually a really close friend of mine, who is a contract public defender led the charge against it because she was afraid it was going to bankrupt the state, which I'm sure was to the chagrin of all the other contract public defenders because I too am a contract public defender on the side, and we don't get paid anything. We do this basically because we believe in justice. So the fact that we have to eat and the fact that we have to pay bills and stuff just seating is I know so overrated, but it's

Andy  1:09:54  
couldn't that then be worked in a different angle and the prosecutors could go well We could prosecute fewer cases so that we don't have to hire as many public defenders at the higher rate I guess that's that like a nice you're getting patted on the head now aren't I? Sweet little Andy. He doesn't know anything, does he?

Unknown Speaker  1:10:17  
Yes, that was a year so pretty pot. Yes. So

Andy  1:10:23  
no, bail me out.

Larry  1:10:28  
I like that laugh. I think that's pretty cool.

Andy  1:10:32  
Was I think that's the question wasn't

Larry  1:10:34  
sick, was sick. But see, that's what we own this podcast I have relentlessly said that. That of the tripod of the judiciary of the judicial system. On our on our part of the tripod, we have no control. There's only the primary controller of the heavy docket that is so heavy that WeChat if that's the prosecution, they can control the docket. The judge can control the I like it to some degree by holding prosecutors accountable to timelines and granting motions to suppress which will actually extinguish cases. So the judges can make their caseload slider. There's only one tool that a defense attorney has to make their since they don't. They're not the input. They don't create the input. There's only one tool that a defense attorney has to reduce their caseload. So all the people that moan and wring their hands about their their their caseload being so heavy, they have power to make their case loads lighter. Why don't they utilize that power? You were prosecutor for 25 years. When you guys moan and groan divide about your caseload. Why don't you break your cases?

Unknown Speaker  1:11:41  
Ah, you people. So, essentially, it's not about you're not to consider this budgetary aspect of it. You're not to consider what is bogging down the court system. That's not a consideration. Again, it's right back to let's do justice. Bring the cases. It needs to be brought and don't bring the ones that don't need to be brought. It seems real simple to me.

Larry  1:12:05  
Okay, but why did you bring so many cases? Not you personally, but why does the prosecution? Why is it that we have conversations on this podcast about something we roll our eyes and say they actually brought a case for that. If you're so overworked? And does the We Are the breaking point? Why do you bring a case where the victim doesn't want to participate? And where you have an incredible just such ridiculously we cases? Why do you bring those cases? If you're so crushed under the caseload? Why do you break those and there is an answer I'm looking for. But why do you bring cases like that?

Unknown Speaker  1:12:44  
I don't know if it's the answer you're looking for. But a lot of it goes right back to what you were talking about earlier. Politics. That's exactly. That's exactly.

Unknown Speaker  1:12:52  
Office making those decisions.

Larry  1:12:54  
That's exactly Yes, I was looking for because some people listen this thanks to the prosecutor. gets to pick their cases. And I suspect every day when you walk down or every on a regular basis, you were handed two files, yet only the vertically organized offices were there very few of them went up an essay vertically organized, I mean that the the prosecutor is in from the ground floor from a diet but from the initiation of the case all the way to conclusion and sentencing. Most most offices are horizontally organized, and I don't know how yours was organized, but but it was vertical. Okay, so you were one of those who who did have some sub sub sites awake and cases that you decided to indict? Because like it Burlington County once they once they once they've been indicted, that that that prosecutor never sees that case, again, they're doing they're doing grand jury all day, if they're not actually following it to it to its conclusion.

Unknown Speaker  1:13:49  
Right. Berta, Leo is actually moving to a vertical there is somebody that does the grand jury for him but they take the cases to preliminary hearing and they are in from the get go versus the way that it Used to be, which was completely horizontal. But yes, you're absolutely right. And if more offices were vertical, if they got involved, for example, on homicide cases I would be involved from the second, the officers called out and said, Hey, we have a dead body here. So we were on scene with them, when you work a case from beginning to end, you know, your strengths and weaknesses. And it narrows down the number of cases that you bring.

Larry  1:14:23  
Well, well, I'm a big believer in that. So then then in a vertical organization, then you have only the politics of the elected prosecutor. What what what, what, when, when the prosecutor when the DA DA says, Well, take this to Grand Jury anyway, even though you don't think it's the case? Even though you know, you can indict a ham sandwich. You don't think it's the case that should be indicted? What's your answer to that? When it when when the when the person in the corner offices says indict this case? What what's a mosquito supposed to do? Say No, sir. No, ma'am.

Unknown Speaker  1:14:53  
So my response to it it's funny because I just had a friend reach out to me asking for help on a case that I know for a fact That I ran into the exact situation. And what I said is I'm not going to do it, but I'm sure you can find somebody else in the office to do it. And they did.

Andy  1:15:09  
They also say that they're going to add 60 prosecutors across the state Can one of you possibly like is that a significant bump?

Larry  1:15:17  
Oh, God, that is a significant bump. That's huge. That's billions and billions of dollars.

Andy  1:15:23  
And obviously, that many more cases coming down the pike, so they could increase it by 60. And then not increase the public defender. Well, it doesn't say the public defenders, they're just increasing the pay.

Unknown Speaker  1:15:34  
So it may not be I don't know if Wisconsin is one of those states. For example, in the state of Georgia, there are certain I don't know if it's across the entire state of Georgia but like their contract different public defenders are required. If they're a member of the state bar and they are a defense attorney. They are required to do public defender duty in some of the counties. I don't know if Wisconsin is one of those states, New Mexico is not New Mexico. We have we have to put in for it. We get a contract for Right. But essentially, it may not be that there are more cases coming down the pike, it may be that each prosecutor is carrying a huge, huge volume of cases. And so they're just asking for more prosecutors to divvy up the load,

Andy  1:16:14  
and then buy, like a trickle down kind of thing that would then create a larger demand for attorneys. So then maybe then more attorneys would step up, and they would start getting cycled through if they're part of that plan that you just described that they would then be cycling through the public defender space, it would just correct itself on its own kind of sort

Unknown Speaker  1:16:32  
of, eventually it would the other thing that people don't think about it, though, is that then you need more judges to because they have to start here the number of cases if you actually have the defense and the prosecution, and you have enough of them ready to go to trial. You need more judges as well. It's a trickle down effect. Absolutely. Andy,

Andy  1:16:50  
and you would be more judges like you said to and I'm I'm I'm just going to point out that this is under the new governor after scott walker got Was he turned limited? Larry?

