[00:00] Intro: Registry Matters is an independent production. The opinions and ideas here are those of the hosts. If you have problems with these thoughts, f y p.
[00:14] Andy: Recording live from FYP Studios East and West, transmitting across the Internet. This is episode this time, Larry, I said it on, in the show the other night. This episode is three fifty seven. I was confused at the conference. This is episode, three fifty seven of Registry Matters. Larry, it has been so long since we have spoken. How are you?
[00:35] Larry: Well, it was just yesterday, but I’m doing awesome.
[00:40] Andy: Well, I I guess I mean, in the context of recording a podcast because I think we skipped the week before the conference, and then you weren’t at the conference. So it’s been, like, forever since we’ve done this. I don’t know if I remember how to press all the buttons the right way.
[00:52] Larry: Yeah. It was. I got to take two weeks off because of various things, and I was so happy for a vacation. When can we have the next two weeks off?
[01:03] Andy: John says no. Let let’s just go right ahead for it. What are we doing tonight?
[01:10] Larry: Well, sad news. It’s just gloom and doom for this episode. I don’t know what happened to our attorney partner, Chance. I was not able to raise him this week. Oh. Uh-oh. Yep. I’m hoping he didn’t croak. But we have a special guest from Pennsylvania, John, which we’ll be getting to him early on in the episode. He’ll be walking us through some recent develops and their advocacy there in PA. And we have a new segment that’s been invented for this episode, and we plan to continue it if the audience likes what we’re doing. And we have two articles I’d like to cover, from recent news that are tangentially related. And I received an angry email stating that I promised to explain why president Obama did not veto IML. So if time permits, I will try my best to answer that question again. Why didn’t he veto it? People just keep writing about that, man.
[02:15] Andy: Well, let us, dive right in with, John. So welcome, John. How are you tonight?
[02:24] John: I am doing fine, Andy. Much better than when we last saw each other when I was dying of COVID.
[02:32] Andy: You were not doing well. You I couldn’t hear you with the mask, and you were you were you were in bad shape. I’m glad. Are you feeling better? Are you all well now?
[02:41] John: I, woke up this morning for the first time without a coughing fit, so I think that’s probably in the right direction.
[02:47] Andy: Well, that’s awesome. Well, here’s the proper introduction. So you are John Dawe, and you are the managing director at the Pennsylvania Association for Rational PFR laws. I I don’t like using sexual offense, but PFR laws, where he uses his personal experience as a person who is both a survivor and per perpetrator of sexual harm to help others with similar life consequences to live healthy and productive lives through recovery coaching. He has a master’s in nonprofit administration, which I heard earlier is similar to an NBA excuse me, an MBA, not NBA, not basketball, but it’s for, nonprofits. You are a certified nonprofit professional with additional graduate certificates in leadership, governance, and fundraising. And and NARSAL recently recognized mister Dawe as its twenty twenty five advocate of the year at its annual conference in Atlanta. So welcome again, sir. How are you? Alright. Yeah. In Atlanta, that conference that Larry didn’t go to. That’s the one. He skipped out just so that he, snubbed you from getting the award. I I
[03:49] John: I think we need we shoulda had a cardboard cutout or something of him, and he could’ve he could’ve been behind the FYP table. We just coulda had little signs that people held up next to him, like doom and gloom. Or
[04:05] Andy: That that would have worked quite well. Alright. Well, so you guys in Parcel had a fairly significant event on Tuesday. Is that correct? What happened?
[04:16] John: We did. Here’s the whole backstory. About thirty years ago, and now I guess ten days. So
[04:26] Andy: so thirty years Not to be specific. Ten days ago. Not to be specific.
[04:30] John: Pennsylvania’s then governor, later Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, signed into law Pennsylvania’s Megan’s Law, which established the first conviction registry here in Pennsylvania. So this past Tuesday, Parcel held an information day and media event, at the Pennsylvania State Capitol, just steps from the governor’s Office, to, quote, commemorate, unquote, this. Our staff and volunteers showed up with Windows 95 CDs, a floppy disk drive and posters for, Apollo 13, the TV show ER, Alanis Morissette’s debut album. Fantastic. All of these all of these things from thirty years ago, thirty years ago being 1995. And I think we very effectively showed that pretty much everything in in our lives has changed since 1995. You think about, just the Windows 95 thing and and the floppy disks. I mean, 25% of Americans had home Internet access, and a much smaller portion of those had high speed Internet access. And now we have, devices in our pockets, I mean, the podcast listeners can’t see that I’m holding up my phone, but, that are hundreds of times more powerful than the computers we had back then. But the registry laws remain rooted in the 1995 zeitgeist in the culture of that era.
[06:17] Andy: Good choice of words. Yeah. That would actually be you’re you’re pretty tech tech inclined. So what was the Internet like in ’95? I don’t know. I had AOL dial up. Yeah. I had dial up too. I was, I was in the army and and, actually, I was in Korea in 1995. So I didn’t have a lot of Internet access when I was in Korea. Like like you said, though, so the thirty years and a few days ago, it’s been since, Megan’s law took effect in Pennsylvania. And it’s the same as it is in so many states. The registry was built for another error. And, for a lot of folks that are forced to register, it feels like time has simply frozen for the law. And I honestly, I would say that it’s gotten significantly worse in places like, Florida. And so I want you to dive in here, John. Has anything truly changed in your view for people on these registries over those years, or is everything pretty much stuck as it was in 1995?
[07:12] John: Absolutely right, Andy. It’s it’s gotten worse. I mean, in 1995, because there was not a robust Internet, there wasn’t a there if you I mean, there was a public registry, but if you wanted to know if your neighbor or anyone near you was on the registry, you had to go to the police station, and they got a big binder out, and you paged through it. Now you can, open on your phone in less than fifteen seconds, everybody in the state, in Pennsylvania, there’s more than 24,000 people on the registry here. It it it still, I think, continues to be built on a perception of, a misconception about risk. It’s a one size fits all Well, this is all things that, I’m sure, our listeners know, but, it’s built we’ve gone thirty years, And what’s happened in those thirty years is thirty years of research on its effectiveness on the best way to prevent sexual harm, the best methods to treat individuals who cause sexual harm and prevent them from committing or causing additional harm. But we still are rooted in that 1995 idea that we just treat everybody the exact same way and go from there.
