ROL_2011-04-14_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:10.720]  The tiny Gulf Arab nation of Qatar said Tuesday it was behind last week's sale of 120 million
[00:10.720 --> 00:14.440]  dollars of crude oil from areas held by Libya's rebels.
[00:14.440 --> 00:17.920]  Qatar also said it has been shipping gasoline to Benghazi.
[00:17.920 --> 00:22.280]  It is one of two Arab countries enforcing the no-fly zone over Libya.
[00:22.280 --> 00:27.080]  Qatar was the second country after France to recognize the rebels' transitional national
[00:27.080 --> 00:31.240]  council as Libya's legitimate government.
[00:31.240 --> 00:36.440]  A U.S. Senate panel Wednesday accused Goldman Sachs of contaminating the U.S. financial
[00:36.440 --> 00:42.920]  system with toxic mortgages and undermining public trust in the run-up to the 2008 financial
[00:42.920 --> 00:43.920]  meltdown.
[00:43.920 --> 00:49.120]  The bipartisan report depicted an industry rife with conflicts of interest.
[00:49.120 --> 00:55.640]  Goldman touted investments to clients on one end but bet against them on the other.
[00:55.640 --> 01:00.840]  Israel's ultra-nationalist foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman is to be indicted for fraud,
[01:00.840 --> 01:04.400]  breach of trust, money laundering and witness harassment.
[01:04.400 --> 01:10.320]  The prosecution says between 2001 and 2008, Lieberman funneled millions of dollars from
[01:10.320 --> 01:14.640]  businessmen into secret accounts in the Virgin Islands and Cyprus.
[01:14.640 --> 01:19.920]  Lieberman, a proponent of a recently approved loyalty oath law against Arabs, has denied
[01:19.920 --> 01:20.920]  the charges.
[01:20.920 --> 01:28.160]  Barack Obama Wednesday proposed a mix of long-term spending cuts, tax increases and changes
[01:28.160 --> 01:33.920]  to social welfare programs as his opening position in a fierce partisan budget battle
[01:33.920 --> 01:36.520]  over the nation's fiscal crisis.
[01:36.520 --> 01:42.280]  Obama's budget plan includes taxing the rich, whereas Republicans want to cut Medicare.
[01:42.280 --> 01:48.280]  Obama said his proposal would cut federal budget deficits by $4 trillion over 12 years.
[01:48.280 --> 01:52.400]  Obama said the Republican approach would hurt the elderly by driving up the cost of medical
[01:52.400 --> 01:57.520]  care, deprive millions of health insurance and starve the nation of investments in its
[01:57.520 --> 01:58.520]  future.
[01:58.520 --> 02:04.520]  A leader in the Honduran resistance movement said Tuesday the government is killing opposition
[02:04.520 --> 02:09.160]  members and using U.S. aid money to fund corrupt police officials.
[02:09.160 --> 02:15.960]  Errado Torres of Honduras' National Front of Popular Resistance said since the 2009 coup
[02:15.960 --> 02:21.120]  that ousted President Manuel Zelaya, the Honduran government has cracked down on citizens critical
[02:21.120 --> 02:26.520]  of the new administration and spent U.S. aid on weapons, propaganda and controlling the
[02:26.520 --> 02:30.760]  mass media, adding there are no civil rights in Honduras.
[02:30.760 --> 02:35.000]  Under the government of President Porfirio Lobo, murders of opposition journalists and
[02:35.000 --> 02:40.640]  activists as well as hate-motivated killings against gays have risen sharply, with approximately
[02:40.640 --> 02:43.840]  300 such crimes not investigated.
[02:43.840 --> 02:47.880]  On Tuesday, workers, students and activists took part in a general strike against the
[02:47.880 --> 02:53.080]  high cost of living, human rights violations and attempts to privatize education.
[02:53.080 --> 03:03.760]  For more details on this story, visit www.inmworldrecord.net.
[03:03.760 --> 03:10.760]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at ruleoflawradio.com, live free speech
[03:10.760 --> 03:17.760]  talk radio at its best.
[03:40.760 --> 04:01.760]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at its best.
[04:01.760 --> 04:29.760]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at its best.
[04:29.760 --> 04:35.360]  All right, bad boys, bad boys, what are you going to do when we come for you here on the
[04:35.360 --> 04:37.400]  Rule of Law?
[04:37.400 --> 04:46.600]  Tonight is Thursday, April 14th, 2011, this is the Rule of Law, ruleoflawradio.com, I
[04:46.600 --> 04:53.480]  am Deborah Stevens, we're here with Randy Kelton and Eddie Craig, and sorry we had to
[04:53.480 --> 04:58.400]  run some archives the last couple of shows, folks, but Randy was out of town and could
[04:58.400 --> 05:06.440]  not do the show, and Eddie and I both had to work feverishly to prepare our presentations
[05:06.440 --> 05:11.720]  for the legislature, both of us had, Eddie and I both had presentations to make on the
[05:11.720 --> 05:20.520]  same day, which was Tuesday, and we are going to be going over what happened on Tuesday,
[05:20.520 --> 05:26.120]  and first I'm going to go over the DUI Checkpoint Bill.
[05:26.120 --> 05:32.280]  This is House Bill 439, which of course we are against, this would allow for sobriety
[05:32.280 --> 05:39.000]  checkpoints in Texas, in other words, unreasonable search and seizure without warrant, without
[05:39.000 --> 05:46.240]  probable cause, and the terms of the bill would allow for the police to basically seize
[05:46.240 --> 05:54.480]  you for one to three minutes for questioning, that's what it says, for conversation, for
[05:54.480 --> 06:00.560]  them to ask you questions to determine whether you are inebriated or not.
[06:00.560 --> 06:07.120]  Now I have seen dozens of videos on YouTube from these sobriety checkpoints all around
[06:07.120 --> 06:12.640]  the country, where basically a lot of times people are like, we don't want to answer your
[06:12.640 --> 06:16.360]  questions, I'll talk with you, but we're going to talk about what I want to talk about, we're
[06:16.360 --> 06:20.600]  not going to talk about what you want to talk about, I'm not going to tell you my name,
[06:20.600 --> 06:24.640]  I'm not going to tell you where I'm coming from, I'm not going to tell you where I'm
[06:24.640 --> 06:33.120]  going, or any of these kinds of things, and so the police consistently use people's refusal
[06:33.120 --> 06:40.600]  to answer private personal questions as a reason to further interrogate and harass them,
[06:40.600 --> 06:43.000]  and so that is a big problem with these checkpoints.
[06:43.000 --> 06:50.400]  Well, at any rate, the Bible verse comes true, the Lord Jesus told us, ask and you shall
[06:50.400 --> 06:55.000]  receive, seek and you shall find, knock and it will be open to you.
[06:55.000 --> 07:01.920]  Well, I found once again, this holds true, when I started doing research for my presentation
[07:01.920 --> 07:08.280]  to this criminal jurisprudence committee, I wanted to find some research that shows
[07:08.280 --> 07:14.320]  that these checkpoints just don't work, that they don't do anything to curb drunk driving,
[07:14.320 --> 07:18.000]  they don't catch any drunk drivers, I said, I bet that's the case, let's see.
[07:18.000 --> 07:22.960]  Well, I found so much research, I uncovered so many statistics, I couldn't even fit it
[07:22.960 --> 07:28.320]  all in the presentation, so I wanted to go over some of this tonight and then Eddie's
[07:28.320 --> 07:32.680]  going to go over his stuff, we're going to have some discussion about this.
[07:32.680 --> 07:37.880]  First off, I didn't want to just rant about our rights and these sorts of things, I wanted
[07:37.880 --> 07:42.160]  to give the committee something they could really sink their teeth into.
[07:42.160 --> 07:49.080]  Now, one of the problems with arguing constitution, well, Harmon Taylor will say, you can't argue
[07:49.080 --> 07:53.200]  it anyway, and folks, you can go back and listen to archives of Harmon Taylor for that
[07:53.200 --> 07:58.320]  dissertation, but at any rate, one of the problems with arguing constitution regarding
[07:58.320 --> 08:04.480]  these sobriety checkpoints is that there was a case in 1990, the US Supreme Court ruled
[08:04.480 --> 08:11.960]  in Michigan v. 6, that's SITZ, that sobriety checkpoints were indeed permissible under
[08:11.960 --> 08:21.880]  the US Constitution if the nature of the checkpoints fit certain criteria, all right, and basically
[08:21.880 --> 08:30.120]  it was somewhat of a split decision, it was six to three, Ryan Quest wrote the, he wrote
[08:30.120 --> 08:36.760]  the majority opinion, and it really is a bunch of bunk, what he wrote, really, I'm shocked
[08:36.760 --> 08:44.080]  that this happened, but at any rate, in order to be constitutional under the Michigan v.
