registry matters as an independent production. The opinions and ideas here are that of the host and do not reflect the opinions of any other organization. If you have a problem with these thoughts fyp recording live from the super secret underground bunker transmitting across the internet. This is Episode 132 of registry matters. Larry, do you have the COVID from flying? I probably do. Oh my god. So we need to keep probably not even six feet. I don’t know that that would be sufficient. We need to keep maybe like 30 feet.
Well, what are we right now?
We’re across the road. It’s probably 15 or 20,
maybe 20. So all right, well, we’re doing the best we can
with what we’ve got. The acoustics in here are always amazing. And what is the super secret underground bunker?
It is a residential facility in the county of butts. So you people that are looking all you have to do is hit every residential unit and buts County, Georgia, there’s only like
30 people that live here
and you’ll eventually find Find us.
We have a handful of people in chat we have a voicemail messages to play we have possibly a 911 call to to play and a crap ton of articles so we are just going to go dive right Is it hot enough over here and humid enough for you here compared to back West?
No, it’s only in the low 90s what do people expect this time of year?
I would expect like pretty much this not too long ago it’s been very cool. So yeah, I would expect roughly this
so so who do we have in chat tonight? I can say hi to I don’t see him on my screen like I usually do.
We have a third Risa Oh Teresa and we have a Tammy and a will.
So All righty.
That is that is the big crowd this well this first article comes from the appeal and the title of it is Coronavirus in jails and prisons. And this article is I put this at the top just to give us a quick little update on where things are, as far as Is it still spreading rapidly. In prison, is it you know, so this just more or less just like an update of where we stand on things. So Larry, where do we stand up?
Well, it’s I didn’t I didn’t read this article. But I would imagine from what I’m hearing in the news, it’s, it’s, it’s escalating a lot of institutions.
Yeah. What the article says it is, it hasn’t abated is pretty much the answer. It’s like the worst conditions that you could possibly be in is to be in prison. More cases, more people getting infected, they’re not able to clean they’re not able to separate they’re not able to get masks. It’s just it’s pretty awful. It’s a pretty, pretty dismal situation, if you happen to be locked up, you know, much like the situation you described in the for that Riot if you were there, if you got out on the 28th versus the 29th. In your state.
Yes, well, this doesn’t take any particular level of genius to figure it out when you have when you have people clustered together and in conditions that are not less than ideal when weather pandemic, sanitation and cleanliness is less than ideal. And there’s so many things that work against it. Those of listen to the podcast we talked about erawan are early on in the, in the pandemic, your laundry is very restricted. At least at most facilities I’m familiar with, you don’t, you don’t just go to the washing machine and do your laundry, you you have a laundry round, picks up laundry once a week or twice a week at best, and you’re limited to your access to laundry. Water is designed to prevent flooding of cell blocks and housing units. So waters restricted in terms of it flows with with a time limits of anywhere from a couple of minutes to maybe 30 seconds. Yeah. And so you’re constantly having to push the button so they they’ve the flow is not is not strong and most most situations they they’re trying to conserve water resources. So you got all these things working, guess you and then all the proximity of people being close together. Other than the lack of the lack of
Unknown Speaker 4:03
hey, you know, there’s something funny that you just reminded me of of thinking about some of them like that the faucet will flow kind of in an upward direction and then just sort of spill out. Yes. And I’ve seen that in some like in the more elegant kind of high end, hoity toity kind of designs of things where it’ll like fill into almost like an aqueduct and then like you have this flowing water to wash your hands, but it’s definitely like a more volumous amount of water. But you know, it’s just it’s like trickle that it would drive you absolutely bonkers.
That’s why I’m prepared for this time. I only had to adjust one of my rooms that I stayed and the other one was adequate.
Well, that’s good to hear. Did you have any, any battles with any critters? critters, what type of critters insect types of critters, undesirables?
I haven’t had any battles with any that I can think of. No.
Unknown Speaker 4:55
Okay. I wasn’t sure if you would want to bring up talking about any sleeping critters. Now, I
don’t know anything about that.
Okay. All right, then. Well anyway, so the prison COVID situation is still still dismal, dismal, dismal. That is, pretty much all we really even have to say about as if you were in prison at this time, it would be I can’t do it. I can’t even imagine how people are like hanging out in the day room or something, they probably have T shirts like wrapped around their faces. People probably get twitchy about being near anybody else. So it’s just it’s got to be awful.
Well, we would have to be losing lives that didn’t have to be lost. But people that have had they been taken out of the environment, they would help survive. Of course, everyone’s not going to die that gets gets the virus we know that. But we also know that that that was at the vulnerable population, that the the rate of severe risk reported by looking for the words the severity, increases with with age and with with medical with with a pre existing conditions. If you look at the number of people or died of many Give them have pre existing conditions. Right? And, and we we know that we’ve got the prisons particular, and the states that have three strikes laws where we have a lot of elderly people who have have not been able to be released because they’re not eligible to be released. And we’re going to keep them till they die. And I guess, in that regard, it relieves the state’s problem a little bit sooner.
You know, we have an article coming up talking about that where someone said, I don’t care and that person had a lot of pre existing conditions. So maybe he he got what he deserved. Maybe he shouldn’t have been fleeing from the place. I don’t see a problem now. Absolutely not. Well, let’s uh, let’s jump over to another article. It’s from the appeal as well. And this is Minneapolis city council members announced intent to disband the police department invest in proven community led public safety. I’ve been hearing a whole lot of things about this one and and maybe this even ties into I think it was a city in New Jersey. Oh, God, I can’t think of the name of it. Do you know off the top of your head, it’s on the tip of my tongue. They did a community policing thing in New Jersey. And But anyway, this is a week rarely spend a whole lot of time because even you and I had a conversation earlier in the week about who has the authority to do this. This is the city council has a veto proof majority saying this is what’s going to happen. And please tell me that you can explain this better than I would understand
what particular aspect
how so so the city council can then just go, Hey, Mayor, we don’t want the police to be this way. And you’re going to follow our committee of veto proof.
Well, it would be a veto would work would work just like it would work in a state or federal level. Say on a non member council I’m I’m pulling this out of air because I don’t know the number sides of the Council. But if the city charter requires a two thirds majority and if it were a non member Council, if you had six councillors you would Just override the mayor’s veto. So you’ve passed the ordinance. The mayor would issue his veto. The bear would plead with people to sustain his veto. And he would be looking for four votes, because because if it took a two thirds override, override, six votes would be the magic number. So he would be looking at his magic number would be four. So he would be making all kinds of promises to prevent the override. And when they vote to override the veto, then the legislation the ordinance would become law over his objection. And it would be as if it had been signed.
This I think there’s a lot of confusion in the way that this is worded that that they’re saying that we’re going to quote unquote, dismantle the police department, which is probably true in the literal sense, but not true in the actual sense of not talking about having anarchie with no sort of law enforcement agency. But in the end of one of the paragraphs that says we can resolve confusion over grocery transaction without drawing a weapon or pulling out handcuffs, that You could you don’t you don’t deploy the police for every different every different difficult kind of transaction that you would have the people from, you know, I was driving up here and I saw six police officers pull head somebody pulled over. I don’t know if this person had some sort of vest on that would explode. I don’t know if the person was just having a temper tantrum. But did they need six police officers to handle the interaction that you could build in different units to handle domestic abuse traffic tickets, you know, and have Okay, fine. We have some sort of serious threat that we do need weapons and we can call in that department to handle it. I think that’s what they’re actually trying to describe.
Unknown Speaker 9:41
Well, I think they’ve they’ve had some ideas about unifying the the Hennepin County law enforcement, which is the sheriff’s department. I don’t think they have a county police department. That seems to be a distinctly Southern thing where they have a county police department and a county sheriff’s department but I think this is our guests and like This week, there, they’re looking at one option to bring bring in a unified enforcement from from the county, but they’re not going to they’re not going to go to having no law enforcement. But what this would be it would be we’ve we’ve given up on being able to reform the department that we have the existing apparatus, it just needs to be dismantled. And that’s exactly what needs to happen. In many cases. It’s very difficult to reform an existing bureaucracy. I think if you if one since the title of this podcast, we could talk about businesses that have failed because they were not able to transform themselves. Certainly, this is not just a public sector thing. It I would argue that Eastern Airlines doesn’t exist anymore because it was unable to reform itself to reflect the competitive nature of a change industry. And the power structure within the union within the bushiness within the flight attendants union whether the, the the airline pilots union, they just were not able to adapt to the We had gone from from the era of the Civil Aeronautics Board setting fares to a competitive where the airlines were able to set their own fares and it was competition supply and demand at the cost structure that had been built up when there was protection of fares and protection of routes and the only thing you could compete on was basically food and and how you pampered your passengers and how pretty your flight attendants were, which they call stewardess in those days, it was a whole different world and it was they were they were not able to change now the consequences weren’t that people were dying and being tased and beat up. But the the the culture was too entrenched to change. And that’s what we have here with many apples are many police departments. They are not able to recognize and to effectuate the changes that are needed culturally, they’re just not able to do it. They’ve got too much of the too many of the old guard. They’ve done it this way too long. And the union is too strong. And we have a union article coming up later about how unions stop effort the police you just saw me effort stoked up the reform. And it may be that this banning is the only option.