[08:56] Andy: Well, at at the heart of today’s events and advocacy is this idea of modernization. And it sounds great in theory, but for people living under these rules, what would modernization really mean, for them on a day to day basis? I mean, we were talking a little bit in preshow that, people people keep mailing Larry about IML stuff, and they’re like, I would like to go visit France. And it’s like, we’ve people living in under bridges in Florida. It’s like I mean, there’s there’s not a lot of parity there. You have people who are about to lose their SNAP benefits to go on a teeny tangent, but you got people who can’t function not function, who are are restricted from daily functioning so bad. And then, so what would modernization look like for them?
[09:41] John: Sure, Andy. At its core, modernization would mean shifting away from the forever punishment mindset. It would recognize that someone can actually change and that things like treatment and supervision should count for something. Parcel has several proposals in the legislature right now, to hopefully have bills introduced that would shift us to risk based systems. Right now, no matter what your actual evaluated level of risk, is in Pennsylvania, your registry status is set by the crime that you committed. We know that that’s a one size fits all system which doesn’t work. There, except there are eight different registry tiers in Pennsylvania. Eight. All with different requirements, all with different conditions. So it it’s kinda confusing for anyone. There are attorneys that have looked at me and said eight. And when I show them the list of them, they’re like, oh, yeah. Hey. There there are eight here.
[11:00] Andy: I didn’t know that there were eight. That’s that’s kinda crazy. Because they were they were talking about in Georgia of adding maybe making it five levels or adding five to the existing three. I can’t remember which way it was. And I was like, what is that gonna do? I don’t I don’t see the point of having that many. It seems like to me, I feel like I don’t even know that low, medium, and high would make sense because there isn’t a lot of difference between low and medium if you look at it from, like, a tier one and a tier two or a level one and level two. There’s not a lot of difference. And once you go to level three, then you’re, like, forever forever monitored, you know, lifetime GPS kind of thing? So there’s there’s three
[11:37] John: tier of of those, there are three groups that have any method to petition to be removed from the registry, and that happens to people who are registered for life in some way or another with some number of conditions or another, after twenty five years on the registry with no slip ups and no registration issues, not that as long as you have a perfect record, after twenty five years, you can apply to maybe petition to pay an attorney and go before the judge and pay court fees to maybe get off the registry. So we are we have a proposal in for that. We have a proposal in for what happens I mean I mean, you’ve been to Pennsylvania. There’s there’s a thing called snow here. So what happens if there’s a if there’s what happens if you’re supposed to register February between January 31 and February 9, and there’s snowmageddon, and the governor declares a state of emergency and you can’t register. But somehow during the snowmageddon, the police still can make it to your house and arrest you for failure to register. Or what happens if you get in a car accident or fall down the stairs and break both your legs and are in in traction in a hospital room? And well, that’s an interesting thing. I’d love to get Larry’s, take on that. My idea my thought kind of in a tongue and cheek way is if you have seriously injured yourself and have a ton of medical bills, then let the state come arrest you and pay all your medical bills while you recover. But, anyway, but but we have a proposal in that would that would suspend registration requirements during periods like that. And then we have a proposal in for people who are elderly, people who require long term care in a nursing home. And, I mean, I have parents that are elderly dealing with dementia issues. And so if, if someone on the registry can’t remember their name, they’re not going to remember to register nor are they a going to be able to get in a car, drive to, state police barracks, and register in person. So, we have, proposals for that as well. So there’s there’s a lot of things that could happen, based on these thirty years.
[14:15] Andy: And now I think a lot of people, especially in our community, run up against this kind of question. How do we build broader support? A lot of advocates advocates are on board, but the folks directly impacted, are on board. But how do you reach everyone else, especially when politicians worry about being seen as, quote, unquote, soft on crime. Because as Larry frequently says, if we do blah, blah, blah, we’re gonna unleash a tidal wave of crime. Is that do I have that right, Larry? Precisely. You have a good memory. I do. I try to. John, so what’s the answer to that? That’s where practical strategy comes in. One piece is education.
[14:54] John: Most people don’t realize that the registry covers tens of thousands of people. It catches an enormous range of of cases. It is not based on actual risk. It’s based on perceived risk, again, based on on crime, not assessment. They people assume that the reoffense rates are high. They’re not. They’re the they’re the lowest reoffense rate of any tracked crime except a homicide or murder, and usually people who commit murder are not usually back out on the street to reoffend. So education is a key. We do a lot of that. That was a big part of of this, event in Harrisburg. Is that educating the politicians or the public? Both. Absolutely both. It I just the list this really cool thing happened during the speech. We had, one of our elected officials, one of our state representatives, speaking, and another state representative who was walking by stopped, listened to the speech, and literally walked up onto the steps and stood with the crowd. So that was a really cool spontaneous thing. Like, you just need to start the conversation. And, you know, I think that that’s a big component to it. The other component is we develop strategic relationships with people that you might not think we would, with treatment providers, with law enforcement, with other civil rights organizations. Andy, you came up to PA for our, conference last year where the executive deputy attorney general of of Pennsylvania at the time was our was our keynote speaker, and and spoke about all of these issues and trauma and changing these laws and making them more fair and safe for everyone. So, we develop a lot of relationships, and, we work with other groups throughout the country and in the NARSOL family and in the, national, National Coalition Against Conviction Registries, to make sure that everyone is on the same page and telling the same story and using the same language, so we can build that support.
[17:47] Andy: So let’s talk, I guess, more specifically about Pennsylvania a little bit. It’s does Pennsylvania have lifetime registry for everybody or anybody?
[17:58] John: Yes. Yes. The of the eight tiers, four of them are lifetime.
[18:09] Andy: Jeepers. And so, like, so the question I I this would almost be a a question that you would ask a politician maybe is, why should a registry be for life? So what what would your take what would that be, what would your take be for that?
[18:26] John: I think I think the the answer and I and I try not to say this because I don’t wanna reinforce the wrong idea. So I’ll put out there that this is completely incorrect. That once some that they feel that once somebody, makes one decision or one choice in their life, they are going to continue to make that same choice for the rest of their lives no matter, the circumstances, no matter their age, their experience, their treatment, their situation, they’re always going to go back and commit the same offence or make that same decision. And so that’s why advocates for lifetime registry would say we need that. We know from dozens of researchers over the last thirty years, that is not the case. We know that Doctor. Karl Hansen has has written extensively on the desistance threshold, which states that at some point, because people who commit sexual harm are required to do supervision, treatment, etcetera, that at some point, typically between eight to thirteen years from their, their release, they’re actually at a lower risk of committing sexual harm or committing a crime than the general public. So but people are driven by fear and myth and not rationality and facts.