[08:44.080 --> 08:53.080]  SITZ opinion, there has to, the checkpoint has to fit three, it hinges on three factors,
[08:53.080 --> 08:58.840]  or attorneys may say, it turns on three factors, there's a method of operation, its ability
[08:58.840 --> 09:05.440]  to effectively further a state's substantial public safety interest, and the third prong
[09:05.440 --> 09:10.280]  is the public safety purpose of the checkpoint, so in other words, if the checkpoint doesn't
[09:10.280 --> 09:17.760]  fit those three conditions, it's not constitutional per the US Constitution, that is, under the
[09:17.760 --> 09:20.240]  Michigan v. SITZ case.
[09:20.240 --> 09:30.880]  Now, I looked up a legal analysis written by a professor, Christopher John Bodner, from
[09:30.880 --> 09:36.880]  the University of Texas School of Law, right here in Austin, and he did a very thorough
[09:36.880 --> 09:45.240]  analysis on why sobriety checkpoints now, I mean, think about it, we're like, this is
[09:45.240 --> 09:51.680]  21 years after this ruling, okay, a lot has happened since then, he wrote an illegal analysis
[09:51.680 --> 09:59.200]  on why sobriety checkpoints now do not fit the three prongs anymore, why they are not
[09:59.200 --> 10:05.960]  constitutional anymore under the guidelines of the Michigan v. SITZ case, and the main
[10:05.960 --> 10:13.360]  reason is that they fail to meet the standard of the second prong, which is, it's, quote,
[10:13.360 --> 10:18.880]  its ability to effectively further a state's substantial public safety interest.
[10:18.880 --> 10:22.200]  Now, why does he say that?
[10:22.200 --> 10:30.640]  Very simple reason, there's nothing in law that says that you can't avoid the checkpoint.
[10:30.640 --> 10:38.040]  In fact, there are dozens of Supreme Court cases, state Supreme Court cases, that is,
[10:38.040 --> 10:46.000]  where the Supreme Courts of the states have consistently ruled that avoidance of a checkpoint,
[10:46.000 --> 10:53.960]  of a sobriety checkpoint, is not sufficient probable cause to justify the police officer
[10:53.960 --> 10:54.960]  pulling you over.
[10:54.960 --> 10:58.480]  In other words, if you're approaching one of these checkpoints and you're like, oh,
[10:58.480 --> 11:04.520]  man, here's a checkpoint, I ain't going through it, and you do a UB, you make a U-turn, guess
[11:04.520 --> 11:09.160]  what, cops can't go after you just because you make a U-turn.
[11:09.160 --> 11:12.880]  Avoidance of a checkpoint is not a crime, avoidance of a checkpoint is not sufficient
[11:12.880 --> 11:19.600]  probable cause for the police to pull you over to try to see if you might be drunk and
[11:19.600 --> 11:22.920]  that that's why you decided to avoid the checkpoint.
[11:22.920 --> 11:24.360]  Police can't do that.
[11:24.360 --> 11:28.160]  I'm going to go over some cases here.
[11:28.160 --> 11:37.480]  The first is State V. Heapy, H-E-A-P-Y, in 2007, and this was a Hawaii case, all right?
[11:37.480 --> 11:41.160]  This is probably one of the most outrageous cases.
[11:41.160 --> 11:45.560]  I'm going to briefly go over four cases here.
[11:45.560 --> 11:53.240]  On June 16, 2004, Maui police officer Eric Correa was assigned to work a sobriety checkpoint
[11:53.240 --> 11:55.760]  along the Mokolele Highway.
[11:55.760 --> 12:01.160]  His assignment was to stop vehicles attempting to avoid the sobriety checkpoint.
[12:01.160 --> 12:08.640]  At 6.30 p.m., officer Correa observed a vehicle come within 150 feet of the checkpoint before
[12:08.640 --> 12:14.360]  abruptly turning onto a dead-end road surrounded by sugar cane fields.
[12:14.360 --> 12:18.800]  The only building on the dead-end road was a closed animal shelter.
[12:18.800 --> 12:24.760]  Officer Correa did not observe the driver commit any traffic violations, however, officer
[12:24.760 --> 12:30.320]  Correa conducted an investigatory stop based on his belief that the driver avoided the
[12:30.320 --> 12:34.000]  sobriety checkpoint because he was intoxicated.
[12:34.000 --> 12:39.960]  During the stop, the driver, Mr. Raymond Heapy, exhibited signs of intoxication and was subsequently
[12:39.960 --> 12:45.000]  arrested for operating a motor vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant.
[12:45.000 --> 12:51.080]  On appeal, the Supreme Court of Hawaii held that officer Correa lacked the requisite reasonable
[12:51.080 --> 12:54.760]  suspicion necessary to stop Heapy's vehicle.
[12:54.760 --> 12:59.760]  Since reasonable suspicion did not exist, the stop constituted an unreasonable search
[12:59.760 --> 13:04.240]  and seizure and the results of the field sobriety test were suppressed.
[13:04.240 --> 13:10.040]  Yes, this is what is supposed to happen, folks.
[13:10.040 --> 13:16.880]  The holding in Heapy provides drivers in Hawaii with the option to avoid stopping at sobriety
[13:16.880 --> 13:18.560]  checkpoints.
[13:18.560 --> 13:22.760]  Subriety drivers can drive up to a sobriety checkpoint, make a legal turn, and then remain
[13:22.760 --> 13:25.760]  an imminent roadway hazard.
[13:25.760 --> 13:31.880]  Because of this decision, sobriety checkpoints no longer effectively further Hawaii's significant
[13:31.880 --> 13:37.960]  interest in protecting the safety of drivers on its roadways.
[13:37.960 --> 13:43.120]  This causes the checkpoints to fall short of the constitutional requirements as defined
[13:43.120 --> 13:45.560]  in the Michigan v. 6 case.
[13:45.560 --> 13:51.600]  Okay, so folks, what's happening here is that these sobriety checkpoints are actually having
[13:51.600 --> 14:00.200]  the effect of keeping drunk drivers on the road because people don't have to go through
[14:00.200 --> 14:01.200]  them.
[14:01.200 --> 14:10.040]  And besides that, all the resources, it uses up a lot of resources for the police departments
[14:10.040 --> 14:12.840]  and the sheriff's departments to run these things.
[14:12.840 --> 14:17.280]  And so people will be twittering each other and text messaging each other and telling
[14:17.280 --> 14:20.780]  people where the checkpoints are, and so people just don't even approach them.
[14:20.780 --> 14:24.440]  And then the ones that do approach them, they just turn around and go somewhere else.
[14:24.440 --> 14:26.520]  And so it keeps the drunks on the road.
[14:26.520 --> 14:34.880]  Not only that, the statistics show that crime rates in general go up during the times of
[14:34.880 --> 14:41.400]  these sobriety checkpoints because the thieves know that all the cops are tied up at the
[14:41.400 --> 14:42.400]  checkpoint.
[14:42.400 --> 14:44.800]  It's a day-day and there's burglaries all over the town.
[14:44.800 --> 14:49.800]  All right, so that's another unintended or perhaps intended consequence of these checkpoints.
[14:49.800 --> 14:55.200]  All right, let me go over a couple of these cases just so that you folks out there can
[14:55.200 --> 15:02.400]  realize that we do apparently still have some semblance of the rule of law in this country.
[15:02.400 --> 15:09.760]  All right, the second case is a Pennsylvania case, Commonwealth v. Scavello in 1999.
[15:09.760 --> 15:14.640]  The Montgomery County Police Department set up a sobriety checkpoint with a chase car
[15:14.640 --> 15:18.400]  to pull over drivers attempting to avoid the checkpoint.
[15:18.400 --> 15:24.880]  The chase car officer pulled over a vehicle after observing the driver make a legal U-turn
[15:24.880 --> 15:27.260]  prior to reaching the roadblock.
[15:27.260 --> 15:32.280]  The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania held that merely observing a driver approach a sobriety
[15:32.280 --> 15:37.520]  checkpoint and make a legal U-turn to avoid the checkpoint did not constitute reasonable
[15:37.520 --> 15:40.360]  suspicion to detain the driver.
[15:40.360 --> 15:45.680]  The court found that although there's statutory authority allowing police to establish roadblocks
[15:45.680 --> 15:51.960]  in Pennsylvania, there is no requirement that a driver must pass through the roadblock.
[15:51.960 --> 15:57.040]  Therefore, failing to do so does not create the requisite reasonable suspicion to conduct
[15:57.040 --> 15:59.840]  an investigatory detention.