Larry  1:17:02  
No, he he lost. It just

Andy  1:17:04  
lost all right, he lost and they completely hand tied the the new governor from being able to do things to

Larry  1:17:11  
Well, well, that that's that's that's a trend of around the country they did that North Carolina there's something about when some of these states like particular in the south that wasn't so much in Wisconsin, but they did have a majority of Republicans had the majority, when they when they see that they're losing control the executive branch and their final acts of office. And they did it in North Carolina. They pass legislation to limit the power of the of the incoming government. And they call it a real line. But as they say, we're rebalancing and we're relating, realigning the powers. It's, let me call it what it is. It's actually sore loser and trying to hang on to power as much as you can. But that's what they've been doing is they've been taking powers away from from from incoming governors. And of course, those of the people who claim that they believe so much a due process us, and how how dedicated they are to the rule of law. But and and and when they have the votes and they have the executive and what you would, they would be both. And a lot of them would be like dogs themselves, because some of them maybe did not get reelected. But they come into these post election sessions of the legislature, and they strip the powers of the incumbent governor, and they think that somehow good. But next, this article, the hourly pay of Wisconsin, for those who haven't been on the podcast, since we talked about Wisconsin, they had been the lowest in the country at $40 an hour. And this is supposedly, it doesn't say how much but it's going to be a bump for private attorneys who take on the public defender cases. So maybe they're going to get them up to maybe 60 bucks an hour. I was thinking 41 so it's it's kind of amazing that I mean, $40 an hour, as poor as we are, and I tell people, our per capita income is really low. But but we're not at $40 so that we have some really low flat fee. On our on our flat fee scale for the public defender cases, those those have not been adjusted nearly enough. But, but but old are we building? I don't think we're anywhere near 40 or we actually now so, so we're better off of that.

Andy  1:19:18  
Very good. I'm going to play the last little batch of these, but then I have some bonus material for us, Larry.

Unknown Speaker  1:19:24  
Okay.

Unknown Speaker  1:19:26  
Hey, this is Jen. Happy 100 episodes. I just want to thank you guys for giving us a voice. I community support and resources to keep our families or herself safer

Unknown Speaker  1:19:37  
and also want to disturb you. Also, I want to thank you both for the hope that you provide us because you're giving us the knowledge to learn how to push for change ourselves. Happy 100 and of course FYT Bye.

Unknown Speaker  1:19:55  
Hi, Andy and Larry, longtime Patreon supporter for all penna just happy 100th episode you guys do a great job. I look forward to it every week. And of course to the schools that believe in this system and so forth and anybody else FYP

Unknown Speaker  1:20:13  
Hey, registry matters. This is guy Hamilton Smith. Congrats on the hundredth episode and keep up the good work.

Andy  1:20:21  
All right, we can go on to the final article before we do the Georgia deep dive, which I kind of teased it a minute ago is the appeal podcast when police officers double as prosecutors. I never would have considered this to be a thing because Larry, you just mentioned about the the tripod. And this seems to be a very big conflict of interest that the person that is going to arrest you and book you, whatever would be the one that would then prosecute you. This doesn't seem right to me. Not right now.

Larry  1:20:51  
I'm going to let ash I will actually draw the bustle this pain that she's put on that arena.

Unknown Speaker  1:20:57  
This is very, very common. I'm surprised There's only nine states that do it but what they're talking about are doubling as a prosecutor for misdemeanor charges. In the state of New Mexico. We have Metro courts, magistrate court, and then we have district courts and on the appeals court everything else but for your magistrate and Metro Court. They essentially prosecute DWI is traffic ticket, resisting arrest, everything up to a full misdemeanor. The district courts are reserved for your felony charges for the misdemeanor charges except for DWI. And a couple of the other offenses like domestic violence. Officers prosecute in a bunch of the cases and in magistrate cases, they do anything that does not require a jury trial. If there's going to be a jury trial and it's a full misdemeanor, then the prosecutor is asked to enter but like, for example, our restraining orders. Officers actually are still prosecutors on him even though you're entitled to a jury trial on him. So this is not a foreign concept. And essentially what it does is allows the officer to come in and make a plea deal with, with a person and allows them to dismiss it. It just cuts out a layer of it, and it's for your lesser charges. Oh, just one more thing on that is interesting because it says here meaning thousands potentially face life altering criminal records without a public defender. Even if the officer is a prosecutor here, you're still entitled to defense counsel, anytime you are facing a jeopardy of liberty, the Constitution states that you are entitled to counsel. Do you do you feel that this is as big a conflict of interest as as? I think it is? No. Oh, can you tell me why you think it's a conflict of interest? I don't think it's a conflict of interest. Because it's, I mean, basically, it's, if you've ever had a traffic ticket and you go to traffic court, the officer is also a prosecutor, if you think about it, because they get up there and they testify. And they're telling the judge exactly what happened. Most of the time, you're there going No, I didn't. No, I wasn't speeding or anything else. That's all this is, um, if there's going to be anything different, like a jury trial or anything else, then a prosecutor gets involved.

Andy  1:23:09  
I mean, I guess it's like, you know, watching a show like judge walking or whatever, you the people are just standing there at a podium and they're, they're going back and forth with the judge. And so they're prosecuting and defending themselves respectively. And then the judge makes the decision at the end, I guess, is that what this is?

Unknown Speaker  1:23:26  
Exactly? That's exactly what it is. It's informal like that. Their officers standing there, they submit their citations, and the judge either believes them or doesn't believe them. And same thing. It's exactly like judge

Andy  1:23:39  
Walker. All right. Let me shoot it all down. Tell me where this all wrong.

Larry  1:23:42  
Well, it's hard to shoot it down because because until just a few years ago, and I can't tell you the year, in addition to police officers prosecuting complaints, we had private private complaints and those ashes been around long enough to remember when a private party could record criminal charge. You remember those days, don't you?