[20:17] Andy: I I think you can point to politics in general that people are afraid of the other team being elected, and that’s what prompts them to vote for who they vote for. It’s just my own personal feeling there. So you guys have built, in in my opinion, in a fairly shortish, five ish or so years period of time, possibly one of the best organizations within the NARSAL umbrella. How would you turn this into something that can be replicated at individual states? What are the steps that you guys in Pennsylvania have taken to build these relationships that we could move this into even a national kind of conversation or at individual state levels to to make changes?
[21:05] John: Well, I think the first thing that has to happen in any organization like ours in any state is people need to get involved who are who have gotten through their own stuff. I’ll say stuff. I don’t know if I can say other things on here. You can say whatever you want. Alright. Well, so you’ve gotta get through your own shit before you can help other people. I thought you were gonna say something bad. And and one of the things that we we see is people get involved because they’re very emotional and they want to do something. But they’re in it because they’re in trouble or their kid’s in trouble, and they want justice for their kid. They don’t care. I shouldn’t say they don’t care. It’s not their focus to change the law for everyone. It it it’s that. And so so we need to get people involved. And this is this is where getting to people you you know, there’s the phrase, we need to meet people where they are. Right? Sure. Well, we need to meet people a couple steps ahead of where they are. So we need where they are, where they’re going to be, where we want them to be. Because we want them to get through that, and eventually it becomes a more, holistic, globally, pointed, goal. And so we need people to get involved at at that level. And I think that that NARSOL, NCACR, all of the organizations are are really doing work now that that will be helpful to get everyone on the same page, so that we can learn from each other. I’m I’m happy to have conversations in any with anyone, any of the state leaders on how we did this event. But we also need to, as a movement and as movement leaders, understand that, we all live in different states, all with different political environments, all with different laws, all with different things. So what works in Pennsylvania is probably not gonna work in Alabama. You know? And and and what works in Florida, it has a huge narcolepsy and a huge organization, is not gonna work in Indiana where there’s Of course. Just a handful of people. And then I think that we need to develop, inspired advocates from which can be anybody, anybody who cares about the cause to volunteer, to write letters, op eds, tell their story. We’ll coach them on how to tell their story. Amber Vilangas, did a wonderful workshop at the Narsil conference on storytelling, that people can see on YouTube. As soon as Andy gets it figured out, I’ve been posted. But when real people speak up, it makes a difference. It’s slow work, but the more the more the public sees, people forced to register as neighbors and not monsters, the more likely change will will be and happen.
[24:51] Andy: That’s perfect. So for someone newly faced in the registry or feeling isolated, what do you have as any sort of practical words for them?
[25:04] John: Don’t isolate. Don’t isolate. Don’t isolate. There saying don’t isolate. Right. There are there are fearless support groups. There are, restorative circles programs. There are, the the NARSAL social network connections. There’s this the Registry Matters Discord server. You know? There are all of the sorts of places where people who get it will help you.
[25:46] Andy: Perfect. How about as a final piece? Would you could you give me I mean, I I don’t wanna out anyone. I don’t wanna as far as who was in attendance at your event. But I mean, it’s on YouTube. But yeah. Yeah. I I I mean, I I get that. I’ve just you know, I I was talking to Larry, and I I shared something. And he’s like, I wouldn’t ever say that publicly. So how are you guys able to affect change effectively in Pennsylvania? And then I will turn all of this over to Larry if Larry has some questions that he wants to toss at you because he’s so much more adept at this field. Like, he seems like he’s in the exact same arena that you are.
[26:30] John: Sure. The the high level strategy is is we have limited resources. We have very, very limited resources. So we have to pick and choose the most effective pathway to influence. And for us, that is the House Judiciary Committee. They have an open door policy. You can talk to the people on that committee. And, the way legislation works is that anything that pretty much anything that has to do with the registry is going to go to the judiciary committee in the House or the Senate, and ultimately in the House. And so by developing good relationships with leadership on that committee, we’ve been able to effectively, make sure that everybody in leadership understands our position and understands the facts and not the myths. So at our rally, we had state representative Emily Kinkade from the Greater Pittsburgh area, and we had chairman of the judiciary committee, representative Tim Briggs from Montgomery County, which is out right outside of Philadelphia, where the King of Prussia Mall is. The second largest mall on the East Coast is is there. And they both spoke, in support of parcel and support of our bills, in support of registry modernization. And it was an just an amazing opportunity. And they helped us, like, preserve the capital, and they helped us, like, get the space that we had, and they helped us invite other people. And, you know, that’s that’s taken years of relationship development, but if you find people who get it, it’s not a stretch for them to go out on a limb and and help because, you know, it’s all about creating a safer Pennsylvania for them.
[28:47] Andy: Awesome. Thank you for all of that. Larry, do you wanna chime in with questions, concerns, comments, complaints?
[28:54] Larry: I just love what I heard from John because some of that is echoing what I’ve said for many episodes now about relationship building. Now, Pennsylvania is a much larger state. I don’t know the population, but it’s at least five times the size of New Mexico. And he said 11 ish million, 12,000,000? Yeah. It’s five to six times our size. He said it’s very open and accessible. I think if I remember right, it’s a full time legislature. They meet most of the year. So, and they’re they receive a much greater resource of staffing support and they get a salary that our state doesn’t pay. And amazingly, even with all that, he can still do exactly what I tell people when they say, well, Mark’s in New Mexico because you people are out in the booties, but it wouldn’t work here. Well, it is working there.
[29:43] John: Right, John? It is working here. Yeah. We we have the largest full time legislature in the country.
[29:51] Larry: And despite that, you’re able to go in and do the very same things I do here, And I just really commend you for, for what you guys are doing. I would probably be a little bit more secretive about what I do because I don’t want my adversaries knowing who I have relations with and who they could smear in the next election cycle. But as far as what I see and hear, you guys are making extraordinary progress, and I’m pleased with it.
[30:24] Andy: Very good. John, as always, man, thank you so much for coming on. You can stick around and chime in if you want to on these other segments. If you have any other obligations to be anywhere, you feel free to go attend them if you need to.
[30:41] John: Well, thanks for, having me, fellas. I am gonna hop over to another event, but I’ll probably be back. I’m just gonna mute this here, and I’ll pop back over in a little bit. Very good. Thanks, my friend. Talk to you soon. Bye bye.
[30:57] Andy: Let me make a configuration
[30:59] Larry: change here. Mhmm. Did you wanna do the Obama veto quest?