[15:59.840 --> 16:04.520]  Absent a violation of the Pennsylvania Motor Vehicle Code, a seizure based solely on avoidance
[16:04.520 --> 16:07.960]  of checkpoint is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
[16:07.960 --> 16:13.360]  Hey, Deborah, I don't mean to interrupt your dissertation here, but this brings the thought
[16:13.360 --> 16:18.520]  to mind that this is exactly how the police officers are going to get around this.
[16:18.520 --> 16:23.320]  They're going to set up sobriety checkpoints on divided highways.
[16:23.320 --> 16:25.560]  Oh, where there's a double yellow stripe?
[16:25.560 --> 16:26.560]  Right.
[16:26.560 --> 16:31.360]  There's no way to make a legal U-turn and thus avoid the checkpoint unless they happen
[16:31.360 --> 16:34.080]  to position it just after a turnoff or something.
[16:34.080 --> 16:36.200]  Well, they can't disrupt the traffic flow.
[16:36.200 --> 16:37.960]  That's the thing.
[16:37.960 --> 16:40.040]  They can't disrupt the traffic flow.
[16:40.040 --> 16:45.920]  Well, yeah, we know what they shouldn't be able to do, but we know that these checkpoints
[16:45.920 --> 16:48.520]  are going to do that no matter what.
[16:48.520 --> 16:49.520]  All right.
[16:49.520 --> 16:55.800]  Well, listen, people can see these things coming at least 1,000, 1,500 feet away.
[16:55.800 --> 17:00.800]  I'll talk about that some more on the other side, we'll be right back.
[17:00.800 --> 17:05.080]  Central Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals, and coin
[17:05.080 --> 17:07.560]  supplies in the Austin metro area.
[17:07.560 --> 17:08.560]  We also ship worldwide.
[17:08.560 --> 17:13.200]  We're a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin
[17:13.200 --> 17:14.200]  and metals purchases.
[17:14.200 --> 17:19.080]  Because of you, Austin, business has been so good that we've had to move to a new and
[17:19.080 --> 17:20.080]  bigger location.
[17:20.080 --> 17:26.840]  We're now located at 7304 Burnett Road Suite A, 1.2 miles north on Burnett from our previous
[17:26.840 --> 17:27.840]  location.
[17:27.840 --> 17:32.440]  We're on the west side of Burnett Road in Stanley Insurance Building on the ground floor
[17:32.440 --> 17:35.040]  next to the Ishuban Sushi and the Genie Car Wash.
[17:35.040 --> 17:39.280]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 5.
[17:39.280 --> 17:45.160]  You're welcome to stop in during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440.
[17:45.160 --> 17:50.000]  Ask for Chad or Becky and say that you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or Texas Liberty
[17:50.000 --> 17:51.000]  Radio.
[17:51.000 --> 17:56.400]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion at our new location at 7304 Burnett Road Suite A or call
[17:56.400 --> 18:00.360]  512-646-6440.
[18:00.360 --> 18:05.680]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.680 --> 18:09.200]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[18:09.200 --> 18:13.480]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you
[18:13.480 --> 18:14.480]  can win too.
[18:14.480 --> 18:19.320]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.320 --> 18:24.760]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons, how to
[18:24.760 --> 18:29.240]  answer letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report,
[18:29.240 --> 18:33.880]  how to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:33.880 --> 18:39.000]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.000 --> 18:40.920]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:40.920 --> 18:46.680]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[18:46.680 --> 18:49.680]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[18:49.680 --> 18:59.160]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[18:59.160 --> 19:12.160]  collectors now.
[19:12.160 --> 19:13.160]  Okay folks.
[19:13.160 --> 19:16.600]  All right, we're back.
[19:16.600 --> 19:25.360]  Now Eddie, another issue is there is no requirement that you even stop at these checkpoints.
[19:25.360 --> 19:27.360]  Yeah, I can sit there.
[19:27.360 --> 19:31.680]  I told them at the meeting I was not going to be a cooperative individual.
[19:31.680 --> 19:33.840]  You don't have to even stop at them.
[19:33.840 --> 19:39.880]  See, there's a little bit of confusion when we're talking about these sobriety checkpoints.
[19:39.880 --> 19:43.560]  They don't block off the whole road, okay?
[19:43.560 --> 19:47.520]  They don't block off the whole road and make every car go through them.
[19:47.520 --> 19:52.800]  They can't do that because that would impede traffic.
[19:52.800 --> 19:54.840]  They can't do roadblocks.
[19:54.840 --> 19:55.840]  They're checkpoints.
[19:55.840 --> 19:57.000]  It's different.
[19:57.000 --> 20:02.560]  What they do is they set up the checkpoint on the side of the road, okay, where there's
[20:02.560 --> 20:06.780]  like a parking lot where they've gotten permission from the property owner or maybe it's public
[20:06.780 --> 20:13.560]  property or maybe there's like a waste station for 18-wheelers or something like that.
[20:13.560 --> 20:19.120]  They have cops on the shoulder and then they just will point you out and flag you to pull
[20:19.120 --> 20:20.760]  you over.
[20:20.760 --> 20:26.080]  The thing is you can either make a UB or you just don't pull over.
[20:26.080 --> 20:28.120]  You don't have to pull over, okay?
[20:28.120 --> 20:33.000]  There's ways around these checkpoints literally in more ways than one.
[20:33.000 --> 20:35.160]  Yeah, just make your postcard you hold up in the window.
[20:35.160 --> 20:36.160]  No thank you.
[20:36.160 --> 20:37.160]  Exactly.
[20:37.160 --> 20:38.160]  Exactly.
[20:38.160 --> 20:41.920]  So that's some of these other court cases I read where it said basically you don't even
[20:41.920 --> 20:43.960]  have to stop, all right?
[20:43.960 --> 20:45.760]  It's not a requirement.
[20:45.760 --> 20:48.560]  This is all about fear and intimidation, folks.
[20:48.560 --> 20:53.720]  It's all about intimidating you into bowing down and giving up your rights.
[20:53.720 --> 20:55.400]  So we just have to know what our rights are.
[20:55.400 --> 20:59.080]  All right, let me go and callers, I know there's callers on the board, but I really want to
[20:59.080 --> 21:04.120]  go over this because this is an important issue that folks need to understand because
[21:04.120 --> 21:07.840]  a lot of you all are out there listening, but there's checkpoints in your state and
[21:07.840 --> 21:11.000]  you need to know your rights and you need to know how to handle these situations.
[21:11.000 --> 21:17.240]  All right, I'm going to go over this third case is a Maine case, the state of Maine.
[21:17.240 --> 21:24.440]  In State v. Powell, 1991, an Oakland police officer assigned the task of stopping drivers
[21:24.440 --> 21:29.960]  who avoided the sobriety checkpoint, observed a driver, pull into a driveway, back out and
[21:29.960 --> 21:31.560]  then drive off in the opposite direction.
[21:31.560 --> 21:32.560]  All right, hold on.
[21:32.560 --> 21:33.560]  I'm going to break here.
[21:33.560 --> 21:39.160]  See, most of the time these checkpoints are in neighborhoods or they're on like a boulevard
[21:39.160 --> 21:40.240]  or something like that.
[21:40.240 --> 21:47.080]  They don't usually set up these checkpoints on a major highway like I-35 or something.
[21:47.080 --> 21:52.960]  Okay, anyway, the driver was approximately 700 yards from the checkpoint and 500 yards
[21:52.960 --> 21:57.400]  from the first cones and warning signs when he turned around in the driveway.
[21:57.400 --> 22:02.080]  The Supreme Court of Maine affirmed the trial court's holding that the only thing the officer
[22:02.080 --> 22:06.680]  could have reasonably concluded based on the driver's actions was that he turned around
[22:06.680 --> 22:09.320]  after observing police officers.
[22:09.320 --> 22:14.400]  Still, the court found that this did not constitute reasonable suspicion.
[22:14.400 --> 22:18.680]  Since reasonable suspicion did not exist, the stop violated the Fourth Amendment.
[22:18.680 --> 22:21.720]  Okay, the fourth case is a Delaware case.
[22:21.720 --> 22:27.120]  In Howard v. Vosshull, 1992, the Delaware State Police set up a sobriety checkpoint
[22:27.120 --> 22:31.960]  with lights and flares indicating the upcoming checkpoint, a thousand feet away.
[22:31.960 --> 22:36.200]  The defendant made a legal U-turn when she saw the flares and later testified she believed
[22:36.200 --> 22:38.840]  the flares warned of an accident ahead.
[22:38.840 --> 22:45.000]  The Superior Court of Delaware held that based on the facts of the case, a legal U-turn made
[22:45.000 --> 22:50.160]  a thousand feet before the roadblock could not be considered a reasonable suspicion.