Unknown Speaker  1:23:59  
Oh, yeah.

Larry  1:24:02  
You got some horrible complaints that people brought but, but but again, since it's an adversarial system, the prosecutor, I mean a police officer. If you had an attorney, the police officer was a witness. And what Andy is getting out i think is the police officer is also the witness and he or she is the attorney. And it's kind of like the person who defends themselves that you kind of have a problem cross examining yourself. But but but but the police officer is a professional witness. They do this all day long. Yes. And they know the but they know how most police officers that have been to a Data Wise they know they know to lay the foundation for the breath card before before they move for admission. And sometimes Rookie rookie prosecutors don't know that. Officer a loan officer, so you want me You want me to read the score? Yes, read the score. for god sakes. That's what I asked you. What happens? What happens when you read that? score with the foundation hasn't been laid Ashley

Unknown Speaker  1:25:03  
to miss true.

Larry  1:25:06  
So, so you've got a police officer who's acting as a as the prosecution team. And the police officer is also a witness. I don't, I don't see it as a bigger problem other than the fact that the police officer is much better prepared as an attorney issue than you are. So if you don't have representation, you're essentially the same posture you would be in if the prosecutor was on because the police officer is going to be a far better prosecutor than you're going to be if you don't have any legal training.

Unknown Speaker  1:25:35  
And I do see that as being the bigger issue if they are actually forcing people to proceed without a public defender or a defense attorney. Aside from again, a traffic ticket or something really minor on a dog barking citation. But it's anytime you are in danger if there is any type of incarceration. That's a possibility you are entitled to a lawyer. So I would see that It's been the bigger issue than then the conflict of interest. And I totally get what you're saying I'd be but that's, that's why I don't think it's as much of a conflict of interest as long as you have a lawyer who can counter that professionalism that officer.

Andy  1:26:11  
I mean, that's,

Larry  1:26:13  
I think the test is as 90 or more days, not more than 90 days before, I don't think like on a petty misdemeanor works 90 days or less, or you're entitled to, to to a lawyer for a petty misdemeanor.

Unknown Speaker  1:26:25  
So even if it's 90 days or less, for example, like on driving on a suspended license, if there is you are in danger of going to jail, you are entitled to them.

Larry  1:26:33  
So if for any period of incarceration, they're entitled to any period of incarceration is what it comes down to. So So if a judge directly if I'm sitting on the bench of my magistrate judge or magistrate judges, just for those who don't listen, who don't, of course, they're listening, for those who don't understand. The judge in New Mexico to be a magistrate judge does not have to be an attorney.

Unknown Speaker  1:26:53  
It can be most of them are not,

Larry  1:26:55  
and some of them are verified. Judges are not attorneys, so I'm not knocking that and somebody Not very good as judges. But but it as a badge of honor Magistrate Judge sitting here is without without a law degree sometimes get gets very confused in terms of what due process is required of them. And and they have there's a magistrate a training that they go through but it's very limited to a matter of days or a week or something is that it's not it's not very significant.

Unknown Speaker  1:27:23  
Now go to an annual conference, but still it's a lot of it is up to on the other cases for the prosecutors of the defense attorneys to actually educate that judge.

Larry  1:27:34  
Okay, but if I'm a magistrate judge, and I'll say, well, you're entitled to an attorney. If jail we're going to be a sanction, I will proclaim from the from the bench before we undertake this trial. The jail is not on the table. Do I have I gutted that person's right to an attorney if I take incarceration out of the equation as a sentence? No. I have got

Unknown Speaker  1:27:56  
no Even if you say what your judges not supposed to say. I'm not going to send you to jail, therefore you're not entitled to an attorney. That's not the standard. The standard is. Does it fit the statute? Potentially Corporation?

Larry  1:28:10  
So I can't I can't I can't take that off the table is. Okay. Nope. We ready to move on. We are

Andy  1:28:18  
all right. Before we get to the Georgia thing, I have to play this for you, Larry and try to contain your excitement. Okay.

Larry  1:28:23  
All right. It's like Why don't you people do that. I mean, you claim you're an organization that cares about the offender. Why don't you people tell us where we can live? For God's sakes? What the hell's wrong with you people up there. But again, have you people forgotten what you did when you were 14? I don't understand. He's paid his debt to society. He was a juvenile. What do you people go to stop? Like the California prisons when they got grossly overcrowded? The federal judge says, Well, I can't make you people build prisons. That's your prerogative. But what I can do is tell you that there's a limit to how many people you can put in these and you people tried to commit me already. You people failed. Now you read it again, he doesn't get to say that right? It says a little something about who we are in this country, particularly you people in Naperville. Are you going to do? You people up there and Berlin are really strange people goes off and commit suicide. As I said, at the time we talked about this, you people ought to be ashamed of yourself. And they said, What? What are you talking about? I said, I need to get a driver's license. You people do get licenses? Oh, yeah. You got a secretary of state. Well, there you go. There. There's my

Unknown Speaker  1:29:28  
people montage.

Larry  1:29:33  
That was when I was in Michigan. I was trying to figure out where to get a driver's license. And, and in Michigan, you don't they don't have a motor vehicle division. They don't have a Division of Motor Vehicles. And I said, Well, I've got it out of state license can expire. So we're not like like a driver's license. I said, Oh, Secretary of State I said to what? You go to the Secretary of State, I said, No, I don't need to register to vote. I need a driver's license that they Yeah, Secretary of State, and I said, It's okay if that's what you say. So then I asked another person and everybody was telling me the secretary of state but are you going to believe it? You got the secretary of state so that's that's who does driver's license that Michigan Secretary of State

Andy  1:30:14  
and since you just said the do what I have to, I wasn't gonna play this one. This was like bonus, but now I got to play it. It feels to me like in many of these states, they are aggressive about this stuff because they have an enlarged medulla Blanca, what? It's an area of the brain, like alligators, they're aggressive. The center of the brain, it's just like it. There's certain people that are just aggressive because maybe they have just like, maybe their brain is wired wrong.

Larry  1:30:45  
I never could ever do it what that word was like, you learn me something.