Um, can you backtrack just a little bit that you brought up something about there could be a county police and county sheriff. I to me I use those words interchangeably.
Unknown Speaker 12:18
Well, in the state of Georgia, many counties here in this state have they have the county police. So if you pick up the phone you would call if you’re in Clayton County, you would call the Clayton County Police Department, but Clayton County also has a sheriff’s department and the Sheriff’s Department has responsibilities including running the jail serving civil processes, summonses and and they they they don’t typically engage in day to day law enforcement operations where they have a county police department. That’s distinctly Georgia I have never lived in another state where there’s county police but they are all over the state of this particular county. I’m not sure buts county does have Police Department I don’t think they do. But the next county up Henry County does. Clayton County does Fulton County does DeKalb County does Cobb County does they all have county police? Well, when you have county police, then the sheriff’s office backs off of law enforcement and they would serve a backup role if the Clayton County police requested them if the city of Riverdale which is in Clay County Jonesboro, those counties said we need help. They’re fully certified law enforcement and they can provide law enforcement. They can do things but they typically don’t because they’ve got city they got municipal police within the city. So they’ve got a county police department that does basic law enforcement.
That’s pretty confusing. what’s confusing about it Oh, I just the delineation of like, again, I realize that they have a separation of powers that this one does this one thing but like you just said you’ve never lived anywhere that has these overlapping things with just a different name. So it’s just
Unknown Speaker 13:52
well I’m not sure what that is distinctly Georgia because I’ve not lived in the United States, but I didn’t see it in New Mexico. I didn’t see it in Michigan. I didn’t see it in Colorado. I haven’t seen it and other places you know that they have. They have a county sheriff’s department and then they have the city police or there’s incorporated cities but I’ve not seen what they refer to all over this state is the county police but but they do have them here and they probably do have up in other states. It’s just I haven’t lived in enough states to do the comparison. But it’s not that complicated because they they they define what the responsibilities are in Georgia even though the sheriff doesn’t do or they have kind of police although the sheriff typically doesn’t go out and do road patrol. They can’t they could if they wanted to. Right. The the sheriff is technically the chief law enforcement officer of any county in Georgia, and the sheriff could put a patrol division on the street but the sheriff chooses not to because it’s the county commissioners have funded the county police department for the purpose of providing basic law enforcement the the the sheriff’s department is not going to go out and duplicate what’s already being done but but the sheriff sheriff’s This state particular can do almost anything they want to do.
So, yeah. And then also you just said something that you don’t know a certain thing. I thought you knew everything.
Everything. It’s worth knowing. Oh,
I didn’t realize it was okay. And who’s the arbiter of what is worth knowing? I am. Oh, okay. I thought
but I wouldn’t be surprised if New York doesn’t every New York probably has county police I bet if Charles where he could tell us that but but I know it’s it’s very common here in this state. I wonder if some place like Pennsylvania that has like counties and boroughs that they could have. I know. I know. Marilyn does because I’ve heard about the government county police. Yeah, so I thought I don’t think it’s distinctly Georgia as long so I didn’t mean it that way. But it’s it’s it’s not widespread that you’re seeing in every single state.
Okay, then let’s move over to what is this loss of law 360 calm and Hey, man, this is some bipartisan support that you always grill me on and say, oh, here’s some of your bipartisan support. You say a very contempt of tone. But this is a quartet of senators has put together trying to make it so that our people and those our people are the ones that have any sort of felony could apply for the payroll Protection Program or the paycheck protection program. The funny thing about this though, Larry, is that the winters that when does the enrollment for this thing, stop? versa? It’s June 30. I can’t imagine Congress doing anything to get anything through here it is the one of the 13 so they’re gonna have what’s at 27 days to put get their act together, and then someone’s going to have the wherewithal to get down to their local office to fill out the paperwork for this. Wouldn’t it be 17 days isn’t 1723 1770 See, don’t do math on a podcast.
But But well, and I don’t mean to imply that all bipartisanship is bad what I what I’m trying to stress is just because it’s bar bipartisan does it necessary Sara Lee make it good.
I think you just want to poke fun at me.
Well, I do because we assume mistakenly that something by person magically translates to good. You don’t you don’t just I mean that Applejack was bipartisan. International Megan’s Law was bipartisan, a lot of things are bipartisan, that doesn’t translate to magically good. So you you, you could you can have good public policy derived that is bipartisan. You can have good public policy result from something that’s highly partisan, because that’s the way the system is designed, you’re supposed to have a winner. And you the person the side of an issue that can muster the majority votes, usually has to compromise with with the minority to get enough votes cobble together to represent a majority. And throughout that process of compromise, you often can have some very good public policy, but just because it has bipartisan support doesn’t necessarily make it good. This is something that would in fact, be good if it were to happen.
Yeah, but it doesn’t matter because they’re going to have two weeks to get attached to it. And they’ve already spent 500 billion of the 600 billion that’s allowed for in the program. I no one, no one is going to qualify for this. There’s not enough time and not enough money left for anybody to get anything
said if it comes to pass, it would be a good thing. Yeah, yeah, I’m with you. I just like this is like too little too late. The ship has already sailed. And all that hokey pokey stuff. Well, if we were to, for example, if we were to have a second flare up, and they were had to pump more money into if we have, it would be something good to set the foundation for later that we don’t automatically disqualify people because it’s something that they’ve done in their past. Do you think that something like this would then carry over it? Could we could that we could be having a debate right now. Well, not this now. But in this this era, we could be having sort of a debate about is it fair to penalize people from having access to taxpayer subsidized Services What? What? They’re all up it up. I mean, they speak for employers for God’s sakes.
Yeah, that’s kind of one of the reasons why it really makes no sense that even in the article, it says we should celebrate folks who have done exactly what society asked of them. They turned away from crime, they started a business to support themselves in their families and contributed to their communities. And estimated one in three American adults has a criminal record. And because people with records often have trouble finding employment, many of them have gone on to start their own businesses after they’ve paid for their mistakes. So then wouldn’t we want to reward them and go, Hey, man, thank you for getting your act together and not committing more crime. Oh, by the way, we have this pandemic, when did you shut down FSU you don’t qualify for any money?
Well, all what you said is true, but it’s not only a few and a few employees of that true. Totally, totally.
Yeah. So a few for getting employed by someone who went to prison. So that’s tragic, super tragic.
I don’t understand that type of logic I would want. Like I say over and over again. I would want these employers to survive because If we’re to have this rebound that that we’re hoping for people need employers need to be able to survive and put people back to work so that taxes can start being paid so we can stop running this deficit this year is going to be my prediction says we were at a trillion baseline before COVID-19. I’m predicting, but so between a four and a trillion deficit this year.
Yeah, I think I heard 30 by the end of the year, maybe.
Unknown Speaker 20:25
What are you talking about to accumulate national debt? I’m talking I’m talking about this annual deficit for this year, we were at a baseline trillion dollars, which had doubled from what they had been inherited from the Obama years, the baseline budget deficit was a trillion. And what when you start adding up all these programs was a 2.2. For this 800 billion for that, you’re going to add at least 4 trillion of spending, but that doesn’t tell the whole story. You also have the decline of revenue. all federal revenues are going to be down. If you’ve got 40 million people not working. You’re not getting Social Security and Medicare coverage. contributions, right? If you’ve got 40 million people that are not working, you’re not getting the federal unemployment tax, which is a very modest tax, but you’re not getting that money. And yet you’re you’re adding trillions of dollars of spending. If we don’t have a trillion deficit this year, that is September 30, I will be amazed if we don’t have a trillion deficit.
And those those programs, at least the Social Security one is funded by the current contributions. If I understand how things work,
well, it’s funded by the current contribution to the extent I cover and then we draw down from the trust fund, to the extent those contributions don’t cover. So. So it’s a combination of that and the trust fund is money that has been accumulating running surpluses for the last 30 years.
I understand anything else here that you want to go over before we cover the next really amazing, outstanding article?
No, I’m just hoping that that takes employers actually do get to participated the PDP and I’m hoping that people jobs are able to be saved.
Yes, without a doubt that’s totally, totally true. But over at the Tennessee part of the USA Today network, Tennessee wants to put a man to death despite evidence of racial profiling during trial. Count. What is there’s a there’s a Supreme Court case, and I hope you’ll remember the name of it where they decided this that you can’t use race as jury selection. I believe that was bad. So that sounds that sounds at least close to what I remember. Well, Google
Google bats and somebody and I believe it’s the Batson case,
Unknown Speaker 22:36
and they’re rearranging furniture upstairs there.
It’s actually the icemaker
that is a very, very loud icemaker. It sounds like it’s dumping ice on the floor.
Well, the pan was empty. So that’s what it’s doing. But I think they emptied the pan out, while for some reason.
Oh, it probably had COVID on it. Um, but this is a man who has spent a truckload of time is he He was convicted in 87 for a murder. And he’s not. I mean, he’s Brown, but he’s not like a black man like a traditional, and I hope I don’t sound offensive there, but he’s not like, you know, the typical like black person that we have in the United States. He is from another country, and he got convicted, and there was like, lots of racial biases. And and so far there was only one black person on the jury, and, and so forth. Anyway, so what else is going on here?