[22:50.160 --> 22:53.560]  Therefore, I guess in Delaware, it was actually a roadblock.
[22:53.560 --> 22:55.160]  Most of the time, they're not roadblocks.
[22:55.160 --> 22:58.760]  Therefore, the stop was conducted in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
[22:58.760 --> 23:07.080]  Because of these cases, so here's the conclusion of Professor John Bodnar of the UT School
[23:07.080 --> 23:12.680]  of Law here in Austin that because of these cases and other cases similar to these across
[23:12.680 --> 23:18.560]  the country, these sobriety checkpoints no longer effectively further the respective
[23:18.560 --> 23:24.280]  state's significant interest in protecting the safety of drivers on its roadways because
[23:24.280 --> 23:27.600]  motorists may simply avoid them on site.
[23:27.600 --> 23:32.440]  This causes the checkpoints to fall short of the constitutional requirements as defined
[23:32.440 --> 23:35.280]  in the Michigan v. Sitz case.
[23:35.280 --> 23:45.200]  Now there's other issues concerning these checkpoints and I'll tell you what that is.
[23:45.200 --> 23:53.400]  It is basically a fallacy that is accepted that because of Michigan v. Sitz that sobriety
[23:53.400 --> 23:57.840]  checkpoints are constitutional across the board and it's okay for everyone to do them.
[23:57.840 --> 23:59.400]  Well that's just not the case.
[23:59.400 --> 24:05.200]  Not only do they have to fit these certain criteria but also here's something else concerning
[24:05.200 --> 24:14.440]  the Michigan v. Sitz case that is not discussed very much, which is this.
[24:14.440 --> 24:20.360]  After the U.S. Supreme Court made its ruling, it kicked the case back to the Michigan Supreme
[24:20.360 --> 24:25.640]  Court for the Michigan Supreme Court to change its decision accordingly.
[24:25.640 --> 24:32.520]  However, the Michigan Supreme Court held that DUI checkpoints even if permissible under
[24:32.520 --> 24:39.320]  the U.S. Constitution were still not permissible under the Michigan State Constitution and
[24:39.320 --> 24:45.240]  the Michigan Supreme Court ruled again in favor of the defendant, in effect saying to
[24:45.240 --> 24:48.800]  Judge Reinquest, if you won't protect our citizens, we will.
[24:48.800 --> 24:53.480]  And many states have followed that since Michigan 12 as a matter of fact.
[24:53.480 --> 24:59.120]  So basically folks, just because the U.S. Supreme Court says that it's okay under the
[24:59.120 --> 25:03.360]  U.S. Constitution, that doesn't mean that it's okay under the Texas State Constitution
[25:03.360 --> 25:06.000]  or any other state's Constitution.
[25:06.000 --> 25:13.160]  And so I made that point at the hearing as well and basically to cite Section 9 of the
[25:13.160 --> 25:16.040]  Texas Bill of Rights, searches and seizures.
[25:16.040 --> 25:22.040]  The people shall be secure in their person's houses, papers and possessions from all unreasonable
[25:22.040 --> 25:27.760]  searches or seizures and no warrant to search any place or to seize any person or thing
[25:27.760 --> 25:34.000]  shall issue without describing them as near as may be nor without probable cause supported
[25:34.000 --> 25:36.440]  by oath or affirmation.
[25:36.440 --> 25:38.680]  Now folks, it seems pretty clear to me.
[25:38.680 --> 25:43.640]  No person may be seized without a warrant supported by probable cause and which also
[25:43.640 --> 25:46.520]  must be supported by oath or affirmation.
[25:46.520 --> 25:50.160]  That is the definition of a reasonable seizure.
[25:50.160 --> 25:55.480]  There has to be probable cause and there has to be an oath or affirmation.
[25:55.480 --> 26:02.400]  Now common sense will tell you that a sobriety checkpoint is certainly a seizure of persons.
[26:02.400 --> 26:05.720]  Well it's more than just common sense.
[26:05.720 --> 26:14.400]  The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in U.S. v. Martinez-Fuerte in 1976 that, quote, it is agreed that checkpoint
[26:14.400 --> 26:17.200]  stops are seizures within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment.
[26:17.200 --> 26:18.360]  So there you go.
[26:18.360 --> 26:19.800]  They are seizures.
[26:19.800 --> 26:21.440]  Checkpoints are seizures.
[26:21.440 --> 26:23.480]  So that had probable cause.
[26:23.480 --> 26:25.160]  This is all there is to it.
[26:25.160 --> 26:32.320]  Now let me briefly go over some of these statistics.
[26:32.320 --> 26:35.200]  Now we've done a little bit of legal analysis.
[26:35.200 --> 26:43.880]  I wanted to hit the committee with some legal analysis and some stats showing that basically
[26:43.880 --> 26:45.960]  these things just don't even work.
[26:45.960 --> 26:46.960]  Okay?
[26:46.960 --> 26:48.880]  Yeah, I just wanted to hit the committee.
[26:48.880 --> 26:49.880]  That was...
[26:49.880 --> 26:50.880]  Yeah.
[26:50.880 --> 26:52.440]  Eddie got up and testified three times.
[26:52.440 --> 26:54.480]  It was great.
[26:54.480 --> 26:55.480]  Three different bills.
[26:55.480 --> 27:03.400]  At any rate, I wanted to show them that they just don't work because of statistics.
[27:03.400 --> 27:10.560]  Now I'm going to read some stats here concerning the ineffectiveness.
[27:10.560 --> 27:17.520]  I did a case study from Pima County, Arizona, which is Tucson.
[27:17.520 --> 27:20.480]  That's where Tucson is located.
[27:20.480 --> 27:26.320]  It's a city of just over a million people about the size of Austin.
[27:26.320 --> 27:32.000]  And basically I'm going to read the stats here, just a brief rundown of the stats concerning
[27:32.000 --> 27:34.880]  their sobriety checkpoints.
[27:34.880 --> 27:41.120]  This was a time period of about 16 months from Labor Day weekend of 05 to the end of
[27:41.120 --> 27:44.400]  December of 06, about a year and a half.
[27:44.400 --> 27:48.840]  They ran hundreds of checkpoints.
[27:48.840 --> 28:01.760]  And it says during this time period, no DUI charges in 36,579 out of 36,798 stops, okay?
[28:01.760 --> 28:11.720]  They did a field sobriety check on 2.7% of all stop vehicles, 77.9% of those field sobriety
[28:11.720 --> 28:14.680]  tests resulted in a negative.
[28:14.680 --> 28:21.160]  They only had 0.59% overall DUI arrest rate.
[28:21.160 --> 28:23.760]  That's 0.59%, folks.
[28:23.760 --> 28:26.480]  That's like a half of 1%.
[28:26.480 --> 28:37.720]  They had 99.41% DUI innocence rate, 0.42% non-DUI citation rate, 2.93 hours per checkpoint,
[28:37.720 --> 28:45.240]  12.8 deputies per checkpoint, 37.5 man hours per checkpoint, 3.6 arrests per checkpoint,
[28:45.240 --> 28:48.480]  10.3 man hours per DUI arrest.
[28:48.480 --> 28:50.840]  All right, folks, this is just ridiculous.
[28:50.840 --> 28:55.040]  And this basically reflects the statistics from all around the country.
[28:55.040 --> 28:57.680]  I'm not going to go over everything because it will take too long.
[28:57.680 --> 29:04.280]  But I submitted a 13-page document to the committee showing statistics from all over
[29:04.280 --> 29:08.080]  the country basically reporting the same thing.
[29:08.080 --> 29:13.360]  In general, across the board, across the entire United States, in every state that runs these
[29:13.360 --> 29:22.560]  checkpoints, they have all reported approximately 0.6% arrest rate at these checkpoints.
[29:22.560 --> 29:24.560]  All right, folks.
[29:24.560 --> 29:27.000]  This is just outrageous.
[29:27.000 --> 29:32.280]  And what's ending up happening is that the checkpoints are being used for other purposes,
[29:32.280 --> 29:35.160]  to check for driver's licenses and things like this.
[29:35.160 --> 29:39.320]  So we're going to continue on when we get back on the other side.
[29:39.320 --> 29:43.720]  This is the rule of law, Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens.
[29:43.720 --> 29:47.800]  I'll be discussing more about these statistics and what the real purpose of these checkpoints
[29:47.800 --> 29:50.000]  are when we get back.
[29:50.000 --> 29:52.800]  Folks, hold on the line who are calling.
[29:52.800 --> 29:59.840]  We'll be right back.
[29:59.840 --> 30:00.840]  I lost my son.
[30:00.840 --> 30:01.840]  My nephew.