Andy  1:30:48  
So a little peanut. It's the little walnut sized like sending your brain is the fight or flight section of your brain. All right, there you go. You did the one

Larry  1:31:00  
What is that one more time so we couldn't get a

Andy  1:31:02  
straight medulla Blanca

Larry  1:31:05  
but doula are born. Yeah,

Unknown Speaker  1:31:08  
one got act up.

Andy  1:31:10  
It is part of your brain. And at say so what you have to do is there's this movie called the water boy and has Kathy Bates incredible actress and Adam Sandler and it takes place in New Orleans, Louisiana right out in the bayou somewhere. It's incredibly funny, but there's this whole thing about the reason why alligators are ornery is because they have a enlargement to LA Blanca. And he's like, anyway, it goes on. But it's funny. It's very funny. That's where it came from someone in chat that night had said, I bet you you can't get this into the podcast and I said, bullshit. I will get this in the podcast.

Unknown Speaker  1:31:47  
I take that challenge and raise you to this.

Andy  1:31:49  
And now there's somebody in chat named Brian in Louisiana. What's the odds of that? All right, let's cover this Georgia deep dive. We are already added hour and a half. And so you have five minutes go.

Unknown Speaker  1:32:05  
Alright, well, this is Ashley's.

Larry  1:32:05  
But I'll tell I'll tell people that the, as we said in the in the news teaser, that we have a great victory of the state of Georgia. And I'm going to set up the why is it important? And then Ashley can do those legal analysis. But it's important because we we operate under a rule of law in this country and we don't agree with all laws. But in Georgia, we do agree that that there was no law for the sheriff to unilaterally impose a requirement that people post the signs. And we felt that we have to draw the line somewhere we don't like the states where they have laws and there are a number of them. And some local communities have pause but we had a unilateral action by two sheriff's last year and adjoining counties and Spalding and butts and we felt strongly enough that we put them all morning right before for Halloween last year that they shouldn't be doing this because they lack the authority. This being we being the marshal the National Association for rational sexual offense laws. We put them on warning that you can't do that because you're lacking the underlying authority. And they laughed and they scoffed, and they said, Well, good luck. Good luck because no Georgia judge is going to stop us. And a year passed and we were putting together a lawsuit and reaching out trying to find the right attorneys and trying to find the right plaintiffs. And we filed a lawsuit this year. And we filed in both balding and butts. We didn't fall into counties, but we filed suits against both balding and butts. And even though they're joining their own separate Judicial District, Spalding falls in the Northern District and butts falls in the Middle District of Georgia. So we got assigned to to federal judges. Well, Spalding, congratulations to you. You did the wise thing you actually folded and decided that they weren't going to post the sides. Now I don't know if it was because they were wiser. They know they're going to lose the case. I think it was probably because they were trying to escape judicial review. And they figured that that they could convince the judge that there was no crisis or controversy by saying we're not going to do it in 2019. Well, after discussion with all lawyers, I said, Well, no, we still have a very much alive controversy because they said they're not going to 2019. They didn't say they're never going to do it again. And the only way we would be willing to withdraw the litigation would be if we can enter to to a consent agreement, enforceable by the court that says that they won't do it again, period. So Spalding, the issue abated because they there was no emergency need for an injunction. So that case is still alive, and it'll be litigated another day. But the Bucks County sheriff said, I'm going he said FYP, and I'm going to do this regardless. So then we had to have the injunction hearing, which was held a little over a week ago. And the judge ruled Tuesday. And we had a judge who did a an enormous amount of work which actually is going to expand Don, but we've got this beautiful opinion and the judge enjoying the butts County Sheriff from from enforcing our plaintiffs. Now the judge did not grant class certification. The ruling technically did not apply to everyone in Berks County. But the judge did caution that you probably will not do it to the others. And and so that so at this point in our soul has won the lawsuit. It's unlikely in my opinion that he'll be able to reverse this. But he's bound to try and we'll just have to let it play out. So actually, what what's a good piece that's buried in this, in this case that that's going to help? Because the people in Georgia are happy? Because the other 157 County Sheriff's are probably not going to be dumb enough to do this. But what what good is this decision? Why Why is it important? Why did we focus so much of our energy on this mistake, but we should be bringing down the whole registry of YU people fixated on just one day of the year you people