Well, the state is arguing that the trial was fair enough. But But if if it was I think it was Batson but yes, it was bad. Yeah. The the Supreme Court said that the prosecution can’t use their peremptory challenges. And those were the challenges that don’t require a reason to be stated. Did you to say, You’re excused. Thank you Have a great day. And prosecutors would do that to to exclude minorities. So if you were in a county that was was 80%, white 20% black and you had a black defendant with the jury, the number of people in the pool would be very small to begin with, because the black population is very small mechanic. So the prosecutor would have enough peremptory challenges. They would just excuse anybody that was in the in the pool and end up with an all white jury. And the Supreme Court said, You can’t do that. Right? If you’re a prosecutor, if you’re a prosecutor, you can’t do that. To have to have a on all majority jury. You just can’t do that. But they it wasn’t the case back then.
Right. So but then what would that not be brought forward to now terms?
Unknown Speaker 24:38
Well, I’m not really sure. You know, that does he get does he get a new trial? I didn’t get to dive into this to find out exactly what all the states arguing. But the point that you can make clearly is that if we were to adjust society that we claim to be, we would want to eliminate this as being an issue. If he didn’t get affected. trial because the prosecution excused all the jurors that they thought would be objective. When you’ve got to put someone to the electric chair, which that’s not why they’re doing but if you’re going to take someone’s life, wouldn’t you want to make sure they got a fair process?
I would think so. And I would also think that like we would not want to have that black guy
we don’t seem to worry about international opinion when it comes to us. We we don’t we? We are quick to criticize other nations. But when it comes to human rights issues like young people in the registry like what we have 11 Ted dine years on as the youngest but
Yeah, something like that.
What when, when we get criticized, we just wait it’s kind of bought off.
So we will move over to the next article back to the appeal. This is a I can never be more grateful. After nearly 35 years, Willie Mae Harris is released from prison. Harris is now 72 in blind and had been serving a life sentence for shooting the shooting death of her husband I mean, she said it abused her for years last month. The Arkansas parole board agreed to her. She’s super excited about getting out of prison after being in prison since 1985. So what’s that? 35 years? That’s crazy. That’s a long time.
Well, we’re gonna have to give credit to the governor there. A saw Hutchinson agreed that the time had come. And he had previously said no, but he changed his mind. And, as I have said repeatedly, and I’ll say again, he has the political capital to do this because he will not be vilified by any democrat politicians for letting her out. When you see these republicans leave office,
Unknown Speaker 26:38
former Arkansas governor that ran for President Mike Huckabee, you remember he did a whole bunch of clemency.
I remember the name mike huckabee
do. I think they became a media sensation. I think it was Fox. I don’t know if he’s still there. But then the governor of Mississippi haley barbour, they do these things and they take very little criticism. I think the attorney General now, I can’t imagine Mississippi Attorney General will be will be a Democrat. But I think he got a little bit of grief from the Attorney General. But when Haley Barbara was on the way out the door, but Isla, for whatever his reasons are, he did the right thing. He is in prison long enough, and she’s not going to be a threat to society. And he went ahead and made it possible for her to be released and she’s eternally grateful. Now she’s only got 35 years of parole to do so she’s she’s off parole when she’s 107.
That’s, that’s nothing man. She should be able to do that, like with her hands tied behind her back. Wait, hang on, I probably shouldn’t use that metaphor
that says Hart Harris will be on parole for 35 years in the age of 107. According to her attorney, that’s crazy.
Well, I do struggle with those kind of things that she claims that she was abused by her husband and that at some point, like the tipping point just came in she she smoked him, and then goes to prison for first degree murder and given all of the truths now about so much domestic abuse and whatnot, that it’s just probably another thing of the times that, of course, you know, it’s almost like if you’re a woman in a marriage back in those days that you were just considered the property and there was no reason for you to shoot your husband for beating you like you should just take it.
Well, that says in the article, though, there was evidence that could have proved the abuse. Harris’s attorney that was, who were court appointed, presented, none of it. Harris was the only person to testify and her defense,
and it was a court appointed attorney. Right. So she had a public defender.
Yeah. And I don’t know, that was the reason why they didn’t do anything. It’s it’s the common belief if they have a public defender that the POA defender doesn’t do it because they’re a POA defender. There could be strategic reasons, but it is it is bizarre, but nonetheless, I’m not even getting into that. 35 years and she’s 72 in blind. Mm hmm. It’s It’s time folks.
Yeah, she probably can’t do much damage on the street.
So governor Hutchinson did the right thing,
outstanding. Over at the New York Times we say how police unions became such powerful opponents to reform efforts. Do you know Larry, that there are certain people that they have an appearance and they like it’s almost like their job is then picked for them because of the way they look? This dude that is the head of the police union looks like one of those people that is in charge of a police unit. half a decade after a spat of officers involved deaths inspired widespread protests, many police unions are digging into defend members. I think this was more or less about the don’t cross the blue line. Is that the right is that the right expression where the police officers won’t turn on themselves? Yes. And as you know, so somebody gets accused of doing something wrong, then no one will say yeah, I saw I’m doing the bad thing. And the police shootings I’ve heard a whole bunch of podcasts about this lately, of how much the police unions with the contractor associations and how they fill out paperwork and they can’t get fired. And their records are sealed from public scrutiny. I can’t see how this survives. I just can’t see how it survives. Well, it’s an amazing thing that police union, I don’t think they’re like traditional us union membership is pathetically low in this country. The unions exist are largely very weak compared to their heyday. But yet the police unions are strong, almost as strong as ever.
People that are that are union leaders telling me that they’re not a typical union. And I can’t explain the difference but, but it’s amazing that they have the power they do. And part of that power is the fear that they instill. They have the ability to scare the hell out of you about bad things that we talked about last week on the podcast, about what they will do to make you fear any changes, they will convince you that you’re not safe anymore,
right. And do I watched something today that I can’t remember where this was, and I just, I just watched it on YouTube. So take it with a grain of salt but cameras like 13 cameras inside of police precinct reports come in of looting and rioting and XYZ town whichever one was and all the cops just sit there they sat there for hours just twiddling their thumbs because like, you know, they’re getting so much some so much pressure that they’re overreacting. Well, we’re going to under react now see how you like that?
Unknown Speaker 31:19
Yeah, they’re teaching us a lesson.
Right? And I hope that the framework in many and Minnesota then applies out Yeah, we’ll teach you a lesson to like you don’t have to hit everybody with billy clubs that that that that crosses a saw another video of someone. He said some pejorative to the police and they came over and just squirt it in the face with their pepper spray.
Well, they they’ll 57 officers in Buffalo. You know, initially, we’re hearing that they resign they actually only resigned from the emergency response. Yes, correct. And, and they’re still collected their six figure salary. A former police chief, I had saved the clip with the intention of playing it. He said if They resign. And they don’t accept the OSI, most of the Chiefs given them, that they should be fired from the force altogether. Sure.
That doesn’t sound like that big of a stretch.
But But yeah, they’re they were making a statement. Again, that’s designed to scare people. We just won’t have an emergency response team. Will he’ll show you people, hey, if we’re not going to back us, we just won’t do this anymore.
And then there’s a another paragraph in here. It says politicians tempted to cross police unions have long feared being labeled soft on crime by the unions, and those are big voting blocks, and they would have a lot of bully pulpit public Is that the right term to even use in this case?
Unknown Speaker 32:34
they would they would definitely have access to, to almost non stop media coverage if the police leadership is telling you that the community is in danger that is going to be covered. That’s news. I tell people when when you have officials, whether you agree with them not saying that things are dangerous, what do you expect them to do? And well, we don’t really think it’s all that dangerous, which we won’t cover that they’re going to cover you
Got i don’t i don’t know how you fix that one. I mean, cuz you know, like Larry crasner. So the guy that got voted in and Philly to be a progressive da, how he seems to have won on the platform of something more close to equal and justice and whatnot. And he gets trashed in the media pretty regularly. How do you combat that? They have that kind of platform.
I think education the I mean, as far as the media, they’re going to cover it. Because it’s news.
Yeah, of course. And I mean, that’s kind of their job, and they’re driven by rating.
But But would you like them to be the arbiter and said, Well, we don’t think we do that the holiday we’ve done our analysis. Well, well, the community thought that much danger. Well, we’re not gonna we’re not gonna report that they’re going to report it. If the police say this community is in jeopardy because of these reforms. They’re going to report that it is news. Yeah. But you say Are they going to be the arbiter? They’re already the arbiter they pick and choose? No, of course not. This is a newsworthy thing. So they’re going to cover it, but they pick and choose other things that they don’t cover. That is correct. But talk
this thousand people that get shot by police every day. They don’t cover all of that.
They don’t cover all of them. But if we didn’t cover it, we wouldn’t know thousands of people got shot, would we?
I think that happens to be from the Washington Post, like collecting statistics, because there’s another article we have coming up that there’s no centralized information on what our local police forces do.
But in your local community, you know, when your police are killing people, sure, yeah. Wait, we know when every time the police shooting in Albuquerque we’d up which used to have different levels of reaction, but we know, but I’m saying if the police are saying that these reforms are going to make this community unsafe, that is news, and it’s going to be reported.
Yeah. Hmm. I don’t know. I just this one. I how do we have a group of people that carry the the weapons They have so much access to the media, and they get to tell us how safe or unsafe we are. And then we make policy decisions based on what they’ve said without necessarily any evidence behind it because they didn’t report anything because there’s no reporting requirement. Well,
well, I mean, if people want to stand up and say the community is safe, they’ll report all that. Also, they’ll say, well, the district attorney says the community is safe, or are for kid city councilors say the community is safe, but they’re not going to to ignore when the police are saying that bad things are going to happen. They’re going to report that that’s news.