[30:01.840 --> 30:02.840]  My uncle.
[30:02.840 --> 30:03.840]  My son.
[30:03.840 --> 30:04.840]  On September 11th, 2001.
[30:04.840 --> 30:08.120]  Most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11th.
[30:08.120 --> 30:12.200]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[30:12.200 --> 30:18.080]  Although the official explanation is that fire brought down Building 7, over 1,200 architects
[30:18.080 --> 30:21.840]  and engineers have looked into the evidence and believe there is more to the story.
[30:21.840 --> 30:23.320]  Bring justice to my son.
[30:23.320 --> 30:24.320]  My uncle.
[30:24.320 --> 30:25.320]  My nephew.
[30:25.320 --> 30:26.320]  My son.
[30:26.320 --> 30:27.320]  Go to buildingwhat.org.
[30:27.320 --> 30:28.320]  Why it fell.
[30:28.320 --> 30:29.320]  Why it matters.
[30:29.320 --> 30:31.760]  And what you can do.
[30:31.760 --> 30:36.240]  Like most people, you probably know trans fat and saturated fat can contribute to heart
[30:36.240 --> 30:40.840]  disease, but a new study shows there's another dark side to these substances you might not
[30:40.840 --> 30:41.840]  know about.
[30:41.840 --> 30:46.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back with more in just a moment.
[30:46.200 --> 30:47.800]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:47.800 --> 30:51.400]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:51.400 --> 30:56.160]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too.
[30:56.160 --> 31:01.200]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[31:01.200 --> 31:03.940]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[31:03.940 --> 31:08.220]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[31:08.220 --> 31:11.760]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[31:11.760 --> 31:13.600]  Start over with StartPage.
[31:13.600 --> 31:19.600]  Getting foods laden with trans and saturated fats isn't just bad for your heart, it's
[31:19.600 --> 31:20.600]  bad for your mind.
[31:20.600 --> 31:25.760]  A new study has found that people who eat a diet high in these fats have a 48% greater
[31:25.760 --> 31:29.000]  risk of depression than those who don't consume them.
[31:29.000 --> 31:33.440]  Trans fats are modified vegetable fats used in many fast foods and bakery products to
[31:33.440 --> 31:35.500]  extend their shelf life.
[31:35.500 --> 31:40.240]  Saturated fats are found in animal-based foods like meat and dairy products, as well as coconut,
[31:40.240 --> 31:42.160]  palm, and palm kernel oil.
[31:42.160 --> 31:45.080]  Fortunately, all fats are not created equal.
[31:45.080 --> 31:49.820]  Polyunsaturated fats like those found in fish and olive oil can actually help reduce the
[31:49.820 --> 31:50.820]  risk of depression.
[31:50.820 --> 31:52.820]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[31:52.820 --> 32:20.820]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[32:22.820 --> 32:36.380]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[32:36.380 --> 32:45.380]  I am going over my presentation that I gave to the Criminal Jurisprudence Committee on
[32:45.380 --> 32:50.580]  Tuesday evening, or it's Wednesday morning, I should say.
[32:50.580 --> 32:56.500]  It was about midnight by the time I got to speak, a little after midnight, actually.
[32:56.500 --> 32:58.840]  We were sitting there all day long.
[32:58.840 --> 33:04.080]  Basically, the committee hearing started at 10 in the morning, and we were there all day,
[33:04.080 --> 33:06.160]  and they finally heard the bill at 11.
[33:06.160 --> 33:11.360]  They kept saying, you know, it's coming right up, it'll be right there, just wait, it's
[33:11.360 --> 33:14.480]  next, it's next, and strung us along all day long.
[33:14.480 --> 33:19.440]  They finally heard the bill at 11 p.m., and it was pretty rude, really.
[33:19.440 --> 33:25.440]  They let all the representatives from MAD go first, and all the cops that came to lobby
[33:25.440 --> 33:30.140]  for more power, they let all those people go first, and then the committee took a break
[33:30.140 --> 33:36.140]  and conducted committee business, basically voting on whether or not to pass certain other
[33:36.140 --> 33:40.780]  bills out of committee that they had already had hearings on, while the patriots are all
[33:40.780 --> 33:44.060]  sitting there going, you know, this is really rude.
[33:44.060 --> 33:50.420]  And we were making our voices heard, and like, why can't they do this tomorrow?
[33:50.420 --> 33:53.900]  Why can't they do this in the hearing tomorrow, the hearing that they're going to have tomorrow?
[33:53.900 --> 33:58.340]  And they're all looking at us like, yeah, you hear us, you hear us, that's right.
[33:58.340 --> 34:00.220]  We're talking about you folks.
[34:00.220 --> 34:04.180]  You sit there and you make us wait, you know, for a half an hour while you conduct committee
[34:04.180 --> 34:10.900]  business, while we've been waiting all day long to talk, it was not very nice.
[34:10.900 --> 34:17.300]  But at any rate, we all stayed, and we all got to talk, and fortunately, the committee
[34:17.300 --> 34:21.660]  didn't seem to be sold on the idea of the sobriety checkpoints.
[34:21.660 --> 34:27.820]  I mean, they were kind of given MAD a hard time, and the cops too, and basically, the
[34:27.820 --> 34:33.140]  committee chairman was saying, hey, you know, Mr. Police Officer from Houston, there's a
[34:33.140 --> 34:40.740]  guy, an officer that came representing HPD, and the committee chairman told the HPD officer
[34:40.740 --> 34:46.540]  we put a lot of tools in your toolbox already, you know, and the statistics of drunk driving
[34:46.540 --> 34:48.420]  keep going up in Texas.
[34:48.420 --> 34:53.580]  So at a certain point, we as the legislature have to say, we've done enough, guys, we've
[34:53.580 --> 34:58.540]  given you enough tools, we've given you no refusal weekends, we've given you no refusal
[34:58.540 --> 35:05.300]  blood draws, and a plethora of other tools to fight drunk driving, and you keep coming
[35:05.300 --> 35:09.380]  back to us year after year saying, well, if only you'll do this, if only you'll do that,
[35:09.380 --> 35:13.700]  if only you'll give us this much more power, if only you'll give us this much more power,
[35:13.700 --> 35:17.500]  if only you'll take away people's rights just a little bit more, we'll be able to solve
[35:17.500 --> 35:20.420]  the problem of drunk driving, but what happens?
[35:20.420 --> 35:25.860]  The statistics of drunk driving keep going up and up and up and up in Texas.
[35:25.860 --> 35:31.140]  So the committee seemed quite reluctant to give them any more power, and I was happy
[35:31.140 --> 35:33.060]  to hear that.
[35:33.060 --> 35:41.660]  At any rate, concerning these what's called infinitesimal and possibly negative effects
[35:41.660 --> 35:49.340]  of the sobriety checkpoints, this was the finding of the Michigan Court of Appeals citing
[35:49.340 --> 35:58.820]  their statistical rate concerning that the effects on drunk driving of these sobriety
[35:58.820 --> 36:02.580]  checkpoints are infinitesimal and possibly negative.
[36:02.580 --> 36:04.540]  That means they actually do damage.
[36:04.540 --> 36:08.780]  That's what the Michigan Court of Appeals said, and I'm going to read further here.
[36:08.780 --> 36:15.060]  There is a responsibility in DUI laws, or RIDL is the name of the organization.
[36:15.060 --> 36:21.740]  They reported on the ineffectiveness of sobriety checkpoints in February of 2010, and according
[36:21.740 --> 36:27.980]  to the investigative reporting program at the University of California in Berkeley,
[36:27.980 --> 36:33.340]  quote, California police agencies are using millions of dollars in federal funds to set
[36:33.340 --> 36:40.260]  up DUI checkpoints, but they are apparently more effective in finding unlicensed drivers
[36:40.260 --> 36:42.620]  than drunks.
[36:42.620 --> 36:48.820]  State Senator Gil Cedillo criticizes the sobriety checkpoint program in California stating it's
[36:48.820 --> 36:53.780]  not effective, it's not efficient, and now we're finding it's not constitutional.
[36:53.780 --> 36:57.540]  That's a quote from a state senator in California.
[36:57.540 --> 37:04.300]  Even the FBI has officially reported that sobriety checkpoints are ineffective at catching
[37:04.300 --> 37:05.540]  drunk drivers.
[37:05.540 --> 37:10.500]  From the FBI's website, quote, typically sobriety checkpoints do not yield a large
[37:10.500 --> 37:12.860]  volume of DUI arrest.
[37:12.860 --> 37:16.980]  Now what about, well, the deterrent factor?
[37:16.980 --> 37:21.620]  Okay, now we're getting down to what the real reasons of these sobriety checkpoints are,
[37:21.620 --> 37:23.300]  what the stated reasons are.