[31:05] Announcer: Are you a first time listener of Registry Matters? Well, then make us a part of your daily routine and subscribe today. Just search for Registry Matters through your favorite podcast app. Hit the subscribe button, and you’re off to the races. You can now enjoy hours of sarcasm and snark from Andy and Larry on a weekly basis. Oh, and there’s some excellent information thrown in there too. Subscribing also encourages others of you people to get on the bandwagon and become regular Registry Matters listeners. So what are you waiting for? Subscribe to Registry Matters right now. Help us keep fighting and continue to say f y d.
[31:54] Andy: Oh, well, we can totally put that in. I I’m totally okay with that. I it didn’t fit with the way that the script was laid out at that particular point, so that’s why I dumped it out of there. Okay. Well, I was trying to find a place for it, but while you’re configuring, I can tell people it shouldn’t take very long. There. The reason why the
[32:14] Larry: president didn’t veto it is IMEIL was passed in 2016, which is an election year. Every two years, in the even number of years, we elect one third of the Senate and the entire House of Representatives. And President Obama was a lame duck at that time. He had served his two terms. He was in the final year of his second term, and he didn’t have a lot to offer people in the Democrat party. He was not gonna get any Republican votes to sustain his veto if he were, if he had such inclinations, which he did not, because he would not have been told that there was anything wrong with the legislation since it passed unanimously, or almost unanimously. But he didn’t veto it because he would have put his party in an extraordinarily difficult position in an election year, trying to sustain a veto, and he would handed a campaign ad cycle for the rest of 2016 to how these Democrats are pro sex offenders. And that’s why he didn’t veto it. It’s really straightforward politics. He did not have the political capital as a lame duck president to lean on his party members to support a veto that he didn’t even think that he should issue because nobody told him, and it would have put his caucus in extreme danger electorally, and he just wasn’t gonna do that. No president would.
[33:33] Andy: Totally understand. Makes perfect sense. Shall we move along then? Sure. What is it? What’s this new segment’s cockamania that you’ve dreamed up? It is a segment that I am putting together manually by hand without any assistance from anybody else or anything else.
[33:51] Larry: I see.
[33:53] Andy: Well, what I wanna talk about though is life after probation. So it’s when a PFR finally finishes their sentence and is moving forward, what should folks keep in mind?
[34:05] Larry: You want me to answer this?
[34:08] Andy: You you are the expert explainer in chief about all things criminal justice pre, post, during, after prison, court, all that stuff. After they’ve spent their $100,000 defending themselves and and still end up going to prison and get on the registry for their life, all that?
[34:25] Larry: Well, if you finish PFR probation in most states, that’s huge because they are destined to find a way to violate most individuals. So that’s been years of reporting and restrictions and constant stress of worrying about small mistakes that could put you back in court and possibly prison.
[34:46] Andy: So when that ends, that’s a huge relief and weight off of their shoulders. I’m quite sure. I know it was in my case. It was in my case. And so in this example, the person that we are kinda, like, modeling this after didn’t have to register after probation. Now that’s going to surprise some people, I’m sure. Can you walk us through how that could be possible that a person ends up with, you know, a PFR type conviction, but then, doesn’t end up on the registry after their supervision?
[35:13] Larry: Sure. I can do that. So, not every sexual offense will trigger a duty to register. For example, in many states, practically, I think all states, indecent exposure is a crime. But it doesn’t put you on the registry in many states unless it’s in the presence of a minor or where a minor could have seen it or if it’s your second or third or fourth conviction. So, each state sets its own rules for what triggers a duty to register. And sometimes there’ll be plea negotiations for getting a plea that would be to an offense that doesn’t require registration. For example, the person might plead to contributing to delinquency of a minor when they actually had unlawful sex with a minor, and that still gives the state their felony conviction, but it would not trigger in my state a registration obligation. It would trigger it in many states because they have that inclusive category of if it was sexually motivated and that’s a separate finding. But in my state, it must be on the list. So there’s ways that you can avoid registration.
[36:20] Andy: And now just quick, I I remember movies back in the day, and it’s just like boys being boys or whatever, and there’s a a school bus going by and, like, the jocks put their behinds out the window. They’re mooning the cars as they’re driving by. Well, that would be considered indecent exposure, wouldn’t It would. And they did that back in my days back in the eighteen seventies. When you guys were riding chuck wagons? No. We did we did that for horseback. That would be hard to do.
[36:47] Larry: But that would also be not You just stand up and drop your bloomers. And then but that wouldn’t be sexually motivated necessarily. Right? No. You were you were just trying to get the shock value of it.
[37:02] Andy: So if someone is eligible to avoid registration, it often comes down to what? Sentencing, negotiations, a tarot card reading, Rochambeau, rock, paper, scissors, maybe legal defense strategies?
[37:17] Larry: Well, it can be most of everything you’ve mentioned there. Early advocacy can really matter when a person gets arrested. If they get lawyered up with the right lawyer and they get in treatment and they recognize they have a problem and that they’re dealing with the problem. Sometimes there can be a rational prosecutor and they offer a non registrable misdemeanor or the judge has some discretion in not ordering registration. In other cases, like I mentioned, people plead to a lesser charge. It might be a felony level, but it’s not a it’s not a duty to register type offense. And people should always make sure that they have a good lawyer if you’re charged with PFR type of offense.
[38:02] Andy: Now so here you go again. So you say people should always have a good lawyer. How does how does one know if they have a good lawyer or not?
[38:11] Larry: Very simple. You call me.
[38:14] Andy: Okay. So for anyone struggling through their probation right now or waiting to see if they’ll get registration, it’s not always spelled like and wait. They should call you? Is that what you’re saying?
[38:23] Larry: Well, not just tongue in cheek, but what it’s really hard. It’s like me trying to find a good medical provider. You know, I had one of my dearest friends refer me to a podiatrist that I thought was the biggest quack I’d ever run into, and she swore by him. She’d go into him for twenty five years, and thankfully, just announced a couple days ago he’s retiring. But, it’s really difficult. And I can arm you with questions like I did with you personally many years ago, several years ago. And you can tell when you’ve got a good lawyer, when they can answer those questions or when they tell you to butt out it’s their business, which I think one of the lawyers told you that that He he was not a fan of me challenging him. He was not. He didn’t think he didn’t think he needed to be explaining anything to you.
[39:10] Andy: He was not a fan. I I mean, I sat in the office when he called the prosecutor, I guess excuse me, the DA. And, I I I mean, it was just very strange, but I anytime I was trying to, I guess, Larry him is the way I’ll word it. Just ask, like, strategy, challenge anything that I knew about the law that was different than what he was. He was like, you don’t you don’t like lawyers, do you? No. Not really.