Unknown Speaker  1:35:58  
you people So there's so many golden nuggets. In this opinion. as I alluded to earlier, Judge Treadwell went above and beyond and did independent research related to the case and came up with a lot of good statements that actually don't just apply to this sign issue. We're going to be able to use them in other cases where they're trying to bring broad sweeping impositions on registrants. So, let's start with the first thing. As part of the order. He points out that the people that are being forced to put these signs in their yards are by all accounts, in his own words, by all accounts are rehabilitated, they live productive, law abiding lives, their parents, and children. And there is not a direct system for classifying has not determined that any of these people pose an increased risk of again committing a sexual offense. So then we move on from there. Again, he says this decision was not based on any determination that the plan absurd, dangerous. And he goes on to state that later in the case to stating that, even if they're trying to say that they're saving the public and saving the children and everything else, they have not shown that that is actually a what they're doing, and be that it has any effect whatsoever. In fact, what we discussed earlier is that the sheriff himself acknowledges that he hasn't had any problem with registrants in the county for as long as he can remember, if ever, you can never recall a time when he actually had any issues, just because they didn't do the trunk or treat this time and there's going to be an increase in trick or treaters, which is what they tried to use as a basis for putting these signs out there doesn't mean that there is any correlation whatsoever. And the judge comes out and says, the answer is not whether his plan is wise or moral, or whether it makes logical sense. It's whether it runs afoul of the First Amendment of the constant United States Constitution and He says it does. So then he goes on into this brilliant analysis, which essentially sets up in order to grant. And what we have to remember at this stage is that this was asking for an emergency injunction, meaning don't put the signs up before Halloween. In order to meet that threshold. There are four things that you have to prove. And the biggest one being, let me pull it up here, the biggest one being that you can prevail on the merits. And most of the opinion goes to this. Do you have a substantial likelihood of success on the merits? There's the other problems include irreparable injury if relief is not granted, threaten the injury outweighs the harm, and then entry of relief would not be adverse to public interest. While the judge Treadwell actually does spend some time on the other ones. The first one that substantial likelihood of success on the merits is really important to not just this case, but other because what it does is He goes into this analysis and says, hey, you're going to win on this, you have a really good likelihood of success on this. Because this threat of the First Amendment of forcing people to compel speech and put signs, whether it's in the right of way or in front of their houses, it doesn't matter. And then not giving them a chance to even rebut the signs, basically telling them they're going to be arrested, if they cover the sign, if they put up their own sign or anything else, is a serious violation of the First Amendment and the compelled speech. Once he makes that determination, he shifts the burden back to the defendants to show why they could the plaintiffs couldn't prevail on this. And it's a really good little shifting, which means that now the sheriff is on the defense and has to come up with a reason as to why he should put the signs up. There is nothing in this opinion that states that he could do this and there's terms like vaguely They're using a statute that says vaguely must inform the public of the presence of sexual offenders in the community. Then it talks about right away and whether you even have the right to take that if it's on a private citizens to to put public announcements or signage. And essentially, the judge says no, those are only for traveling utility. utility lines, they don't do not include a space for the sheriff's public announcements. Then he goes on to talk about the irreparable harm, and the First Amendment. And this is really important because when we're talking about any type of these no candy laws that we alluded to earlier, any of the other things. The first amendment forbids abridgement of the freedom of speech and the freedom of speech includes both the right to speak freely and the right to refrain from speaking at all. So I think that we can use this argument in a bunch of the other litigation that we're looking into where people's freedom of speech is being infringed upon, whether they're not being allowed to celebrate Halloween at all, or put out decorations. Christmas decorations. And the case that they actually cite to there's a couple of cases, being forced to put something on your license plate, for example, the live free and die states that was ruled that that was compelled speech having to put sex offender across your driver's license that was ruled to be compelled speech. So there's a lot of good things that he cites too. And I think that we can make this really widespread. One of the other things that's really important in here is this don't want to be Marshall. And if anybody's familiar with this case, it's been quoted on several things, several publicity and news things that essentially it states the judge, in that case states, sex offenders are not second class citizens and the judge quotes that in here, they are not second class citizens. Therefore, you can't just go and do what you want to do to them when you want to do it and expect there to be no reprisal and expected to be constitutional. So it's a great analysis. I love how he cites the case line here and everything else in here. I can't say enough about this opinion because it is spot on. One of the last things that I will bring up on this is compelling interest and Least Restrictive means judge Treadwell actually points out that, okay, for all these years, you've been doing whatever you were going to do, and now you started putting up signs, how is what you're trying to do now? Any going to actually accomplish anything better than what you were doing before? And this Sheriff goes on to say, Oh, well, you know, would cost us $10,000 to send deputies out to all these places, and it cost us we had to spend all these time putting these signs up. And the judge basically she sat down and says, Yeah, but you're not showing me how much it would cost us to sit outside of these three people's houses. And you haven't shown that what you're proposing to do with anything other than incredibly expensive and time consuming. So he waves the big flag on it. And to cut down on that,

Andy  1:43:03  
is that a legal term bs flag? It was

Unknown Speaker  1:43:08  
every Law Dictionary.

Larry  1:43:10  
I was gonna say that that the judge on the least restrictive means first of men, but when you're intruding, it has to be narrowly tailored, the least restrictive means and what what the judge will say is share if you just put your hand on that Bible, and you said you hadn't had any problem. So clearly less restrictive means are working because you admitted you haven't had any problems. So therefore, you lose by saying that you need more restrictive means which the First Amendment requires the least restrictive means the system least restriction that means have been working, you lose. Very few judges have the courage to do that. And only that article three judge is protected for life. This is the reason why we chose federal court versus state court in Georgia because a state court judge would find themselves in a judge Persky situation or whatever that judge was and the other state That that was a California what the other one who got got in trouble for? I think that was Massachusetts or somewhere where he didn't want to waive the person up to adult court.

Unknown Speaker  1:44:09  
Yep. New Jersey? Jersey,

Larry  1:44:11  
New Jersey. Yeah. So so so we went to federal court or we had the protection of article three, because this judge called bs BS. You've admitted you've admitted that the least restrictive means have worked. But yet you want to increase the restrictions. When you're required constitutionally, if you're going to intrude and first amendment it has to be the least restrictive means. So sheriff, you lose. But But judges generally are afraid to do that. And the reason why they're afraid to do that it's not because they don't know right from wrong. It's because of you the voters who live in those judicial districts of like you're going to do to them. When you have a judge Persky. Obama, that's what they're afraid of because they actually have kids in college, and they have mortgages and they have car payments and they have insurance and they have all the things going on in their life that you have going on in yours. And that's the reason why they're afraid.

Andy  1:45:06  
Ashley, if I can back up to some of your points, that defense made a strong strong point that they never threatened the paint plaintiffs would be arrested. But when handing them the signs, yeah, and I mean, I could I could like if a cop comes to my door and says, I need you to sign this Or else, like, okay, you didn't say I would be arrested, but you did say or else. So or else to me means I'm going to get taste and beat to death. And then, you know, arrested ultimately. But so they only said like, Hey, you are required to post a site and then the sign says this is county property. It where would one draw the line? I get like, where would the How is it reasonable that the the plaintiffs said that they felt that they would be arrested, they even stated that they were told that but then Sheriff long in the deputy sheriff both said that they they never threatened the people that they would be arrested.

Unknown Speaker  1:45:58  
So I don't think the judge bought that. at all that they weren't threatened to be arrested or that there's any voluntary nuts and we did actually see that in the other county lawsuit where they were saying, Oh, these signs were purely voluntary. No, that's disingenuous to us hilarious. It's completely not in the facts. Because if I came to your house and said here, I want you to put the sign up for Halloween, would you like to do it? Your answer would be go pound sand. So there's nothing that can even be construed just rationally that they're these were anything other than forced and compelled.

Andy  1:46:36  
And how would you ask someone to put a sign out in front of their house when you leave at five in the morning, she she testified that before you know, she was out before dark and she came home after dark, and she's just going and putting the signs by the mailboxes. I don't know that she necessarily asked all 57 people if they would mind if the sign was posted.