[37:23.300 --> 37:24.660]  What about the deterrents?
[37:24.660 --> 37:26.460]  What about public perception?
[37:26.460 --> 37:35.980]  Well, in 2009 the University of Maryland conducted a study nationwide looking at nationwide statistics.
[37:35.980 --> 37:42.780]  The University of Maryland found that sobriety checkpoints don't have, quote, any impact
[37:42.780 --> 37:49.220]  on public perceptions, driver behaviors, or alcohol-related crashes, police citations
[37:49.220 --> 37:54.780]  for impaired driving, or public perceptions of alcohol-impaired driving risk.
[37:54.780 --> 38:04.420]  Okay, so the University of Maryland officially stated in their study two years ago that these
[38:04.420 --> 38:07.980]  sobriety checkpoints, they don't even have any impact on the public perception.
[38:07.980 --> 38:11.500]  They're not even a deterrent, okay?
[38:11.500 --> 38:18.740]  Now in the same article they cited that over a million vehicles went through 1,469 California
[38:18.740 --> 38:25.540]  sobriety checkpoints and police arrested one-third of 1% of these motorists for drunk driving.
[38:25.540 --> 38:31.900]  A similar analysis in Arizona found that over a two-year span sobriety checkpoints arrested
[38:31.900 --> 38:41.220]  less than 1% of 46,000 drivers stopped and cost taxpayers over $140,000.
[38:41.220 --> 38:48.700]  Okay, folks, I mean, it just gets more and more ridiculous.
[38:48.700 --> 38:55.380]  Supreme Court in Pennsylvania and the Supreme Court in New Hampshire stated in cases that
[38:55.380 --> 39:01.260]  roving patrols caught 10 times more drunk drivers than checkpoints.
[39:01.260 --> 39:06.180]  And according to the FBI, it is proven, quote, it is proven that saturation efforts will
[39:06.180 --> 39:09.460]  bring more DUI arrests than sobriety checkpoints.
[39:09.460 --> 39:15.380]  Okay, folks, this is, it just goes on and on and on.
[39:15.380 --> 39:22.300]  There in Ohio, ohio.com news, they reported the success rate of sobriety checkpoints is
[39:22.300 --> 39:29.900]  minuscule in a four-hour roadblock, one in Summit County, they reached an all-time new
[39:29.900 --> 39:33.020]  low, zero arrests.
[39:33.020 --> 39:36.620]  I mean, it just gets worse and worse and worse.
[39:36.620 --> 39:40.580]  How did the, now how did the police officers or how do some police officers feel about
[39:40.580 --> 39:41.580]  these things?
[39:41.580 --> 39:42.580]  All right.
[39:42.580 --> 39:48.300]  We have a quote from Officer Martin Gilliland, a member of the Kent, Ohio Police Department.
[39:48.300 --> 39:52.580]  He made 83 arrests for DUI in the year 2006.
[39:52.580 --> 39:58.580]  He told ohio.com news, quote, I have been a police officer for over 17 years and have
[39:58.580 --> 40:01.260]  been on my share of checkpoints.
[40:01.260 --> 40:03.260]  They are a waste of time.
[40:03.260 --> 40:05.700]  We would be more effective on the road.
[40:05.700 --> 40:10.900]  The money the state sets aside for these checkpoints ought to be used to put extra officers on
[40:10.900 --> 40:14.020]  the road patrolling actively looking for DUIs.
[40:14.020 --> 40:19.540]  There have been times where I have made more arrests for DUI in one night than a checkpoint
[40:19.540 --> 40:21.700]  with 20 plus officers.
[40:21.700 --> 40:23.780]  It's not rocket science.
[40:23.780 --> 40:28.100]  Okay, it goes on and on and on.
[40:28.100 --> 40:34.540]  So this raises the question, this begs the question, what is the purpose of these checkpoints
[40:34.540 --> 40:39.060]  if they're not effective at removing drunk drivers from the roads?
[40:39.060 --> 40:46.020]  The answer, the stated answer, education, awareness, and deterrence.
[40:46.020 --> 40:47.580]  All right.
[40:47.580 --> 40:48.580]  Listen to this.
[40:48.580 --> 40:55.220]  According to a March 24, 2011 article in USA Today, Barbara Harsha, executive director
[40:55.220 --> 41:01.700]  of the Governor's Highway Safety Association said, quote, the goal is not to write tickets
[41:01.700 --> 41:08.300]  or make arrests but rather to remind the public that they should drive sober or tsk tsk, face
[41:08.300 --> 41:10.380]  serious consequences, end quote.
[41:10.380 --> 41:13.540]  I added the tsk tsk in there, folks, sorry.
[41:13.540 --> 41:20.980]  Anyways, Riverside County, California Sheriff Stanley Sniff, whose deputies made 491 DUI
[41:20.980 --> 41:27.620]  arrests at 83 checkpoints in 16 cities says, quote, random patrols are still the most effective.
[41:27.620 --> 41:33.220]  We make light years more arrests on random patrols than at checkpoints.
[41:33.220 --> 41:41.260]  Even MADD admits Lawrence Taylor cited a DUI attorney and author, California DUI attorney
[41:41.260 --> 41:47.180]  and author Lawrence Taylor cited a quote from a MADD official, Bryce Templeton, who said,
[41:47.180 --> 41:50.580]  quote, I've read that police are less than enthusiastic about DUI checkpoints because
[41:50.580 --> 41:52.500]  they don't make that many arrests.
[41:52.500 --> 41:53.500]  Well, duh.
[41:53.500 --> 41:54.500]  Okay.
[41:54.500 --> 41:55.900]  It goes on and on.
[41:55.900 --> 42:00.900]  I have citations, folks, if anybody wants this, in fact, I'm going to post this.
[42:00.900 --> 42:05.620]  I'm going to turn this into a PDF file and post it on the website for folks to download
[42:05.620 --> 42:10.860]  so that they can read all these stats that I'm kind of glossing over right now and some
[42:10.860 --> 42:16.540]  of these other court cases concerning the stated goals, all right?
[42:16.540 --> 42:21.620]  The Supreme Court of California, Randy, I'm hearing some noise.
[42:21.620 --> 42:23.980]  Maybe you can mute your mic.
[42:23.980 --> 42:34.220]  The Supreme Court of California had some, hello, Randy, okay.
[42:34.220 --> 42:35.220]  I think that's Randy.
[42:35.220 --> 42:36.700]  He must have forgotten to mute his mic.
[42:36.700 --> 42:37.700]  All right.
[42:37.700 --> 42:42.700]  The Supreme Court of California had some interesting observations about sobriety checkpoints in
[42:42.700 --> 42:47.540]  Ingersoll v. Palmer in 1987.
[42:47.540 --> 42:55.340]  The court noted, quote, the stated goals of several law enforcement agencies explicitly
[42:55.340 --> 43:03.580]  point to deterrence as a primary objective of the checkpoint program.
[43:03.580 --> 43:08.980]  Just one moment, folks.
[43:08.980 --> 43:11.900]  Okay.
[43:11.900 --> 43:16.980]  The stated goals of several law enforcement agencies explicitly point to deterrence as
[43:16.980 --> 43:21.140]  a primary objective of the checkpoint program.
[43:21.140 --> 43:26.780]  Two major goals of the pilot checkpoint program as stated in the Burlingame California Police
[43:26.780 --> 43:32.180]  Department manual were to increase public awareness of the seriousness of the problem
[43:32.180 --> 43:37.140]  and to increase the perceived risk of apprehension.
[43:37.140 --> 43:42.340]  An important part of the Burlingame procedure was to educate by giving each stop driver
[43:42.340 --> 43:45.940]  a leaflet about the checkpoint program as well as a survey card.
[43:45.940 --> 43:50.300]  So, folks, they're admitting that they admit that they don't even do any good.
[43:50.300 --> 43:55.300]  It's for educational purposes only, for entertainment.
[43:55.300 --> 43:56.620]  We'll talk about this more on the other side.
[43:56.620 --> 43:57.620]  We'll be right back.
[43:57.620 --> 44:05.180]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so
[44:05.180 --> 44:08.820]  easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[44:08.820 --> 44:11.820]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[44:11.820 --> 44:12.820]  Brave New Books?
[44:12.820 --> 44:17.620]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex
[44:17.620 --> 44:20.180]  Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[44:20.180 --> 44:23.540]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[44:23.540 --> 44:26.500]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[44:26.500 --> 44:27.980]  Go check it out for yourself.
[44:27.980 --> 44:32.340]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[44:32.340 --> 44:35.660]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[44:35.660 --> 44:40.940]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[44:40.940 --> 44:43.140]  facility, just behind the bookstore.