[39:35] Larry: So well, but, you know, this this is essential that you do these things with attorneys. A good professional, when when I was dealing with my air conditioner this spring, you remember, I had, I think, two or three different companies wanted to sell me a $10,000 system, and I knew just enough to know that I didn’t need that. And I ended up getting it fixed for $600 because it was a condensing fan that had gone out, but they wanted to sell me a new system. They told me all these dreadful stories about it was R-twenty two system. They said you can’t get Freon. I said, but I don’t need any. It’s not leaking. Where would the where would the Freon go?
[40:12] Andy: It’s like I’m with you. But, so there’s an undercurrent to this that I noticed, in this conversation, the story that I was reading. This per the person’s personal transformation, both mental health and relationship, how does that fit? Does that fit into the equation of when you’re, getting off of probation?
[40:32] Larry: I think so. I think it’s significant. The registered community understandably can be focused mostly on laws, but so much of surviving and thriving after probation is also your mental health. Many people like me have OCD and they’re dealing with, I’m not dealing with any addiction that I know of, but you’ve lost your support system. You’re working on rebuilding that, and the daily work of going to a job setting where people know, and, or even though you’re not registered, oftentimes when you’re under supervision, your employer was visited and had to sign a form saying that you need what you’re under supervision for, And all of a sudden, they get out of the workplace. All that stuff causes a lot of stress.
[41:16] Andy: Absolutely. And and the the story mentioned leaving a domestic violence situation, and that stuck out to me too. Any practical advice on rebuilding social support when coming out of probation and difficult circumstances?
[41:34] Larry: Oh, boy. I think I’m the worst person to ask this question. Start small, toxic relationships, even without the PR for the situation. Again, isolate a person. I’ve been told that by people who have toxic home lives and, find at least a supportive person or two, to be in your life, maybe an AA sponsor or therapist or even online connections I’ve heard are very
[42:04] Andy: attractive these days to folks. I’ve heard even people get married online and, from meeting someone online. Have you heard that? I have. How so literally, though, how would that be super different than people only being pen pals with a person in prison and they get married? I knew a dude in Georgia that had gotten married in prison to a person that he was only a pen pal with, and then the person starts doing visitation, which I realized now you have visits. But, like, you got married in prison, which seems, to me, feels really bizarre.
[42:36] Larry: I’ve heard of that and and also seek professional help from a qualified mental health professional. And, again, I don’t know how you identify that qualified person, but
[42:49] Andy: well, let’s talk about identity too. Some people say, thank you for telling your story. There’s power in telling your story. Right? You know, and let me go back one step on this because we talk about this pretty regularly. Like, I don’t I’m I’m not saying I don’t care about your story, but your story is the same or very, very similar to that person, that person, that person, that person, that person. And all of us are dealing with the same shitty laws, So it doesn’t matter because we need to help everybody and all of whatever it is. The rising tide lifts all boats, whatever that expression is. So I don’t really super care about people’s stories, but there is power in telling it under certain circumstances.
[43:28] Larry: I agree. And and for many, the shame and secrecy or shackles, and you share when you share your journey, that removes some of that. It helps others to see hope and find hope. But always practice safety. No full names, no doxing. Just speak from your experience and help others, but don’t put yourself at too much risk.
[43:52] Andy: And one comment in the thread asked, how do you avoid registration? Practically speaking, should folks be asking their attorneys about post sentence possibilities even if they if they’re already well into their case?
[44:07] Larry: That’s a good question because laws do change very commonly and it’s very rare that they take an offense off of the list of registered offenses. It’s more likely they’re gonna add offenses, but it may be that the law has changed to allow you a post conviction remedy. You may have found some evidence that that’s something that would give you an opportunity to eradicate your conviction, or you just may be able to petition for removal after a specified period of time or achieving certain milestones, like completing therapy with a specified period of time. It varies a lot from state to state, and some states don’t have a process like we don’t, but we have some offenses where you just time out. So it’s just worth talking to a qualified lawyer as I’ve said previously.
[44:57] Andy: Now if you don’t mind, again, you are the, the person the the practical expert on this stuff of what a person should do when they’re transitioning out. Can you give us some kind of basic list of your after probation checklist?
[45:13] Larry: One of the things I harp on here is is the first point is make sure you have official paperwork when you’re done. Because contrary to popular belief, the NCIC can be wrong. Stuff can be reported incorrectly, in the NCIC, and your paperwork is important to have that you completed successfully. In my state, you have to present that to the county clerk. Now, the probation of the department of corrections is supposed to send it to the county clerk saying that you’re eligible to to vote again, but you need that documentation in case that that part of the bureaucracy is broken down. So get the documentation. Keep the documentation. If you’re not required to register, make sure you’re, you know, I tell people keep those letters in multiple copies of locations. So, you know, they confirm your registration or lack thereof requirement. If you’re in one of those states where you have to have PFR specific IDs, update those things, get that PFR information off of your ID card. Your social security shouldn’t be a problem for registration as long as you’re not in prison. If you’re in prison, notify social security when you’re out because they won’t pay you while you’re in. Right. If you’ve been lacking on medical care, catch up on your medical care, reconnect with people you deem safe. But really, most importantly, focus on stable stability, stable employment, stable housing, which will still be problematic for the criminal record, even when you’re off supervision because we don’t eradicate criminal records very easily in this country. And more, more, well, equally important, become a voter. There’s a couple states that don’t, argue on voting while you’re serving your sentence, but most do. But almost all states permit you to return to the voter rolls after conviction, after you’ve served your sentence. And, so know know your rights to vote and vote if you can.
[47:27] Andy: So do you think there are any surprises that people could expect? Like, you’re not on under probation anymore, but?
[47:34] Larry: Sure when you’re even when you’re off paper, you still face the consequences of background checks identifying that you have convictions. Those background checks can result in denial of housing, denial denial of employment. So be prepared for a gradual process. It’s not gonna be overnight, but if you can secure some stable employment, not even in your chosen profession at the salary you want, but if you come to me as an employer and you’ve been working stable somewhere else, even if I’ve discovered your background, I’m gonna be impressed with that stability. So that’s important.
[48:10] Andy: Do you think that you’re different? Like, you’re in a you’re in a position where you are you you see people that are down on their luck and you offer to help them. Do you think that employers generally see things that way? And you and you’re the anomaly, or do you think generally employers are compassionate?
[48:31] Larry: That’s hard to say because employers are looking out for their interest. And when you’re trying to run a business, you don’t have but so much capacity to solve people’s personal problems. But I think from my decades in the workforce, most employers that I’ve worked for do care about you as an individual. You’re not just a number. So, I think that I’m not that much of an anomaly, but maybe I am. I just don’t realize it.