Sure. Well, then let’s move over to another New York Times article, Democrats to propose broad bill to target police misconduct and racial bias. How in the world, Larry, can those federal government people tell my local police department how they should or should not act?
Unknown Speaker 35:55
Well, literally they can’t. But but that what what’s a federal grant Has his money which local communities want. And therefore, in order to, to get the money, they can attach conditions of local communities. But as far as telling the local community, how to run the police department, they really can’t they can say to meet federal standards, just like they do with that emotion act. In order to meet federal policing standards. If you want your burn grant, you will do these things. You will you will, you will act in the following fashion but they don’t have to do it. They can say you know what, you get your burn grants, and you can do whatever you want to with it. I make that I’ve made that argument many times. It’s about the school lunch program. I heard so much criticism about the National School Lunch Program standards about how Michelle Obama was dictating no she wasn’t. She was
saying you get this batch of money if you
Unknown Speaker 36:44
follow these guidelines, if you want the federal government to feed your local school children, which that’s the bulk of where all the lunch money comes from is from the National School Lunch Program, federal funds. If you would prefer that the federal government feed your kids, rather than you take it your own response. Ability local level and you feeding your own kids, then you have to beat these Sanders. But you can tell the federal government, we don’t want to die, but your National School Lunch money, and you can feed the kids, whatever you want to feed them.
And do you think the sheriff in Bucks County is going to turn down that money? I don’t think everybody
law enforcement wants all they can get
that. Tell me this one of the thing, are these the same people that bitch about any sort of government hands out handouts,
Unknown Speaker 37:24
they typically are the people who preach self reliance and individual responsibility. But say they have an argument. I mean, I’ll go into what the argument, the argument is, well, we pay our taxes to the federal government way by our federal taxes, and all we do, it’s getting so mad money back that we’ve paid. And if we didn’t pay the money to the federal government, we wouldn’t be asking for that money back. That’s their answer.
I guess it would be required to pay it regardless of them receiving the benefit.
Unknown Speaker 37:54
Well, that’s the silliness of the whole thing because regardless of how the federal money is allocated, you’re Gotta have federal taxes. So whether we allocate it to law enforcement or to national defense or to whatever programs, that there’s going to be federal taxation, but but they justified they would admit that they’re being hypocritical. They will say, well, we’re paying our weird title to our show the federal buddy. Well, we should just stand down and let the other states get it I’ll be wearing titled hard cut. That’s what they’ll say.
And and I wonder, then, can we we’ve covered the article a number of times where the women get shackled when they’re giving birth. Why do we have to make certain kinds of things like chokeholds? and knees in the neck? Why do we have to make any sort of law that would actually target those kinds of things? Shouldn’t that already be like, we ought not do that?
Unknown Speaker 38:49
You would think so. But I’ve come to the conclusion when I see so much, that there’s not enough internal discipline within within law enforcement to do For those things on their own initiative, I would never like to see children. And when I say child, I’m judging by their size and strength that if a person is 12 years old and the way 190 pounds and they can bench 300 pounds that I don’t really consider their child emotionally, but they’re not a child in terms of physically, hope and I see a crying, nine year old, being handcuffed with hard steel handcuffs, when the nine year old looks like they might could lift 4050 pounds if they’re lucky. Yeah, and that the average adult could hold the nine year olds hands until they completely exhausted themselves from running out, you know, when a child is fighting how you can hold the child, and they’ll eventually completely exhausted go limp. If you do it long enough, they will completely run out of energy. Sure, it may take a while. But I wonder why would you handcuff that child? Mm hmm. But they do. Mm hmm. So that so since they’re not able to impose their own values and say I wouldn’t want my child put in handcuffs at this age. I’m not going to put handcuffs No, sir Chief, I’m not going to bank up this child. I’ll take a neck scarf and I’ll tie his hands but I’m not going to put hard handcuffs on. That’s what we do with adult criminals. But but they won’t. Nobody will say No sir. Or no, ma’am. Right. The chief doesn’t have to be BIA, sir, but nobody will say no, we’re not doing that. So it says
so it says here it says the federal police misconduct statute currently makes it a crime for an officer to willfully violate an individual’s constitutional rights, meaning prosecutors must prove an officer acted with the intention of depriving the person of their rights democrats plan to propose lowering that standard of criminal intent to knowingly or with reckless disregard disregard excuse me and they say that the this change is likely to face opposition from police unions and their allies. What would be Tell me what so the willfully thing like I think I kind of get that one but I was willfully versus knowingly or with reckless disregard. Disregard I keep saying that wrong.
Okay. Well, what was reckless reckless was Be that that, that you’re being careless but you didn’t have a state of mind of actually wanting to cause the harm your negligence and and carelessness caused the harm. And so it’s a much lower standard to prove that someone saw someone was was was willful is a tough standard approach.
Is that almost like beyond reasonable doubt? Oh, well stass so just just like armchair judge for a minute if you would, you know, back Monday morning quarterback for me, that the the situation with George Floyd, the dude, like, where would where would you interpret that that to be did he willfully violate the guy’s constitution or did he with reckless disregard?
Oh, I’d love to have the reckless as a standard if you I know
that you would love that. But do you think that he willfully did it? Or do you think that that threshold is still like kind of murky that you could kind of argue that he, like, he didn’t do it intentional,
Unknown Speaker 41:56
that’s exactly what this defense is going to be. And that’s what makes makes fright frightens me about the the prosecutor upping the charges because the difficult standard, I want to conviction, and I’ll look a person in the eye and say, We want this person convicted of something. I don’t want to risk a not guilty verdict. So I don’t want to reach higher than what what the state. Okay when you have to show I don’t believe we have any evidence unless he had kept a diary somewhere that that, that he had been using force on people and he hoped that they died in his diary reflected that they didn’t. So I don’t think we’re going to be able to show that he wanted that outcome. But we can show that with basic police training, that you would know that depriving a person of oxygen could be could have has the potential to be to be very detrimental to their health. So you don’t want to over prosecute you you want to conviction. I would much rather him go to jail for seven years. And then go free. Okay, because he gets to be a convicted felon, he gets to serve time, he gets to be away from his family and he gets to do some reflection on his behavior, he gets to come out and face not having a career, he gets to have to compete for a job, and he gets to be labeled.
Unknown Speaker 43:17
And he won’t qualify for the payroll protection program.
Unknown Speaker 43:20
And, and so I’m not concerned about him spending decades and decades in prison, I want him to be convicted of something. Because I want the message to go out to officers because we’re not gonna have a overnight change in police culture, I want the evidence to go out to officers that if you do this type of behavior, you will be charged and you will be convicted of something. And if you don’t like the idea of going to prison, and so we get back to I would prefer with with with the prosecution for the likelihood of conviction of forbore certain, and with the these reduce standards that they’re talking about, but that’s a bunch of liberal democrats and you gotta remember the Liberal Democrats. Don’t get The US Congress who controls the Senate, Republican, particularly who Mitch McConnell, yep.
And the most I he is the worst human being on the planet. Maybe not the worst human being on the planet. But Kim Jong Un is worse, but this dude is way up there. Top 10 he’s definitely
He has power. He knows how to use his power. Like there are other people that you could say have more power, but they don’t necessarily know how to use it. He knows how to use it. He’s very strategic. He’s methodical. He’s got he. Oh, he really he frightens me deeply.
Well, on the on the federal misconduct statute, reading, say your makes it a crime false or willfully violate individual’s constitutional rights. The officer is going to say I wasn’t trying to violate his rights. I was trying to keep a very strong man
Unknown Speaker 44:50
restrained. But what
do you like it speaking of this specific situation after he’s non responsive for three minutes, you probably could go huh? He’s not resisting anymore, which he had I don’t think he was resisting to begin with. But at some point time, you’d be like, maybe I could reduce my knee pressure on his neck at this point. This is this is like, I don’t know I don’t I don’t know how you really get around much of anything then first, I can maybe not first degree murder but second degree murder.
Well, what we need to do is we need to next week we need to bring the Rodney King beating video with him clubbing all the officers. Have you seen that video?
I vaguely remember. I know. I remember somebody getting pulled out of a truck. I think.
Unknown Speaker 45:36
Well, that was the that was the driver the ride. So it was Reginald Denny but the Rodney King video to spark that. There was a group of officers I don’t recall how many but I think it was in the four to six officers and they were swinging the clubs wildly on him. Okay. And cameras happen to be rolling and captured otherwise they would have said stuff that would have been sustainable but
yeah 1980 who had cameras
Unknown Speaker 46:00
Well, it wasn’t that long ago. It was a it was a it was in the 90s, if I recall, but but he then police their defense was that they were only using the force necessary, and that Rodney King was in control of that situation while he was pleading for his life, covering his head, and they were swinging and clubbing wildly. That was their defense. It worked a Simi Valley Valley, jury in California, found him not guilty with him on the ground being clubbed repeatedly. And the police saying we were doing this for own safety. And then the big old bad federal government came in and they’re brought federal charges and they and they actually secured a conviction. But the state the state jury refused to make this has nothing to do. You can’t it’s difficult to convict a cop of anything certain it’s going to be the same situation in Minneapolis is going to be very difficult to come back to Cops and Robbers, particularly if you overcharge them,
okay, which is kind of it seems opposite of what we normally experienced where the the charges are accelerated and enhanced to try and get you to plead to something less than here you’re almost describing a lesser situation where we’re just trying to get him guilty of something. And I don’t mean we but they somebody is trying to get him guilty of something.