[44:43.140 --> 44:46.940]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[44:46.940 --> 44:51.380]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[44:51.380 --> 45:00.620]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[45:00.620 --> 45:07.460]  At HempUSA.org, we offer chemical-free products to people around the world, detoxifying, self-healing,
[45:07.460 --> 45:09.600]  while rebuilding the immune system.
[45:09.600 --> 45:15.620]  We urge our listeners to please consider our largest selling product, micro plant powder.
[45:15.620 --> 45:20.620]  Our micro plant powder is rich in silica and probiotics to help rebuild the immune system
[45:20.620 --> 45:23.580]  and to create a healthy stomach flora.
[45:23.580 --> 45:27.740]  Micro plant powder is excellent for daily intake and is perfect to add to your storage
[45:27.740 --> 45:28.740]  shelter.
[45:28.740 --> 45:32.540]  We urge our listeners to please visit us at HempUSA.org.
[45:32.540 --> 45:36.060]  And remember, all of our products are chemical-free and healthy to eat.
[45:36.060 --> 45:40.700]  We constantly strive to give you the best service, highest quality, and rapid shipping
[45:40.700 --> 45:41.700]  anywhere.
[45:41.700 --> 45:45.740]  And we offer free shipping on orders over $95 in the U.S.
[45:45.740 --> 45:51.340]  Please visit us at HempUSA.org or call 908-69-12608.
[45:51.340 --> 45:54.380]  That's 908-69-12608.
[45:54.380 --> 46:21.380]  See what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you at HempUSA.org.
[46:25.380 --> 46:31.380]  Such a sentiment the soldier, a warrior of love, scoupling the keepers heath.
[46:31.380 --> 46:36.380]  All they're taking is misunderstanding, and somebody calls the police.
[46:36.380 --> 47:01.380]  What's in the spot's blood?
[47:01.380 --> 47:22.380]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[47:22.380 --> 47:23.380]  All right.
[47:23.380 --> 47:29.380]  We are talking about what the true stated goals, what the true purposes of these sobriety
[47:29.380 --> 47:35.380]  checkpoints are as admitted by the entities that implement these programs.
[47:35.380 --> 47:42.380]  And I might add that the representative who introduced this bill, and I forgot his name.
[47:42.380 --> 47:43.380]  I'm sorry.
[47:43.380 --> 47:48.380]  But at any rate, he even admitted in his presentation that the point was not to catch drunk drivers,
[47:48.380 --> 47:53.380]  that the point was to educate people and to raise awareness, okay?
[47:53.380 --> 48:00.380]  So here is another quote here, quote, the evaluation report on the pilot project carried
[48:00.380 --> 48:05.380]  out by the California Highway Patrol stated that although a project of stepped-up roving
[48:05.380 --> 48:11.380]  patrols had resulted in approximately twice the number of arrests per work hour, quote,
[48:11.380 --> 48:16.380]  it must be remembered that accomplishing more arrests is not the intent of sobriety checkpoints.
[48:16.380 --> 48:21.380]  Rather, they are intended to deter persons who have been drinking from driving for fear
[48:21.380 --> 48:23.380]  of encountering a checkpoint.
[48:23.380 --> 48:26.380]  Oh, boy, give me a break.
[48:26.380 --> 48:34.380]  And the Arizona Highway Patrol stated, quote, the purpose is, quote, to develop a public
[48:34.380 --> 48:39.380]  perception of the high risk of apprehension of drinking drivers.
[48:39.380 --> 48:42.380]  I mean, it just goes on and on and on.
[48:42.380 --> 48:48.380]  So basically what this proves is that these DUI checkpoints are about fear-mongering,
[48:48.380 --> 48:52.380]  exercise of police authority, and potential deterrence than they are about actually
[48:52.380 --> 48:56.380]  apprehending impaired drivers.
[48:56.380 --> 49:01.380]  And the Colorado Springs Gazette reported on this in July of 1999.
[49:01.380 --> 49:06.380]  They called it, the title of the article was, quote, another nail in the DUI checkpoint
[49:06.380 --> 49:07.380]  coffin.
[49:07.380 --> 49:08.380]  I love it.
[49:08.380 --> 49:12.380]  And they said, quote, to successfully apprehend drivers who are actually impaired,
[49:12.380 --> 49:17.380]  police should not waste their time standing around waiting for a drunk driver to miss the
[49:17.380 --> 49:22.380]  DUI checkpoint ahead signs and wander into a checkpoint.
[49:22.380 --> 49:27.380]  They should be out driving around observing driving behavior and comparing it to the cues
[49:27.380 --> 49:35.380]  provided by the NHTSA to achieve reasonable suspicion and to stop and probable cause to
[49:35.380 --> 49:36.380]  arrest.
[49:36.380 --> 49:37.380]  All right.
[49:37.380 --> 49:40.380]  This is just getting out of control, folks.
[49:40.380 --> 49:45.380]  So now let's get to the fiscal note.
[49:45.380 --> 49:58.380]  This representative in this bill, he had the gall to say in the bill that there was not
[49:58.380 --> 50:06.380]  going to be any significant fiscal impact on the localities, on the state or the counties
[50:06.380 --> 50:10.380]  or the local municipalities.
[50:10.380 --> 50:11.380]  This is ridiculous.
[50:11.380 --> 50:13.380]  That's not what the stats show.
[50:13.380 --> 50:14.380]  All right.
[50:14.380 --> 50:18.380]  And not only that, it raises the question of federal funding.
[50:18.380 --> 50:24.380]  There's nothing in this bill that would authorize law enforcement, whether it's state or county
[50:24.380 --> 50:31.380]  or local law enforcement, to accept federal funding to run these things.
[50:31.380 --> 50:37.380]  However, we all know that these law enforcement entities just take federal funding anyway.
[50:37.380 --> 50:38.380]  All right.
[50:38.380 --> 50:43.380]  So folks, it raises a more serious question concerning federal funding, at least here
[50:43.380 --> 50:44.380]  in the state of Texas.
[50:44.380 --> 50:48.380]  I personally have been researching the statutes pretty thoroughly for the last two years,
[50:48.380 --> 50:56.380]  and I can't find anything anywhere in statute that authorizes local county or state law
[50:56.380 --> 51:03.380]  enforcement entities to directly accept federal funds for any reason whatsoever, not even
[51:03.380 --> 51:05.380]  to implement a recommended federal program.
[51:05.380 --> 51:12.380]  They can only take money from the tax base, either from the state directly, from the state
[51:12.380 --> 51:18.380]  of Texas, or from the local taxing authority.
[51:18.380 --> 51:24.380]  Now folks, if I or any other entity offered law enforcement, quote, funding to implement
[51:24.380 --> 51:29.380]  a, quote, program, that would be called bribery.
[51:29.380 --> 51:34.380]  And so we really need to dig into this and see if we can't start getting some criminal
[51:34.380 --> 51:42.380]  charges in front of some grand juries here regarding the federal funding for the local
[51:42.380 --> 51:43.380]  police.
[51:43.380 --> 51:52.380]  So at any rate, in conclusion, about these checkpoints, this is my take on the whole
[51:52.380 --> 51:53.380]  thing.
[51:53.380 --> 51:58.380]  If the true purpose, which is even admitted and stated, is that the reason for these sobriety
[51:58.380 --> 52:03.380]  checkpoints is for education and awareness, then the response to this should be clear.
[52:03.380 --> 52:05.380]  The answer should be no.
[52:05.380 --> 52:10.380]  All right, we as citizens have the right to travel free from being seized without warrant
[52:10.380 --> 52:12.380]  or probable cause.
[52:12.380 --> 52:16.380]  And since these checkpoints are proven to be statistically ineffective at removing drunk
[52:16.380 --> 52:22.380]  drivers from the road, they don't even satisfy federal constitutional muster anymore as defined
[52:22.380 --> 52:24.380]  in the Michigan v. SIDS case.
[52:24.380 --> 52:30.380]  It is completely unacceptable to have our rights violated in the name of education and
[52:30.380 --> 52:33.380]  awareness and deterrence.
[52:33.380 --> 52:39.380]  And certainly there are ways to educate the public and raise awareness about drunk driving
[52:39.380 --> 52:45.380]  and to warn drunk drivers about the dangers of drunk driving and how bad things can be
[52:45.380 --> 52:47.380]  if you get caught.
[52:47.380 --> 52:51.380]  And I told the committee, they can run a PSA on my network.
[52:51.380 --> 52:54.380]  In fact, I've got some open slots right now.
[52:54.380 --> 52:57.380]  I offered to MAD, hey, you guys want to run a PSA?
[52:57.380 --> 52:59.380]  Well, they didn't take me up on the offer.