[49:00] Andy: And I love that you mentioned hope earlier. The original conversation closed with you’re worth it from, another person in the thread. Now for a lot of folks in our audience, that encouragement is rare. What’s your final word on that topic there?
[49:16] Larry: Well, when people have made an awful decision and then the world tells them they’re worthless, that’s hard to deal with. But, first of all, there are no saints on their on their planet Earth I’m aware of. But whether anyone’s done what they’ve done, what they’ve been through, there’s always a possibility of growing, surviving, improving, and doing good things. So, find what gives you hope and move forward in life. I tell people, quit dwelling on the past. You’re all supervision. Go out and find a new career even if you have to change careers. If you’re if you’re not as old as I am, you can start doing something new even if you’re not allowed back in your previous profession.
[49:57] Andy: Very well. That’s that’s well said. So let’s recap. So finishing probation, obviously, is a super huge win milestone for someone. Registration isn’t always required for everybody, but the path forward is never the same for two people. Meaning, my situation is very different than someone else’s, and you can’t directly compare. There may be similarities. Lean into support, legal advice, and mental health care, and keep telling that story to people that will listen to it and those that can actually make change. We’re like, if you’re telling our people, it’s kinda preaching to the require, which isn’t really look, man. We’re all just trying to make it day to day.
[50:34] Larry: And don’t forget, there’s a community pulling for you, sometimes in person, sometimes online. But I’m one of those people. I’m pulling for you. I want you to make all the money you can earn because I have my pod every month waiting for a check from the government, and I need I need that coffer filled with your tax dollars so I can collect that money.
[50:56] Andy: I understand. Alright. Well, you threw this article in here that says and it’s from a courthouse news service. Liberal justices slam supreme court approval of nitrogen gas execution in Alabama. In a graphic dissent, justice Sotomayor, one of those liberal pointy headed communist loving people, invited readers to imagine themselves in the shoes of a man Alabama executed on Thursday.
[51:23] Larry: God. So, well, and I put this in here because the expansion of the death penalty is underway around the country and the gruesome way that states are executing people. Folks, you go ahead and vote for these folks that promise you law and order, and you are gonna be on the execution list next because they’re already putting PFRs type offenses on the list. I think they did so in Florida already. Correct?
[51:55] Andy: I think so. That sounds about right. So,
[51:59] Larry: but yes, but the lambasting comes from a liberal communist sympathizer, and it’s what would you expect, you know, from, from Sotomayor. But it says Justice Sotomayor Sonia Sotomayor lambasted her conservative colleagues for allowing Alabama to move forward with a nitrogen hypoxia execution. Is that the way you pronounce that? It is hypoxia.
[52:22] Andy: On Thursday,
[52:24] Larry: stating that the experimental method induces psychological terror and violates the mandate against cruel and unusual punishment. Folks, listen carefully. The Liberals believe that there is a such thing as cruel and unusual punishment. Sotomayor said, take out your phone, go to the clock app, and find the stopwatch. And then we’ll get into more about how much time you would have to watch your stopwatch for further as we go.
[52:48] Andy: Alright. And not just Sotomayor. She was joined by justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, Of course, the other communist justices there. Sotomayor instructed readers to watch the seconds count up on the stopwatch until how long? The four minute mark. Now imagine for that entire time, you are, well, if there only is nitrogen going into your lungs, which means there’s no oxygen, the air is 74% nitrogen already. So you’re only talking about, you know, 15 or something percent oxygen is what I understand it to be. So if you’re only getting nitrogen, that means you are suffocating. And Sotomayor wrote, you want to breathe. You have to breathe, but you are strapped to a gurney with a mask on your face, pumping your lungs with only nitrogen gas. Your mind knows the gas will kill you, but your body keeps telling you to breathe. This is disgusting.
[53:38] Larry: Unless then the majority of execution stays that the Supreme Court looks at, do not generate illicit public dissents because they get these last minute requests all the time, let alone detailed descriptions of the planned execution. But Sotomayor offered a graphic picture of Alabama’s execution of Anthony Boyd, which the Supreme Court refused to block to chronicle what she said was a form of cruel, unusual punishment.
[54:06] Andy: Now did Boyd have any sort of particular, peculiar request? Excuse me. Peculiar request?
[54:11] Larry: He did. Boyd Boyd asked for the rarest form of mercy mercy. He wanted to die by firing squad, which would kill him in seconds rather than a torturous suffocation lasting up to four minutes.
[54:24] Andy: The constitution would grant him that grace, Sotomayor said, but my colleagues did not do not. Now before you get too many people in tears about this, Larry, keep in mind that Boyd was sentenced to death in 1995, in the murder of Gregory Huguley. I have no idea if that’s pronounced properly, and I apologize if not. And he was burned alive over a whopping $200 debt. But in 1995, that was like a million dollars today.
[54:52] Larry: Oh, not quite, but, I would pronounce it heucaly the way you did. But Alabama was the first state to use this controversial method in 2024 to execute Kenneth Eugene Smith. Similarly, the Supreme Court refused to stop Smith’s execution from moving forward against the dissent of the three liberal pointyheads, communist sympathizers. Then Sotomayor described nitrogen hypoxia executions as experiments on human life. She said the court knows what will happen.
[55:22] Andy: Now you know how we got here. Right? I’m I’m gonna take a little detour because the I don’t know if it was The United States was ever a manufacturer of the concoction, but the other countries have decided that they are not gonna be participants in executing people. So they won’t release it and sell it to The United States. So The United States is then forced to figure out a different way to nuke people, and this is what we’ve come up with.
[55:47] Larry: Correct.
[55:48] Andy: Alright. So isn’t that but so isn’t dying this way, what wouldn’t that be considered cruel and unusual punishment?
[55:56] Larry: No. Not according to the conservative wing of the court, and that’s what I keep telling people when they say isn’t the registry cruel and unusual punishment? If you will allow this to happen in America, how the hell can you say the registry comes close to this? Right. But but anyway, Sotomayor wrote, for two to four minutes, Boyd will remain unconscious while the state of Alabama kills him in this way. Hold on. Conscious, not unconscious. Alright. Conscious. Excuse me. She said when the gas starts flowing, he will immediately convulse. He will gasp for air. He will thrash violently against the restraints holding him in place as he experiences the intense psychological torment until he finally loses consciousness. Just short of twenty minutes later, Ward will be declared will be declared dead. And this is not cruel and usual punishment. The registry never will be under this type of court.