Unknown Speaker 47:23
Well, now, though, I’m not saying the prosecutor might be overcharging with the intent of offering a plea. I don’t see the community accepting a plea at this case. Okay. So if I’m going to like the prosecutor, I’m going to be fearful of offering a deal because the average, the average citizens not going to understand why you offer deals, and they’re going to say, there they go again, there’s that corruption that we were feared of. Here it goes, they’re making a deal. So the cop doesn’t have to pay the price that a regular person, they’re giving him a sweetheart deal. And, and I don’t think the community would tolerate that. I think the prosecutor would have an immediate rebellion if they cut it down. So I don’t think you can offer a deal. I’m not saying that that’s not in the prosecutors mind, but I don’t believe politically you could offer a deal. You have to convict this cop. But I think the prosecutor has to be courageous and say if I overcharge, I might end up with nothing. Now you can always ask for what’s called lesser included. So if the jury won’t convict on the more serious than you asked for conviction on the lesser included of the reduced charge, but I just don’t like overcharging people. I really, I really think that’s a horrible tactic and I think you charged accurately you offer a reasonable plea to to everyone and if they don’t take to play you go to trial. If the evidence will support it, you shouldn’t bring the charges less evidence supported if they won’t, if they won’t accept a plea offer you try the case.
Ready to be a part of registry matters, get links at registry matters.co. If you need to be discreet about it, contact them by email registry matters. Cast at gmail.com you can call or text a ransom message 27472274477 want to support registry matters on a monthly basis, head to patreon.com slash registry matters. Not ready to become a patron. Give a five star review at Apple podcasts or Stitcher or tell your buddies at your treatment class about the podcast. We want to send out a big heartfelt support for those on the registry. Keep fighting. Without you, we can’t succeed. You make it possible. Now here’s an article from CNN says videos often contradict what police say and reports. Here’s why some offers can officers continue to live this from CNN? Can you believe Larry that there would be video footage and then the officers would say that didn’t happen? They would actually contradict the video evidence even like in the face of watching it.
Well, yes, I can’t believe that because what they say is their standard line. Why you don’t see everything thing of that video just like I’ve heard from people that are dear and close to me about about George Floyd. They say, well, you don’t know what he was doing before that before the cameras start rolling. I can’t wait to see the rest of the tape and I said, Well, if the police have tape, why don’t they release the video? Why don’t we, if the police have all this magic stuff? Why don’t we get to see it, but the cops typically their response is, you just don’t know the whole story.
But even if that’s the case, like even like I, short of Osama bin Laden being on your front door with with a vest that explodes. I don’t want to say the B word. Like, I struggle to think that the police should arrive at your door and kill people. I just I cannot fathom like the circumstances short of that example I just gave where there’s an immediate I mean, immediate threat of massive public damage that they are not the arbiters. They’re not the ones that get to tell you that you get to die today. Well, I agree. I bet I don’t know how any conversations that are had with anybody if someone told me like, I’m just tired of all this stuff. That’s On the news, like, when I saw something on Reddit, some pros, that protester, a white woman that said, if my my it was listing like the circumstances of the some of the high profile ones, if my son got put in the back of the van and died, if my son went to the store and didn’t return, if my son was just, you know, went to the store with and didn’t return, I would be burning up the city too. And I think that, like that message when especially when we talk about our people, the registrants, the PF ours, the people in return, they go, if anybody messes with my kid, I would kill them. And somehow, like that doesn’t translate to all of these other people had been killed for severely limited, like inconsequential circumstances and they’ve died. We talked about like kids with plastic guns and the police shoot them. You can’t I don’t know how you could ever justify that into something rational.
Well, it’s easy. officer safety. I don’t know what you don’t have Sam I mean I’m not trying to be funny. I know that’s how they justify they say well I didn’t know it was toy gun
Should I put even like to have the immediate trigger finger to that be the response to Oh someone sneezed I shot I’m sorry, my bad. You know, like someone farted Oh, crap. Damn, I shot him. I my dad, I can’t put my head around all these circles.
Well, I agree on people people get shot with no weapons. Some of the articles we have tonight I think we have either one or two articles where where the there’s a number of them don’t have weapons
like this. The headline out of this article is a video showed officers in Buffalo New York pushing a 75 year old man police initially said he had tripped and fell but then video comes out and shows this dude, baby he was slightly aggressive but he didn’t threaten the police and they just frickin Billy clubbed him and he fell over and then you see blood all over. And then they stopped. They stood watched and that in that sad unbelievable dude. It’s just unbelievable to me that that the I was having a conversation earlier about this sort of same thing I don’t the police aren’t to me we talk about like white and black and and traditionally when you were when you were coming up probably when you were like already in your 50s or whatever the TV show The Lone Ranger what color hat did
he were? so well that was i was i was like 107 What was that show was running.
So what color hat was white? Okay and what color clothing and things did the bad guys wear?
That’s the long gloves. I remember it was items black and white in those days.
Oh, okay. Well, it seems to me so wife has always represented the good guys and the blacks and I know I know how wrong it is to say that considering like we have whites and blacks and other races and colors and whatnot. But so here in the picture that we have on the screen, the police are wearing all black and in my head. Black is the bad people and are cops driver on a black card. They have all the tactical gear and they’re wearing like military garb they’ve got combat boots on and they’ve got the like the the BU the battle dress uniform pants with the cargo pockets, they got all that crap on and they look militarized. They don’t look like they’re Community Safety people.
I agree. It’s got it’s gotten where the police it’s more and more difficult to distinguish them from military. It’s It’s sad that crime is getting less and less serious, less less prevalent. And we’ve been more and more militarized the people they’re supposed to be interacting with.
And and of course like they are there to keep us safe. And if Oh my god, something bad is happening. I would like to scream out and go. I would like some help, please. But I don’t know that. Those are the people that are going to come help me either. Tell they might mistake me Oh, hey, I’ve seen your picture on that website. You’re on that registry thing. So you must be trying to make something up to get somebody else in trouble.
Yeah, we are though. You’re the bad guy
apparently apparently. What’s this crazy article from vices police are gaslighting us reformers say body cameras and video evidence would stop police brutality. Instead we’re being told not to believe our own eyes. This goes along with the same thing that we were just talking about in Buffalo police said a 75 year old man who was walking alone, doing nothing when he was pushed over by a cop hit his head on cement started bleeding from his ears and was ignored by a group of a dozen officers tripped and fell. They have several other examples of similar things. How is it that the police like can try and stand by that the video evidence doesn’t. It goes against what their story is?
Well like like say they tell you don’t see the whole thing.
Do you see the video on that page? Did you see the the SUVs running over the people? Yes, I did. We had no choice. We were surrounded. You could have backed up. You could have done nothing. Were they going to break in their windows like maybe they Then the police are threatened and they could do something they would have to guess I think that would be an effect like an appropriate use of if they’re trying to roll your car over and take you out and beat you to death but if they’re just protesters on the street Why did the two SUVs like frickin gun it mow people down?
Oh well they would say that they felt very threatened the menacing crowd and that they wanted to get home to their families
that’s what the asshole did in Charlotte with the the Jews will not replace us and that the unite the white right wing or protest whatever that was.
Unknown Speaker 56:29
Do you remember that? No.
There it was right after Trump was elected. It was in Charlotte and I was pretty sure it was in Virginia. And the the rednecks with the tiki torches running around they were saying the Jews will not replace us. It was highly charged racist kind of things. And so a bunch of protesters, mostly black but many other people show up like and it was like a very large majority of protesters considering compared to the people that had started the the white side of the protest. Anyway, somebody In like a Dodge Charger, like runs down the street the next day and killed somebody, but just mode the car into a crowd of people.
Don’t remember that my, my senior moment here.
God, I just I’m just baffled by this layer, baffled. How about from the New York Times where Barr says there is no systemic racism and policing? I don’t see how you don’t see that there’s racism and policing. I just I just don’t understand how our chief law enforcement officer at the top would like publicly say, Now, there’s no problem here
that I think we refer to that as being tone deaf.
Unknown Speaker 57:39
that’s a that’s a fair way to put it.
Is it? Is it is it willful ignorance or is it strategic Lee countering the narrative.
I wonder about that was when I talk to people who say that they don’t see it. And I’m wondering that if he’s lived such a sheltered life privilege that he that he just doesn’t That he doesn’t. If you’ve ever experienced it, it’s not a relationship, something you can relate to. So I’m wondering if he’s tone deaf? Or if he’s just totally oblivious, or I mean, does he really believe what he’s saying?
I I’ve asked this to you like a bajillion times about our president. Is he like a babbling buffoon? Does he know what he’s doing? Is he just an accidental genius of whatever? I’m just I’m like, but this guy has been Attorney General before. Is that right? Yes. So like, I got to think that he has proven he’s competent somewhere in his past because he wouldn’t have just been like, graduated high school and became Attorney General. He would have to have some sort of resume to be appointed. Like this would be as something of an accomplished whether you disagree with his politics or not. Someone liked him somewhere along the way.