Unknown Speaker  1:47:00  
I don't believe they did. I'm just going to say what it is. I don't believe they did. And even the judge alludes to that when he gets down to talking about there might be an instance might be where somebody would be willing to put this sign on it. He's not going to rule on that. But he is insinuating that there is nothing voluntary about this.

Larry  1:47:23  
Day over, could could they overcome that? Not not on the facts that already evidence but going forward say that they don't learn their lesson in law enforcement, I have to break it to you they always want criminals to learn their lesson. Law enforcement has a horrible time burning their lessons, you can sue them and you can sue them and sue them and they never seem to learn a thing. They just dig their heels in deeper but say say that that of the hundred and 57 remaining counties been he'll account account he announced that they were going to do the same thing. We sent them a caution or later we're going to survey the vendors there and find out if they did but if if a sheriff wanted to do this and make it voluntary How would How would you actually be able to assure is voluntary? Because when they come with guns, and they have a sign and they say, Would you like to put this up? Is there any way that that can be voluntarily done?

Unknown Speaker  1:48:14  
So my argument would be no, because even if they got them to find releases I'm with you. How do you know it's not under duress? You've got 100 officers out there in Swat gear this stating here would you like to put this sign up?

Andy  1:48:26  
Oh, that was that was something that they did not Yeah, but that's what they even brought up is like how were you dressed? Were you just dressed in like your casual officer gear was just like khakis and a polo? She's like, no, I had my tactical gear on maybe she was still wearing the Polo but she still had the she had her gun on she had like her tactical boots on she was like, I don't know, I don't know if they have the names for these different categories of dress. But she mentioned that she was not in full Sheriff like, you know, smoking the bear hat kind of thing.

Unknown Speaker  1:48:55  
I bet that she what she said because this is a standard officer job. When they testify, I was wearing my uniform display my badge of office, because it is so ingrained in them to testify to that to establish jurisdiction, that they're an officer, that it wouldn't occur to them that this would not be good in this instance. But I don't actually think it would matter. They could have showed up in a polo shirt and camels and Dell, you're asking somebody to put a sign that essentially is stating, the sheriff has determined that I am dangerous. That's what the court points out that I am dangerous. And who's the question that so it's every way from Sunday it's compelling speech.

Andy  1:49:39  
I have and I just wanted to bring up that. So they did bring up in court that they they did make the comparisons to the Alabama driver's license thing, and I think even the judge brought up talking about the license plate thing is that Connecticut live for your day, Larry. Gotta get New Hampshire, those little thumbprint size states they're also very confusing to me. They did bring our side brought up a whole bunch of examples of Least Restrictive means of where they could publish information about who the dangerous people are, as opposed to putting signs out in front of people's charts. Something else that I thought maybe should have been brought up is, perhaps the signs being out specifically at the time when the kids are trick or treating would be an effective method, but they put them out a day in advance, and just general people driving up and down the highway would then see the signs that have no relationship to the trick or treating event. And now they're going to know that these people are quote unquote, dangerous. And that felt that it would go beyond the scope of what they were intending even to begin with.

Unknown Speaker  1:50:44  
So my argument would be even if they did put it out for the three hours or four hours of Halloween wouldn't have that wouldn't have made a difference, because you're still putting it out there. You're still compelling the speech. In fact, they tried to narrow down and say, but we're only putting it up from a couple days before been to a couple days after they tried to narrow it down. That timeframe, I don't think made a bit of difference to the court. It was the fact that those signs were there. And that they had told people you can't cover them up, you can't put anything out and you have no way to counteract it. Which, when you get back to the license plate thing to Live Free or Die, one of the arguments made in that case was that you could put up a counteracting bumper sticker but even then being compelled to essentially state something that you don't have a belief in is compelled speech and it violates the First Amendment.

Andy  1:51:33  
They do that here in Georgia the default license plate says In God we trust and they ask you and you get your license plate if you would like to have something cover it and then they just put a sticker of your county over it. I I'm personally bothered by this. I you know, maybe you should have the default county and then if you want to display the ungodly trust would be the more appropriate method.

Unknown Speaker  1:51:55  
That's interesting. That hasn't been challenged.

Unknown Speaker  1:51:57  
Your pagan Andy,

Andy  1:51:58  
I'm sorry that that may be true. Maybe not a pagan. Yeah, those were my only points.

Larry  1:52:05  
I haven't agree with you. But but the this, this is what passion when we talk about building a body FK, so it confuses a lot of people. What does this do in terms of helping us build the body of case law that we need? Because I guess it would be a better question is why is having we talked about foundations. Why is a body of case law important as we as we intensify our challenges, and as we go after more of these, what we believe to be unconstitutional things.

Unknown Speaker  1:52:34  
So it's interesting because one of the things when I was reading through here and I was Uber impressed about the body of case law that he cites to one of the things is if you were to do a search on some of this, this just shows the link that he went to to do the research. These cases are not what would come up by went out and looked for any cases on not having to display science and Halloween, it wouldn't be the cases that excited you would have to know it. exactly which argument you were using, for example, like undue prejudice would be the son America case, or the doby Marshall in the second class citizens and things like that. So it's really, really important that he actually cites to a bunch of cases that we can use going forward. For example, were talking about the loss of First Amendment freedoms, even for a brief time is sufficient to constitute irreparable injury necessary to justify the issuance of an injunction. The case that he cites in that it's a federal case will be able to use

Larry  1:53:31  
I've never heard of, I've never heard of that case before. Have you know,

Unknown Speaker  1:53:36  
which is what's so great about it now we have it here.

Unknown Speaker  1:53:40  
And that was the judge gave it to us. We didn't give it to the judge did we

Unknown Speaker  1:53:44  
know the judge went through and cited to a bunch of cases that we did not like to in our in any of our stuff. I mean, he cites Pacific Gas and Electric Company cases and the entire ordinance stuff on the signs on what you can post excited all the the ordinances Everything else. So he went above and beyond and, and really supported what his order said, some judges will just issue an order and say this is the way it is because I said, so he didn't do that. He reasoned out and gave us stuff that we can build on to attack some of the other things because there are Supreme Court cases, federal court cases, circuit court cases. So I love that he gave us all of us

Larry  1:54:24  
well, and he did something even more spectacular. He gave us the it's hard to imagine that they're going to find a three judge panel at the 11th circuit. He He covered every base that you could possibly argue for an appeal for because they can't undo the jargon for this year. But as appellate court could say the injunction was unfounded. Georgia was unfounded, and that it should have not have been granted. And then that would preclude us from getting a getting our permanent injunction that goes beyond what's this case goes to trial where we fell, but this case, I don't see how you'd have to have a really bizarre panel that would be able to overturn this because of the thoroughness of his work.