[56:47] Andy: Alabama and Louisiana are the only states that use nitrogen hypoxia, executing a total of seven people with this method. Alabama started using the method after a slew of botched lethal injection executions. When Smith was executed, witnesses said he convulsed for around four minutes like watching someone drown without water.
[57:07] Larry: And according to Alabama, Smith’s convulsions were due to him holding his breath and fighting the execution process. Well, they’re probably right. Sure. But he couldn’t hold it for so long. But Sotomayor said subsequent nitrogen, epoxy executions had similar results. Sotomayor said Gary Carey, Dale Grayson, Demetrius Fraser, Gregory Hunt, and Gregory West, all executed by nitrogen hypoxia, had similar experiences.
[57:35] Andy: It’s interesting that Boyd elected an alternative execution method death by firing squad, but Alabama rejected his request. It’s probably too expensive, Larry, to get, I don’t know, a dozen or whatever bullets to do it. The lower courts refused to force the state’s hand, fighting that distress was an unavoidable consequence of capital punishment.
[57:55] Larry: They did say that. Sotomayor, had a response. She said there’s significant constitutional difference between three to six seconds of physical pain and terror of two to seven minutes of conscious suffocation with its associated psychological pain and terror. Sotomayor said that the courts must weigh the associated pain and different execution methods, even though the process could be deeply troubling. Now I vaguely remember when the Supreme Court, when a bunch of the damn liberals back in ’73 had declared the death penalty unconstitutional, and states started passing new death penalty laws. Georgia was among the first. Utah did, I think in 1976. You can Google them and see if I’m right, they executed Gary Gilmore. I think, and they used a firing squad. He wanted that way. And I think they, I think if I remember right, Utah honored his request to give him the give him the bullet.
[58:49] Andy: Sotomayor went on to say that allowing the nitrogen hypoxia experiment to continue despite mounting and unbroken evidence that it violates the constitution by inflicting unnecessary suffering fails to protect the dignity of the nation we have been, the nation we are, and the nation we aspire to be.
[59:06] Larry: I would say the better description of the nation that we used to be. The conservative majority did not explain its decision to deny Boyd’s execution state request. But Alabama attorney general Steve Marshall countered that Boyd’s arguments by countered Boyd’s arguments by stating that the victim was not given the opportunity to delay his death, which would be true. Alabama remained steadfast in its commitment to uphold the law and deliver justice for victims and their families. This is your attorney general. Remember, I think we got a clip for what I think about Alabama. Do you wanna run that right now? Oh, I think I got that right here. Run by the strangest collection of misfits, Looney Tunes since the advent of the Third Reich. But Marshall said in his statement, I am proud of my team’s tireless dedication to that mission, and I pray that Gregory’s loved ones may finally find peace and knowing that justice has been served. If you call that justice, okay, attorney general.
[60:06] Andy: Alright. Well, let’s quickly move over to this final segment so that we have an equal bashing session. You have the story, and it’s called, how a Maryland prisoner died by excuse me, died an excruciating death from dehydration. So we went from suffocation to dehydration. And it begins on July 2023. An officer working at the Western Correctional Institute noted in his log book that Lamont Meeley, housed in an isolation cell without even toiletries, appeared to need help, according to filings in the Baltimore County Circuit Court. The officer later told investigators that Meeley looked dazed and was unresponsive at the time. He noted excuse me, notified a sergeant who did not get medical attention for Meeley even though an IV at that point would have saved his life. The filing said, now hours later, Meeley, 52, was dead. This is just horrible.
[61:01] Larry: It is indeed. And the medical examiner’s office concluded that the cause of death was dehydration. Per report, Mr. Mealy had a history of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Medical examiner’s reports that he was found in his single person cell with fecal matter in and around his mouth. The medical examiner officers ruled the manner of death and accident. There was no signs of significant trauma, and the toxicology report for drugs and alcohol was both they were both negative.
[61:32] Andy: They ruled it an accident? Like, to die by dehydration, that doesn’t happen in a day, Larry. You don’t die of dehydration in twenty four hours. Oh, I know. So many of the details of the events leading up to what the lawsuit described as Meeley’s slow and excruciatingly painful death were drawn from letters written by fellow prisoners who was housed nearby excuse me, by a fellow prisoner who was housed nearby. Danny Hoskins. I’m sure he’s not getting any favorable attention now either. Hoskins filed complaints and wrote letters claiming that Meeley spent a week suffering in an isolation cell with no access to water, at times taunted
[62:10] Larry: by correctional officers. These are guys that had very, very broken upbringings, and they were boldied, and now they can turn around and bully people that are less than them. Now and I remember, Andy, this is coming from the pure wind driven state of Maryland. Right? I I know. I yeah. I know. Is Maryland the pure wind driven snow? I know. Yeah. And and this is this is disgusting because, it doesn’t matter. It seems like they’re Looney Tunes regardless of whether it’s Alabama, so we’re bashing Maryland also. The first complaint prompted correction officers to come to house Hoskins cell and beat him.
[62:44] Andy: Wait. I’m sorry. You’re too thirsty. Take a take a stick in the vase.
[62:49] Larry: Well, sounds like a good idea. But before he was later transferred to other, rather, the prison to other prisons, then he sent letters to the governor, to attorney general, and to Carolyn Scruggs, secretary of Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services.
[63:04] Andy: Hoskins wrote, for years, the Western Correctional Institution has gotten away with murder, beatings, and pepper spraying of the black inmates over and over again. Hoskins wrote to the governor in a letter obtained by a legal team representing a member of Meeley’s family. By the way, I’m a white man who has risked my life in this. What will you risk?
[63:24] Larry: Yeah. Well, the corrections department investigated the hostage claims and disputed parts of his account. Can you imagine that they did this? I’m so so surprised.
[63:33] Andy: Now attorney Carrie Hansel representing the family member is arguing in a public record lawsuit related to the case that the relative ins is entitled to discovery. He wrote in a filing that the correction secretary and her top lawyer were both made aware of the death, but covered it up and did not disclose any of the wrongdoing to mister Mealy’s family. The Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services, the attorney wrote, then stonewalled the family’s public records request until they filed the lawsuit and engaged in an obvious and unlawful effort to hide the most incriminating evidence of what was done to mister Mealy.
[64:09] Larry: And in response to questions about the lawsuit, the department spokesman, Keith Martucci, said, quote, while the Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services is unable to comment on matters involving pending litigation. The health and safety of those in DPSCS is responsible for as well as, facility personnel remains the department’s foremost priority. Now I can certainly see that for the Yes. They have demonstrated it for sure.