Unknown Speaker 58:54
Well, I have no doubt he’s respected but but respected people sometimes are oblivious to See, I take the attitude that no one wants bad things to happen. Believe it or not, whether you’re liberal or conservative, that contrary to rush limbaugh, liberals are not wanting to destroy America in their mind. They think they’re improving America. I do not believe that when when liberals would type conservatives that they want to destroy America, it makes absolutely no sense that they won’t destroy America. They want America to be better for them. I mean, people, people who are succeeding, they want to be even more successful. And when when they propose privatizing Social Security, I don’t believe they’re trying to destroy Social Security. I don’t believe that at all. I think that they don’t understand some of the ramifications of it. But I don’t think I don’t think I don’t think bars is is doing anything deliberate. This certainly he may not have spent any time roaming around the inner cities and watching what happens he may not be desired his life to learn that sure if he if he’s if nobody’s ever said, Mr. Turney General, you’re just flat out out of touch with what happens in minority communities. Hey, you know, he, he may, he may not understand. But for him to say there’s no racial bias to me, all he would have to do would be get into a police car with a hidden camera and watch it on a patrol. Watch it on patrol. Yeah. As all he would have to do income and compare notes as to who gets asked to open their trunk who gets pulled aside for being in a particular asking, asking, why are you here? What are you doing? And they’re doing nothing about passing through. I don’t think it would take very long to figure it out that there’s some there’s some bias in policing
to go along with that the acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad wolf said that systemic racism was not an issue for law enforcement. So I mean, it’s not clearly not just him, and I’m assuming it’s not just the two of them. It probably runs further deeper. And I would also point out that both of these are white men.
Well There’s not a lot of diversity in this national administration. Hmm. What’s up with that? Do you think? I mean, we’ve got Ben Carson and what else? Who else have we got?
Oh, God, and he’s been there the whole time him and which one? Do we keep the secretary the education secretary de vos, Betsy DeVos. They’ve been there. There’s like the only two people that have written the entire time, which I find amazing considering all of the turmoil, but as far as other minorities like, none, none that I can think of Jeff session, he was short. Does that make him a minority?
Well, I’m talking about black there so there’s no blacks in this administration. Other the big Carson I can think of that’s I would agree, I would agree.
Ah, well then let’s see what’s over at the Washington Post, which I might be stuck behind a paywall. Let me try and navigate my way around that real quick to go over this one. Open cognito because I can trick the system really well. Alright, protest spread over police shooting. Police promised reforms every year they still shoot and kill nearly 1000 people. This is why I was reading this letter it says last that year, the Washington Post began telling this is after Fred Diigo, after the Ferguson, Missouri one, Washington Post began telling how many people were shot and killed by police. By the end of 2015. officers had fatally shot nearly 1000 people twice as many ever documented in one year by federal government. And then they kept doing it in the same roughly thousand people in 16, and 17, and so forth. So they’ve been like doing their own independent analysis of this to come up with their own own version of the of the total.
It’s a it’s an alarming number. To me. It really is because, again, we lead the world.
Yeah, we apparently lead them in another category there.
So if you were to go to United Kingdom, you’d be hard pressed to find the police ever killing anybody.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Um, so what do you think? About a manager that I’ve worked for he says you can’t manage what you can’t measure. So if we if we just sweep all this crap under the rug, then we go, Oh, hey, it’s not a problem. If we would track it, if we would, I guess going back to the the power of the purse that ties some sort of funding to it that you have to report this. I don’t know how you validate the accuracy of it, but you make police units report in to get some sort of federal federal dollars. How I don’t know how else you would report these things. How would you have accurate data to manage that the city is more gooder than another thing? Is is really
is tracking a significant problem because deaths are pretty much recorded.
But but don’t don’t you end up with the corner in cahoots and said, God, I don’t remember if it was an article we had tonight. But there was an autopsy on someone and the coroner said nothing like there was like there was nothing in the autopsy report. So then you then the family has to go get their own. Private autopsy isn’t that even like George Floyd? They said that they found things in the autopsy that that aren’t true.
Right. But what we’re also what the autopsy is, is what we know that the police killed him.
How? Who would who would be the the the institution that reports that that happened?
Unknown Speaker 1:04:18
Well, the aisle, all death, as far as I know, in every jurisdiction are recorded if they’re known. And and so if someone dies and police custody, I don’t know how that the last person who had contact with him we know whose name was on his neck, right? Sure. We know. We know that he died in police custody. So it doesn’t seem like tracking people in police custody to die would be all that hard. Same thing in prison. We know. We know you go into jail house. And we know that if you come out alive one thing and we know if you’re brought out as a deceased, we would know that when we don’t know necessarily what killed you while you’re in prison. You could have died natural causes, but with when personally Does that help the police? I think we we have a pretty good idea.
So then by extension, do you believe that this is not accurate information from the washington post that they’re tracking twice as many deaths per year than what the government has information on?
Unknown Speaker 1:05:15
I’m not I’m not able to explain how how that would be such a variation of them, because it seems like it’d be straightforward. They either died or they did
I get that part, but then the quote unquote, cause of death and circumstances. Does the does the family of the deceased have any say in how that is documented? And then how is that information aggregated and produced into a report for someone to go? Well, this Police Department has killed way more people than per capita than this police department? I don’t understand the mechanism for that information to travel up the chain of command.
Well, I’m assuming this is only an assumption, but I’m assuming that if if the NRC ADB the Office of medical investigate I’m assuming if Oh, am I receives report of a death, whether it’s in police custody or not, oh, Maya would send out an investigator to do to do an investigation. And of course, the police will be interviewed. So the person would say, Well, what were you doing with it? Well, I had my data’s not okay. Did he? What happened next? Well, he went silent for the for 810 14 minutes. Okay. Well, then, and I don’t know, the ultimate stage was in an autopsy, because I’ve never I’ve never observed one. But by understanding at a basic level, from what you see on TV, and and what you hear about is that they take the control of the body and they try to figure out what the what the causes of death were, we if there were, there was a particular cause of death, but death, but the first thing you do would be you pick the corpse up at the police department and police custody, you would know that right? And then you would start you start looking into the cause of death. You might find that the person you might find that the person had all sorts of issues. Once you get an autopsy. Now we have a person In Mexico, I can ask for about autopsies. And we can get on next week because because that person who’s retired now used to do they’ll sakes, you know, we used to, but I’m assuming that we could, we could we, we would know who’s dying in the police custody.
Unknown Speaker 1:07:15
I guess you could have people that would go into a corner arrest because our police costed and the police have it costed. It might not had anything to do with it, their calls to death, but but it seems like that there would not be a huge variation.
Hmm, I can’t argue with your your analysis that I just said, I’m been conflicted on the Washington Post’s making their claim that they have tracked, and I don’t know what their mechanism of tracking was, did they just take eyewitness reports and, you know, there’s like, Hey, I watched Larry die by the police and they just accept that as being the truth. I don’t know how they I have a decent amount of respect for what the Washington Post does is journalism. I realized that they’re slanted in a certain direction, but I don’t think that they have been called out terribly for being inaccurate like some other Let’s
Oh really? For instance,
I mean, you know, I mean, even CNN, you know, gets called out fairly regularly for being shoddy. But you know, maybe there’s another one that has three letters and starts with F and is a name of an animal. Aha, I won’t be specific about which animal that was sort of like a canine kind of an animal. Uh huh. Have you figured out what I’m referring to you?
It’s a little hazy to me but so
Alrighty, though, and then we have another Okay, so that’s the same well then All right, let’s uh, gosh, you know, the the Atlantic if you don’t have like a college education, you cannot read articles from the Atlantic just about these very big words. The first step is figuring out what police are for this is a an article, like I said from the Atlantic for reform to succeed, American communities need to have a conversation about what the purpose of police is, and think hard about what jobs can be better handled by other institutions. This uh, I we’ve kind of been tiptoeing around On this one, if you have somebody that’s having a mental health issue, like some kind of breakdown, and you get the police out there, billy clubs, like, that’s probably not the appropriate response. But I don’t think that we’re having the conversation in the country of trying to figure out how we should delineate those. Those roles. I think we had a clip, maybe it was a clip, or at least I heard some someone say, well, we just send the police to do everything. So the police, like everything looks like a nail in there the hammer,
there’s some fairness involved or something. The police are de facto, the problem solvers for we’ve had either never adequately funded or we’ve reduced funding for this, like our jails have become de facto mental health wards and the jails really don’t want that responsibility. And the police get called out when you when you have a that’s got to be a name for a down and out that’s more appropriate. But one person who’s down there login and who’s not completely rational, guess who gets to call The deal with those people is to police. You know, we don’t have we don’t have anybody else to sin. So you have a person who may be struggling with mental illness. And this person with all this garb, dressed with guns and handcuffs and clubs and everything comes rolling into the scene. And it police officers are trained to talk sternly with command, with with confidence and to be and that probably escalates all situations. And in fairness to the police, they probably be happy not to have these roles that have been thrust upon them. But unfortunately, that’s where we’re with society. We don’t have we don’t have anybody else to call but to please. So this article points out that, you know, what do we want from the police to do? Do what do we want to have less police and more people that are able to respond to those types of situations where you need more of a counselor, a compassionate person, rather than an aggressive armed person? And would you get better out I think you probably would,
I want you to put on your hat and pretend that you’re a particular attendee of the first Atlanta conference that says the crime rate has for several years now been at historically low levels
Unknown Speaker 1:11:13
I’ve heard that before. What was the response of the person gave you?