Unknown Speaker  1:55:06  
Yes. And on top of that, because the presumption is that he, the court ruling, in order for it to be overturned in the circuit court, the defendants are actually going to have to come up with something showing that there was no basis for his ruling. And like you said, he argued it out and did the research and everything else. So it's going to be very, very difficult to be overturned. But I hope they take that into consideration when you think about appeal,

Larry  1:55:32  
and of course, always hope that we can conclude cases without having to go up on appeal. But it, it almost, there's almost the challenge there because Sheriff law, what you're going to do if you appeal this, and I hope you're listening, what you're going to do is you're going to make this precedent for Georgia, Alabama and Florida. If you take it up to the 11th. And then you're going to have an 11th circuit opinion that we can waive all over the United States, even though it's not binding. We're going to say We have this persuasive opinion of the 11th. So if you want to be the one who gives us strong ammunition, I would encourage you to appeal.

Unknown Speaker  1:56:09  
Because that's what

Unknown Speaker  1:56:10  
we're really right.

Andy  1:56:12  
Let me All right, when we go ahead, I was going to ask I don't want anybody to get like a strange shoulder from patting themselves on the back. How much work did the two of you put into developing this case? I'm thinking you did the best body of the work. Which you?

Unknown Speaker  1:56:29  
I'm sorry. To switch you. There's two of us here.

Andy  1:56:33  
Well, I know there's two of you. I'm referring to the two of you, you people I'm referring to.

Unknown Speaker  1:56:38  
Okay, boss, Frankie, your people. Well, well,

Larry  1:56:43  
I did. I did a small amount of work. I don't think it'd be that great body, but I did. I did do the search for the legal team. I did do the coordinating between the legal team, to the extent that the coordination was was was as effective as it could have been. And And then Ashley came on board with us and Ashley, that helped us with with brief writing and rewriting. And it was it was it was a team effort. I wouldn't say that, that we we did the bulk of the work, but NASA was definitely involved and deserves credit. NARS will put the money up.

Andy  1:57:19  
Yeah. And I should have mentioned that up front. I mean, I realized the legal team quote unquote, behind it, but not so you guys led the charge in drafting the

Larry  1:57:28  
first Marshall. Marshall allowed us to do this. And Arsenal put the money up. And thanks to the to the donor support that normal has. We've built here on what seemed like a trivial case as a time to say we took criticism as we always do for anything that we do. People don't understand it. What we've done if we're building the foundation and the body of case law, and Sheriff Longo, probably, despite all the advice he's going to get to the contrary, he'll probably try to do the appeal and they'll probably give us even a stronger hand to play which you know, we appreciate that But But Marshall without Norful, we wouldn't have got these attorneys. They did not do this. On the hope of getting paid later, we did put money into it up front to inspire them.

Andy  1:58:10  
When will that portion of the decision come down as to? I think you told me it's a settlement of sorts.

Larry  1:58:16  
Is that right? If the case were to go to trial, the verdict would be rendered in our favor. If it's not, if the judge did not somehow reverse himself and say I was wrong on granted injunction, we're going to win the case at trial, because that's the only way we could lose, the judge would have to say what Gee, having heard all the evidence, now I got this wrong. And I don't see that. So so at the conclusion of the case, which could be the concluded by the settlement and internet until consent agreement or consent decree or by going to trial and have and have the judge render a verdict in our in our favor. That's what we're entitled to attorneys fees, we can't file now, because the case is still this still operable. We've won the first stage which is a huge one. Because when you do when you when you get preliminary relief before you fraud your case, and that standard that Ashley articulated as you have to show that you're likely to prevail on the merits. We've already done that. So unless unless the sheriff can come up with something which we know he can't because he invented this To start with, unless he can come up with something he's going to lose at trial, he would be best advised and I'm giving some fronted by she'd be best advice to settled and cut your County's losses, but you never know what law enforcement is going to do.

Andy  1:59:28  
That's interesting. And so as it stands, if he if he then proceed, like we're done on our side, unless he decides to proceed, if he doesn't, this is just Case Closed. We paid the money to get out. No,

Unknown Speaker  1:59:43  
we're not done. We're not done.

Larry  1:59:45  
Okay. We won. We won preliminary relief, this case has to either go to trial, or it has to be settled. We had only hearing on the injunction portion. We're wanting a permanent injunction. What we've got is an emergency injunction for health. 2019 Okay. All right. So Sheriff long, sheriff's long still has the right to put his case on trial and say, Judge, although you did the injunction, and although you told me not to put the signs up, I believe I have the right to put the signs up. And I want to trial he has the right to do that. Okay.

Andy  2:00:17  
So one way or another, there's going to be some sort of funding awarded.

Larry  2:00:21  
Well, unless the judge decides that he was wrong, it will and ensure as long as correct.

Andy  2:00:27  
Okay. That's cool, though. I mean, that's what I'm not trying to. So down this path, and then if he decides to then appeal it to where does it go? Does it go to like one of the circuits, it goes to the

Larry  2:00:39  
11th, the 11th 11th circuit, which based based in Atlanta, and the level of circuit covers just three states it was carved out the Fifth Circuit back in the 70s. It's the state of Georgia, the state of Alabama, the state of Florida, okay. And we've already got the driver's license case out of Alabama. Not the compel speech, right, which which which which is not going bode well for him. But like I say, when you're dealing with law enforcement mentality, they do one thing and that's to push ahead and to try harder and to be more bully. So Sheriff long has valid his constituents. So he's going to appeal to the Supreme Court. So he very well may take it to level circuit. If he does, he'll be doing us a favor, because we will expand the reach of the decision beyond just this county. So if Sheriff law was to be able to break bread with his colleagues and say, thanks to me, I have now saddled the floor you can do what you are doing because my arrogance cause you to have an adverse ruling. He can do that. That's his right and I applaud everybody has the right to their day in court. He has the right to take us to trial and he has a right to take us up on appeal that says right to do that.