[64:39] Andy: On 03/20/2024, Hoskins wrote in a letter to governor Wes Moore introducing himself as an inmate at Jessup Correctional Institution. I’m writing to inform you of a murder that was committed on or before 07/05/2023 at the at the Western Correctional Institution in Cumberland, Maryland, he wrote. This murder was done by all white correctional officers of a single black male inmate. Hoskins wrote that he was housed in a cell adjoined by Meeley’s, witnessed the events leading up to his death, and had repeatedly tried to get your employees to do something about it with no success. Though he did not know Meeley’s name, he described seeing correction officers lead him to the isolation cell. Meeley, Hoskins, recalled, was struggling being pulled from several directions one by excuse me, one time by correction officers.
[65:27] Larry: Yeah. And here’s what gets really juicy. Hoskins also wrote that Mueller was placed in the cell by two officers who were not wearing name badges or rank insignia, which is kind of uncommon. Would you agree? I would until you go talk about the, ICE officers running around these days. And and they went directly into the closet between Cells 1 And 2 On 4 Unit 4 B and turned the water off to the cell.
[65:54] Andy: Well, that’s so he can’t flush his drugs down the toilet. So on June 07/02/2023,
[66:00] Larry: the the same two officers were, who cut the water off stood in front of 4 B 2 and asked, are you thirsty? Are you thirsty? And the inmate asked several times, water, water, and officers merely laughed and exited the tier according to this accusation from mister Hoskins.
[66:19] Andy: Hansel, the family’s attorney, described this as an eight day period of torture during which the prisoner was designed denied toilet paper, soap, deodorant, towels, and a toothbrush. Hansel wrote that video evidence from the de Amelie’s death shows that officers performed about half the required checks on his cell approximately once an hour as opposed to every half hour. That’s special.
[66:45] Larry: Yeah. And this is one of the reasons why I feel so strongly at at Narstel while I’m handling the mail. I don’t believe everything that every inmate writes to us. You’d be a fool to do that. But I try to take as broad an action as I can when these type of accusations are made and people laugh at me. But I say, look folks, if we don’t take these people in an isolated world where no one has access to them from the outside, except for when they’re granted access and they tell us stuff and we, everybody ignores them as if it’s made up, which some of the stuff is made up, but we don’t know. And it would be the same thing as like in 1963, when the Supreme Court received the handwritten petition from Clarence Gideon, scribbled out on legal paper paper and sent to them, if they had had that attitude. When we receive letters, we have the duty to try to do the best we can to figure out if the person is crazy, hallucinating, or if they’re making true accusations, because hopefully intervention can happen. And every everything broke down in this case, every single check and balance broke down.
[67:53] Andy: Well, what is a check, though? I mean, I I don’t sure. The the officers are supposed to be almost that entire check and balance. There’s nobody else that’s like, an an independent auditor to to go by the cells and check on people. And if there is, they’ll certainly go shuffle you around from dorm to dorm to make sure that you’re not where they are looking at that time.
[68:15] Larry: Well, I would like to think that they haven’t served time in a in a state prison or federal prison. But I’d like to think when you have medical needs, when you have you can put in a kite or some sort of site request and a medical officer would review you. Is is it that bad that you can’t get any attention from medical, period? If you’re in an isolation cell, if you’re, like, in PC, whatever, how does your letter get out? Well You don’t have you can’t just, like, hit a button in the in the the dorm and and summon someone, like, you’re in a old age home where you have, like, the help by falling, I can’t get up button. Oh, I know that, but I’m I’m that’s what I’m saying. Checks and balances. I’m assuming that if I’m running a prison, I’m gonna have oversight. I’m gonna have someone in charge of monitoring my staff. I’m gonna have someone who’s making sure that shit like this doesn’t happen. And if something like this happens, heads are gonna roll. Because we’re not in the business of killing people. We’re in the business of housing people.
[69:06] Andy: This is gonna roll away just like Freddie Gray and all those other people that end up in police custody and die.
[69:13] Larry: Probably. But that’s not the way I would like to think of how things should work. And my goal is to try to make things work better. That’s why I respond when we get letters from prisoners that are saying horrible things are happening. I’ve got one writing from Texas saying that he’s a former, police officer, and he’s saying that they’re manipulating his food and putting drugs in his food and all sorts of things to him. I don’t know if he’s crazy or not, but I’ve sent it to to tell. I’ve sent it to the people in Texas saying, have you heard from this guy? Can you get can you get somebody to check on him and find out if he’s crazy or if this is possibly true? Because if you’re an ex cop, you’re probably not very popular in prison, I wouldn’t think. I wouldn’t guess so. They’d probably put you in a special prison too. So
[69:57] Andy: Someone someone asked, I and I don’t know the answer to this, but but isn’t the prison system sort of like the police? Isn’t their oversight internal?
[70:05] Larry: Yes.
[70:06] Andy: So they’re they’re They monitor prison Phelps. Yeah. So that doesn’t sound very effective way of monitoring. Alright. Well, that that was a pretty you wanna talk about doom and gloom, Larry? You achieved new heights. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. I know that’s what you aspire to do. Alright. Well, head over to registrymatters.c0 for show notes and and links to more doom and gloom. Email registrymatterscast@gmail.com. You could send old fashioned voice mail (747) 227-4477. And as the people that are listening here tonight have done, and I appreciate them so very much, they became patrons at patreon.com/registrymatters.
[70:51] Larry: And any any closing words before we go? I’ve got a political event next weekend, so hopefully, we have a magic creation of content because I’ll be occupied most of the afternoon or next Saturday.
[71:04] Andy: Gotcha. And, also, I would like to say that, you know, it’s hard for me to show it all, but I’m gonna lift it up. I am wearing one of the fine FYP shirts. This one says, it’s not punishment. It’s just a civil regulatory scheme. And, so you can head you can find those over at fypeducation.org/shop. And I got nothing else, Larry, and I hope you have a fantastic weekend, and I will talk to you soon. Everyone that’s listening, same to you as well. And, one other thing, hey. We record these on Saturday nights usually at 7PM. And, if you want to listen in, you can just message me on Discord. I’ll let you in. Some people show up late and we start over for them. Just kidding. We don’t do that. But, otherwise, patrons get, to to listen to the show while we record it. And any outtakes and conversations with Larry and so forth afterwards. Have a great good night, have a good night, Larry. I’ll talk to you soon. Good night.
[71:55] Larry: Alrighty.
Leave a Comment