Well said it was bogus.
So this must be some shoddy publication the Atlantic Who would ever believe anything that they publish? Oh, obviously not that person. Can you in your mind is it like, can you in your mind layout how you think it should be delineated? How what should be doing the police that should Can you think of how we should identify should how we like quote unquote, break up these different roles that they play?
Well, what, when when crime is happening? Clearly a law enforcement responses as is an option to consider, but I think we have We have to get into Do we? Do we really want to send out a heavily armed for counterfeit? 20. Right? What was that? Had you sent out a? Let’s let’s try to see if we can all agree on this. If you had the British model, where you send out an unarmed officer, or they usually use a lot of verbal, verbal, jousting and persuasive, if you watch, if you watch a a, an officer in the UK, they used to try to persuade the person to do what they want them to do. So you’d go with it with with the British accent and but what Sir, could you step into the car, please? You know, what would you would you mind putting your hands over your head so I can so I can. So I can do a quick Frisk of your body, that they they’re trained completely differently. So I would like to see us send out police that are heavily armed in situations where heavily armed is the right thing to do. Because that’s What you’re responding to, but I would like to see a much more low key response. They’re still sworn officers but maybe they come in plainclothes and maybe they talk to you like a friend. You know, hang on, but I’m with the Albuquerque Police. What’s going on here? Yeah. And and and and crisis counselors available. Mental Health Services. Of course, that means funding and we might have to raise taxes. Oh, stop. We’ll
stop on this
recording as we speak right here. We might have to either reallocate some of the money that’s going to traditional law enforcement, we might have to consider increasing revenues to pay for more mental health counselors, more crisis workers because some things don’t need the aggressive response from the police. They need a calming counseling therapeutic environment. This is more for Teresa to talk about from from pa but but the police to place or we’re probably willing to give up some of those things because they don’t want to do all these things. Do they’re not Marriage counselors, right. One of the things that police hate a lot is domestic domestic disputes.
I can imagine that they do.
Unknown Speaker 1:14:06
They, they hate with a passion, because they know that they have to wrestle buddy, we’ve got this famous bipartisanship that you talk about. We agree that arresting the primary aggressor is required to keep the federal funding. So when you go out on domestic violence call, you’ve got to take somebody into custody. And sometimes custody is not the answer, because by then by the time the police get there, the the parties have had some, some resolution, and they want to call a truce. And then they turn on the police and the police get scratched and attacked at customs and everything, because they’re in the middle of this. So I bet we could actually get the police to agree on some things I would like to get out of that part of the business.
Theresa actually did say she said defund the place and funnel dollars to mobile mental health crisis units, among other things.
Teresa listening right now she absolutely All righty. Well, we might need to fire her up,
then we might I don’t know that we should do that tonight with the internet connection we have the super secret underground bunker has some really shoddy internet I’ve already been disconnected once.
Well don’t let it happen again.
I will try when I load up new pages for the next article. It takes it more like minutes for it to load. But so with that I am going to we’re going to talk about there was a man a week or two ago that like a vigilante murder had been killed in Nebraska and says Oh mom and says killing sex offender was justified and doesn’t think a jury will convict him. This is from Omaha world Herald and I have a voicemail message from will that I would like to play. Are you ready for the for the voicemail?
Unknown Speaker 1:15:47
I will do my best. All right here we go from Well,
Unknown Speaker 1:15:50
good evening, Larry and Auntie This is will from Tennessee. And I have a question regarding the vigilante murder of Matteo conda Lucci by James fair banks, and there have been GoFundMe pages set up to pay for Mr. Fair banks legal defense against the murder charge. He’s that’s been imposed. And I have read the comments on that page. And they are so vile and disgusting. This murder has been raised to the level of a folk hero. And there’s a Facebook group dedicated to supporting him. And according to the World Herald, thousands of people have supported fair, fair banks online. And a store in Nebraska is selling t shirts that read fair banks did the world a favor. Can those kinds of comments and expressions of lethal sentiment be an admitted into court as evidence that the registry does indeed subject registrants to A very real danger that would amount to cruel and unusual punishment. I’d like to hear your thoughts on that. And thank you for what you guys do and to all the rest of the world who loves the registry so much You’re such friendly young people. Good evening, and thank you
cannot get him to save my life to actually see what fyp is.
Well, I liked it till they got to the very, very end about does it does it? Cause does registry cause danger people Clearly, we we’ve documented that with with with the ones that have been willing to proclaim that they use the registry as a tool to target their victims. We know that there’s the overwhelming majority don’t do not pronounce that but but some have thought we know that. So we know subjects them to vigilantes, but vigil. punishment is a governmental function. And because vigilantes are engaging in unlawful behavior. I’m not drawing the connection to that punishment, it’s dangerous. But punishment would be the punishment that’s actually imposed upon you in the registry is not a punishment that’s imposed upon you. It’s the collateral consequence of, of either a conviction or not guilty by insanity or something that triggers the duty to be part of the registry to be a participant in the registry scheme. So up until the part where he said, does it does it? Does it constitute cruel, unusual punishment? or whatever? I don’t I don’t say that it does that. Does it? Does it open up? Do you have any legal challenges? I think it does do that. I think it shows that the internet publication splits with address specific and with the type of detail that it does. I think it it bolsters the claim the internet is a dangerous tool. And it’s a government aided tool that allows the public to engage in vigilante I mean, I think, I think it moves our calls forward and in terms of the jury I think he might be right. That a jury won’t convict them. If you remember what they took when they picked the person in a jail, you remember that, that that uh, they plotted that he was taking the Novation upon being admitted to the jail. Do you remember that?
Yeah, I do. And I have some some clips from change.org campaign to help fund his legal defense to read off, most of which just say things like, he’s a hero, he has saved all of us from these terrible people and, you know, doing things that the government won’t do and protecting our children, etc.
Unknown Speaker 1:19:31
Well now, but just just think about the absurdity of this a jail facility full of people who the majority are generally pre trial pre conviction. These are people who want to be presumed not guilty. They want to have a good attorney. They’d love to have a robust challenge against the state and force hold hold the state’s feet to the fire in terms of burden of proof. How is it that that they could rationally Do what they did, and claim that they want due process of law for themselves. If you can explain that to me, I’ll take you to the thickest steak or whatever you want to eat while I’m here, because I cannot fathom how you could dictate. You could be in jail and applaud someone being admitted to jail. hosts just committed or been accused of we don’t know he’s guilty, but accused of committing a very serious crime to me. I can’t make that calculate.
Do you think from judge Mitch pullet, pointing out that the registry is cruel and unusual punishment at the hands of the public? Do you think that ties into it ties into the just the aspect of what you said is that here’s the internet component that we have this public registry thing and a public registry thing. Dude got killed? And does that make any of the connection for you?
Well, I don’t remember the vigilantism being a part of Jamaica’s decision. He was he was not focused on that. So I’m not I’m not drawing the direct parallel there. And judge mages for judge mates for those who are not recognize the name that was the now deceased federal judge in Colorado who found the registry as applied to the challenging parties was unconstitutional in several regards on one was it It caused cruel, unusual punishment that there was more than one plate if not remember which one he found it was cruel and unusual. There might have been the person who was convicted as a juvenile but but I don’t I don’t quite see the parallel here
Hmm. Well is like determined that saying that three had been harassed and judged he called them out for that they had been harassed because of the public component of the registry, which then ties into this thing and fair bank in Omaha with fair banks and whatever kind of Lucci that because dude was on the internet. He was, who he was and then decided to go murder.
Well, I know that before we sign off, people want me to say that all registries are in constitution. Sure. And They’re not right. All all criminal registries are bad, but they’re not all unconstitutional, you could have a registry that would be constituted. Now, I don’t think any of our legislative bodies would be capable of designing such a thing, because there’d be too much pressure to pile on things that would make it unconstitutional. But you could have a constitutional registry,
so like to take this Omaha thing by extension, so if it didn’t give dudes 123 Main Street but just said in the general vicinity of this intersection, or in this county, maybe then dude would never have necessarily known that he lived next door. Plus, as I understand it, all of the registry said that you cannot use this for anything other than just your basic informational purposes that you can’t use this to go and be a vigilante and dude, killing another dude is that as far as I know, our criminal code shuns that kind of activity, and
it’s already against the law but if someone will Write dilaudid do you think simply putting an admonishment that you should misuse this information? Do you think that I would do anything?
No I certainly don’t but then does does the judge does he get caught you would only have to have one person holdout correct to you to convict him of murder would you just need one holdout
Will you need one holdout to acquit I mean to hang the jury but but
so then can the judge get in there to the jury and go look I don’t care what you think about the registry killing another human is is bad. I mean, does the judge get to like I know the judge does a little bit with the with the jury as far as like, here are the rules here’s what you’re actually listening for. So did he do this like premeditated and all these things and then they’re all gonna come he’s not guilty?