Andy  2:01:50  
And then obviously the next step is to go to SCOTUS, if he chooses,

Larry  2:01:54  
well, that's they get to decide if they will, but he he can certainly follow that petition.

Andy  2:02:00  
And again, granting this objective released, the judge said, you guys are completely screwed. The plaintiffs win this, and I mean, to do the injunction eight. So going forward, you're kind of sort of a moron.

Larry  2:02:10  
Hey, he did say that. He said that you're likely to lose that the evidence is very compelling against you in terms of the legal standards, and that if this case, were to proceed to trial, based on what I see here, your hand is so weak, you're likely to lose. That's what the judge said. Outstanding.

Unknown Speaker  2:02:28  
So anything that he still has faced,

Larry  2:02:30  
he still has a right to go to trial though. We don't want to take that right away from him. He has an absolute right to go to trial when you liked him, Sheriff, but it's kinda you have the right to spend your money foolishly if that's what you choose to do. Because all all you're going to do is waste a bunch of money. And you're going to drive up the prevailing party's attorneys fees, and you're going to drive up their attorneys fees for your county attorney of whatever outside counsel they have to bring in. as this moves up. I can guarantee that Country lawyers there in Middle Georgia have probably very little Supreme Court experience and probably even when they probably have no Supreme Court experience, they probably have very little appellate court level two and the federal courts because they generally are used to dealing mostly in state court. So if if you want to spend all that money, have at it, because ultimately you're going to pay both sides attorneys fees, because we're gonna win.

Andy  2:03:27  
I don't think I have anything else. Ashley

Unknown Speaker  2:03:31  
know, pretty much sums it up. This is a great opinion and it's a great win for

Andy  2:03:35  
us. Outstanding, Larry, we're going to close out with our normal stuff. But before like if you're one of those people says, oh, they're going to do the closing stuff. Well, I have a little extra extra bonus bonus at the end. It's a little two minute long thing. So Larry, how do people get in? How did they find the podcast first?

Larry  2:03:53  
That would be registered matters.co and the phone number because that's your favorite way to reach two people. 7472 to 74477. And if you pause and hit replay, you can hear it again.

Andy  2:04:09  
And of course, I check the email. And so how do they email us?

Larry  2:04:15  
That would be registry matters cast@gmail.com

Andy  2:04:20  
we love all of our listeners, all, all all of them. We definitely definitely love our Patreon people. And where do they support the podcast on patreon@patreon.com

Larry  2:04:28  
slash registry matters.

Andy  2:04:33  
Thank you for joining us, Ashley. It's always always a pleasure. I've really enjoy having you on.

Unknown Speaker  2:04:38  
Thank you guys for letting me be on this 100th episode of the podcast. I am honored to be a part of this and FYP Thank you, Ashley,

Andy  2:04:47  
Larry, I'm true. Truly I am as well i mean that it goes without saying I genuinely genuinely enjoy your insight and words just don't really describe it. And with that, let me say some closing remarks but I play this and then we'll be out.

Larry  2:05:01  
So well I just am so I'm so honored that the people have supported us and we've stuck with it because I did have a lot of duplicity

Unknown Speaker  2:05:13  
what's up what's

Larry  2:05:17  
up about this crazy thing notion of a podcast and although we don't have the thousands of listeners I think that it potentially are there. We have some very loyal listeners and some very loyal supporters and and and thank you for every one of you.

Andy  2:05:31  
But this is a you know you said early I played the little clip where you said moral and so this individual is goes by the handle of sold and wall and he put together one that was just terrible at first and I said, Come on, man, you can do better than that. And this is what he came up with

Unknown Speaker  2:05:49  
your listeners. Today March the 100th. Union of our favorite to misfits Andy and Larry, for it is the 100th episode of the registry matters. podcast 100 episodes. That's a lot of episodes. That's well over 5000 utterances of you people from Larry. And we know there's going to be a lot more of those. Anyways, in honor of this milestone, I'd like to raise a glass of non alcoholic beverage. Since a lot of us are still on probation. I don't want to leave anyone out and make a toast to these two troublemakers for daring to inform people of their rights in a world where registrants are not allowed to have rights, showing us the reality and truth. A light at the end of the tunnel for many registered and trying to know just what the hell is going on. So hold up your glasses but be careful not to spill it on your podcast listening apparatus and toast. No, no, no. Hey, Ryan. I didn't mean that literally. No, put put the toaster away. That's not what we're here for. We're here to what are you doing? Well, I just will Ryan not to make toast. Damn it. Can we please just have a proper celebration? Brenda, can you help me out here getting derailed? Anyways, it's a celebration for the 100th episode of Larry's podcast featuring Andy or something like that. I may have gotten some details mixed up. Wait. I kept in the wind instead of the grape juice. This explains why the railing is going off the goes

Unknown Speaker  2:07:31  
Oh,

Unknown Speaker  2:07:31  
who is that? Your probation officer? Oh shit. Turn around and find your back. No, it's a mistake. I swear. Larry.

Unknown Speaker  2:07:41  
Larry, Larry.

Unknown Speaker  2:07:44  
What are you doing? Stop resisting.

Unknown Speaker  2:07:48  
clubbing me.

Unknown Speaker  2:07:56  
But seriously, Happy 100 to the registry matters podcast. Here's to the best of fortune for the next 100 more.

Unknown Speaker  2:08:02  
Thank you so very,

Andy  2:08:05  
very much for that.

Larry  2:08:07  
That that takes some skill to put together a little sound effects.

Andy  2:08:11  
He's a very unique skilled individual.

Larry  2:08:16  
Of that individuals. That's that's so cool to put all that together.

Andy  2:08:19  
Yep. Thank you everybody. Have a great night. Love you all and talk to you soon.

Unknown Speaker  2:08:25  
Thank you Andy. Thank you very

Transcribed by https://otter.ai