Well, I think I follow your question. jury nullification doesn’t happen very often. That’s when despite the evidence, the jury finds not guilty. That you’re correct, the judge would and instructions and as a Before you get to instructions in the vetting of the jury, you would be trying, you’d be trying your hardest if you’re the defense to make sure that that that those type of biases are not there. But you can have a runaway jury. All it takes is a really strong personality to emerge just for person to the jury. And you can you can end up having a runaway jury and, and people people can can do things that are they’re irrational, but the evidence is pretty compelling. So it’s hard to imagine that they won’t be found guilty of something they may they may they may settle on a lesser charge because I like identify what he did why he did it.
I mean, it’s like I can I can imagine scenarios where you you know, you walk into your bedroom and your spouse is there with your best friend and you lose your brain and you you kill them in the heat of the moment. This guy like kind of pondered it for days and he like went to the door and knocked on And like, talk to him for a second and just said I was just overcome with rage and I just shot him right there on the spot. It feels a little bit less than just like I was overcome with rage and anger at the moment.
No, it’s it’s it sounds very premeditated
it does it it at least maybe not premeditated to the point of But hey, I’m gonna go have a talk with this dude. Okay, I can’t handle it anymore. I just must kill this purse. It’s like, it’s so ridiculous. Plus, have you seen dude’s mustache? Yes, that is an amazing mustache. Kinda Lucci has one of those like 1920s things that like curls up and around a few times over. Looks like it looks like it
looks like a weirdo. So,
I really struggled to think I can see the jury saying that. Maybe he shouldn’t be guilty. But I don’t know how they could argue that it would be to me there would be some mental gymnastics to sit there and go. He’s not guilty of ending the person’s life. So Maybe they come back with some lesser kind of murder. I know that there’s like 10 different kinds of murder that there is but somebody’s still dead in this
day. It’s hard for me to imagine a totally not guilty but like they could cut him some slack and they found without the premeditation, but, but you know, the evidence is strong,
very well. And then if you are not in objection to any, any of the articles to cover, I would like to do the challenge to the Miami Sex Offender Registry residency rules and then call it quits. Sure if there’s something else you want to want to hit, no problem, ru v. So this one comes from courthouse news panel, here’s challenge to Miami sex offender residency rules. And I always love when I read articles that have Lauren or Ron book in it because they just seem to have such a like, like their public image is like, oh, we’re trying to help the offenders but they are putting the screws to them at every turn. And this is about residents PFR is just having to be for all practical purposes homeless and with nowhere else to go. And I was hoping that you had some information that you could fill in the gaps on where this may be heading. But I didn’t get the chance to. So what we have is an appeal in the 11th circuit. And for those who haven’t followed it, the 11th circuit is the southeast United States. It’s based in Atlanta, and it covers three states, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, as one of the circuit courts of the United States court system. So when you when you try a case at the district court level and you’re
an satisfied party, you have a right by law to appeal to the 11th circuit. So the challenge was filed. It’s a 2500 feet requirement. prohibition for us, not all offenders, it’s certain sex offenders but the prohibition that makes it difficult to find housing in Miami Dade. And and the district judge said, Nope, this is Scott. institutional so it’s on appeal. The 11th circuit, just FYI has been sitting on a case out of Alabama. It’s one of the three states in the circuit. McGuire vs. Strange. And that’s been sitting in the level circuit for a number of years now. And those who attended the narshall National Conference, the, the webinar, whatever we call it these days, the one of the attorneys on that case, Philadelphian was the speaker. Yep. And I don’t know if that came up. I have not been able to watch. He
often talked about it pretty much exclusively for the hour that he was on.
Yes. Well, that that that that case has been sitting there unresolved. So my expectation would be that based on the track record of your loan circuit, this case might go sometime before it’s resolved. On the appeal,
can you enlighten me on what is what like? I mean, I have no idea what they do. Do they play golf all day? Like what is the holdup of them deciding on a case for years and years and years?
Well, we don’t know all of this on this. One, it could be, it could be anything from a member of the panel died or had health issues. They this on the cases two, three judge panels. And it could be anything from that there’s an evolving body of case law registration, and they they’re waiting to see if the silver bullet they’re looking for, to either give them the backup to, to strike the thing or to uphold it, you know, in the case of Maguire versus strange, so it could be any number of things, but someday they will eventually decide the case. Who knows when but but they they will eventually decide the case. And same thing with the 10th circuit in the case that you just mentioned earlier with the judge make the 10th circuit sitting for some time on that case. They will eventually decide the case.
2500 feet is it a mile or half a mile it is half a mile but it doesn’t like You know, half a mile as the crow flies like that’s a seven, eight minute walk, you know, at a not even anything of a brisk pace. It’s not, it’s not that far but when you turn it into a big circle, it is a gigantic number of square feet now is off limits. It’s so crazy at how big that is that in a place like Miami Dade like that is a very congested place that there is now effectively no place for them to live except for this tiny little carve out and then when they go there, they run them off and then they’ve got to go find some little other carve out for them to go hang out at. And somehow so this the the original judge says
Nope, you can do this. That’s what looked at the 45 page opinion, which I might may have read back in 18 when it came out, but I don’t recall enough details talk intelligently about it. But I’m sure that the judge felt that he or she had done a brilliant analysis for coming up with with because just cuz you don’t like something doesn’t make it unconstitutional. And what you’re arguing is banishment.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:00
The the issue of banishment as it was understood in colonial times which those who claim they’re literalist and believe interpret by what the words were meant at the time. banishment didn’t include just not being able to live in a place management include being told to leave town and never come back. So the defense of these laws as they say, well, we have a banish them from town, they can spend money they can be here. This is not a banishment This is merely that they cannot live here, or they can live here, but they have to live within the boundaries of what’s acceptable, but but it does, it’s not a true punishment. So then you have to come up with a new legal theory. And a good legal theory is not that I don’t like this law, this bad public policy, that doesn’t make it unconstitutional. Bad public policies don’t magically become unconstitutional because you disagree with them.
I just agree, Larry, we should not allow this.
Unknown Speaker 1:31:52
So so the that’s what people, people who don’t understand what the courts role is their courts. Roald is not to save us from unwise choices that we’ve imposed on ourselves through a democratic process stupid but constitutional? Yes. I think we need to play Scalia. Do you have that handy?
Oh my god, it would take me moments to get there so that for a minute, Larry and I don’t find stupid constitution.
So but yeah, the with when we have bad laws from a policy perspective, that doesn’t make them unconstitutional, you have to put forth the constitutional argument like it deprives the one that I’m chomping at the bit is the religious separation was the first amendment where people are effectively not allowed to go to church. The law doesn’t say you can’t go to church. But the the government by prohibiting a person who’s required to register from being within a certain number of feet, includes the worship house and the worship householder step over said nope, that’s not none of your business with the government that is not allowed to constitutionally separate us from our permission. parishioners, so therefore, we’ve got a constitutional argument. But just because you don’t like the fact that there’s an exclusion, so unless they did it retroactively and took your property from you, at first blush, it doesn’t look unconstitutional because it’s not a punishment.
It’s a restriction. Do you remember if it was the clip that was about originalism, the constitution that I apply is not living but dead or offensive magic? Remember, we’d all look
for it tonight.
Yeah, I don’t know which one it is. I should probably get that as just a little itty bitty one little thing where we’re at the end of our time allocation, we are absolutely 140 So that is all I’ve got Larry, unless you have anything else that you would like to talk about. Plug. Discuss describe?
Well, I would like to know if someone wanted to support the podcast or contact about a guest How do they do it?
Oh, okay. Well, first of all, your answer is always gonna be very careful. However, first of all, you have to go get internet and there is no internet here at this location. It is garbage. So from here, these people could not support us. However, other people go to patreon.com slash registry matters. And of course, we love all of our listeners, but the ones that support us, you guys are the bestest in the whole world. And we so very much appreciate it. It makes this a much more enjoyable endeavor. And it makes the pockets a little bit heavier, I guess. Yeah. heavier. And there’s another stimulus check coming, Larry. So maybe we could entice people to give us the new stimulus check.
Well, we’ll have to wait and see about that.
How long you in town for till next weekend. Excellent. And traveling was good. How did you did you have an interesting experience at Hartsfield? Just a
little three hour stay over but no hearts. Don’t think interesting was there was nobody in it.
Nobody in it. I don’t know. Like, some time ago, I flew out of there like Thanksgiving and the security line was like wrapped all the way around the food court.
I didn’t need to go through it because I was barely passing through. But I could imagine And it will stop very. I didn’t encounter any problems along the way in terms of security delays. It was running with fewer personnel but it was running pretty pretty rapidly.
And and will wants me to ask you, you did bring the showerhead.
I did. I had to I had to use it. I couldn’t get a drop of water in Raleigh.
Did you? You didn’t go to Raleigh.
Yes, I did. You did go to Raleigh. Yes, that was my first stop.
Oh, and that’s why you went through with telling me that okay. Now I understand. I didn’t really I thought you were being silly when you talked about Nevermind. Okay. I thought you ran into somebody somewhere else. I got it. I got it. So, all right, then well, that is going to close things out. The show notes will be at registry matters.co. You can find YouTube you can call 87472274477 and registry matters. firstname.lastname@example.org There you go.
That’s everything. So thanks, everyone.
Have a great night and I will talk to you soon.
Unknown Speaker 1:35:57
Good night. Bye.