[52:59.380 --> 53:01.380]  They'd rather have the checkpoints.
[53:01.380 --> 53:08.380]  And I've got to say, I feel really bad for some of these people that testified from MAD
[53:08.380 --> 53:12.380]  because I could see their pain.
[53:12.380 --> 53:13.380]  I could feel their pain.
[53:13.380 --> 53:14.380]  They've lost their loved ones.
[53:14.380 --> 53:19.380]  They've lost their spouses, their children, people that are very close to them.
[53:19.380 --> 53:23.380]  I mean, it's heart wrenching really to watch these testimonies.
[53:23.380 --> 53:31.380]  However, the thing that was really terrifying is that many of them admitted that basically
[53:31.380 --> 53:40.380]  they are going to push for any possible potential idea that could pop into their heads of
[53:40.380 --> 53:48.380]  what somebody could do or what the government could do to possibly deter or raise awareness
[53:48.380 --> 53:53.380]  or educate or prosecute for DUI.
[53:53.380 --> 53:58.380]  Any possible idea they can come up with, they are going to push for it.
[53:58.380 --> 54:00.380]  They don't care who it hurts.
[54:00.380 --> 54:03.380]  They don't care how many people's rights are violated.
[54:03.380 --> 54:07.380]  They don't care because they are overcome with grief.
[54:07.380 --> 54:16.380]  And if everyone's rights are taken away in the off chance that it could educate the public,
[54:16.380 --> 54:18.380]  well, then they're going to go for it.
[54:18.380 --> 54:26.380]  And they don't even see that what they're pushing for can have fatal consequences.
[54:26.380 --> 54:34.380]  They don't realize that they are actually advocating for drunk drivers to stay on the road.
[54:34.380 --> 54:37.380]  This is how far gone some of these people are.
[54:37.380 --> 54:39.380]  And I really do feel sorry for them.
[54:39.380 --> 54:44.380]  And it's highly unfortunate that most of them had left before I made my presentation
[54:44.380 --> 54:48.380]  because I think that if they could see the reality, they might change their minds
[54:48.380 --> 54:52.380]  because what they're pushing for actually would keep drunk drivers on the road
[54:52.380 --> 54:54.380]  because they can avoid the checkpoints.
[54:54.380 --> 55:01.380]  And it uses up the resources of the police when they could be out watching for errant behavior
[55:01.380 --> 55:04.380]  on the road like people swerving and stuff like that.
[55:04.380 --> 55:06.380]  Yeah, they're always the first ones screaming,
[55:06.380 --> 55:10.380]  we don't have enough funding to do this, this, or this, but they want to waste it on checkpoints.
[55:10.380 --> 55:12.380]  Exactly. Exactly.
[55:12.380 --> 55:17.380]  And then these bills, they want to write bills where there's no fiscal note
[55:17.380 --> 55:22.380]  and there's no funding for these things from the state or the feds or anything else.
[55:22.380 --> 55:24.380]  And then they say, oh, well, it's not going to cost anything,
[55:24.380 --> 55:29.380]  even though it's proven that these things cost millions of dollars to run.
[55:29.380 --> 55:30.380]  All right.
[55:30.380 --> 55:34.380]  Now, what I tell the committee is that, you know,
[55:34.380 --> 55:42.380]  there's a reason why the DUI rates keep going up in Texas,
[55:42.380 --> 55:47.380]  even though they keep giving the police more and more and more draconian tools.
[55:47.380 --> 55:54.380]  And that's because the prosecutor, all right, the prosecutor keeps cutting deals
[55:54.380 --> 55:58.380]  and dealing away harsh sentences in favor of light slaps on the wrist.
[55:58.380 --> 56:07.380]  I was shocked to hear that, at these hearings, I was shocked to hear that there was such a thing as a repeat first-time offender.
[56:07.380 --> 56:12.380]  Now, you tell me how you can be a repeat first-time offender?
[56:12.380 --> 56:13.380]  What does that mean?
[56:13.380 --> 56:15.380]  Well, I found out what it means.
[56:15.380 --> 56:20.380]  What it means is that every time somebody gets prosecuted,
[56:20.380 --> 56:26.380]  the prosecutor deals away the harsh sentence and has some kind of deferred adjudication program.
[56:26.380 --> 56:30.380]  And so the next time they get caught, they are for a quote,
[56:30.380 --> 56:33.380]  technically a quote first-time offender again.
[56:33.380 --> 56:42.380]  And another interesting thing that I found on these statistics was that most of these serious crashes
[56:42.380 --> 56:49.380]  were caused by people who had like six, seven, eight DUI convictions.
[56:49.380 --> 56:50.380]  All right.
[56:50.380 --> 56:51.380]  This is ridiculous, folks.
[56:51.380 --> 56:58.380]  There is an extremely tiny sector of society that is causing these problems.
[56:58.380 --> 57:02.380]  And they're using it as an excuse to take away everyone's rights.
[57:02.380 --> 57:05.380]  I mean, but big surprise to that one, right?
[57:05.380 --> 57:14.380]  So at any rate, it was also shocking to me to find out that MAD actually advocates people calling each other
[57:14.380 --> 57:18.380]  and texting each other and twittering each other about these checkpoints
[57:18.380 --> 57:24.380]  because that serves the purpose of the education and the awareness raising and the deterrence.
[57:24.380 --> 57:32.380]  And I'm thinking these people have lost their minds over grief because what you're doing is you're saying,
[57:32.380 --> 57:37.380]  hey, we want the checkpoints and we want everybody out there to call each other about them,
[57:37.380 --> 57:43.380]  but they don't realize that the result that that's going to have is that the drunks are going to stay on the road
[57:43.380 --> 57:46.380]  and that there's going to actually probably be even more drunks on the road
[57:46.380 --> 57:49.380]  because they know that the cops are all tied up at the checkpoint.
[57:49.380 --> 57:55.380]  It also has the effect of crime rates being raised in general, higher crime rate in general,
[57:55.380 --> 57:59.380]  because the thieves all know that it's open season to go break into people's houses
[57:59.380 --> 58:01.380]  because the cops are all tied up at the checkpoints.
[58:01.380 --> 58:02.380]  All right.
[58:02.380 --> 58:03.380]  So I'm sorry.
[58:03.380 --> 58:11.380]  It's completely unacceptable to have our rights taken away in the name of education and awareness.
[58:11.380 --> 58:15.380]  So I was glad to see that the committee was not sold on this idea,
[58:15.380 --> 58:23.380]  but I wanted to go over my presentation here at a little bit more length than I was able to at the committee hearing.
[58:23.380 --> 58:30.380]  And folks, if you want to read my research, I do have some other stats I wanted to go through just briefly.
[58:30.380 --> 58:41.380]  The death rate of alcohol-related fatalities in traffic accidents is actually 10.6%, not 40%, like what MADD says.
[58:41.380 --> 58:51.380]  They sort the statistics by including situations where like a sober driver hits a drunk pedestrian and things like that
[58:51.380 --> 58:54.380]  to beef up their false statistics.
[58:54.380 --> 58:57.380]  So I'm just going to briefly go over that on the other side, and then we'll take your calls.
[58:57.380 --> 58:59.380]  We'll be right back.
[58:59.380 --> 59:07.380]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[59:07.380 --> 59:11.380]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text,
[59:11.380 --> 59:15.380]  but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:15.380 --> 59:18.380]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:18.380 --> 59:22.380]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate,
[59:22.380 --> 59:27.380]  but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:27.380 --> 59:31.380]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way,
[59:31.380 --> 59:37.380]  providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:37.380 --> 59:42.380]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:42.380 --> 59:53.380]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:53.380 --> 59:57.380]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:57.380 --> 01:00:00.380]  That's freestudybible.com.
[01:00:00.380 --> 01:00:04.380]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Network.
[01:00:04.380 --> 01:00:13.380]  The Pentagon admitted Wednesday airstrikes over Libya have continued despite the administration's claim the U.S. was letting NATO take the lead.
[01:00:13.380 --> 01:00:21.380]  Eleven warplanes have flown 97 missions over Libya since April 4th when the U.S. said it was falling back to a supporting role.
[01:00:21.380 --> 01:00:28.380]  Splitting hairs, officials said, the strikes since April 4th were defensive, not offensive.
[01:00:28.380 --> 01:00:37.380]  A Pentagon official said Monday the U.S. is reviewing arms sales to Middle Eastern countries on a case-by-case basis, given turmoil in the region.
[01:00:37.380 --> 01:00:46.380]  Richard Gunnail of the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency said a $29 billion sale of F-15 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia
[01:00:46.380 --> 01:00:53.380]  and a $7 billion sale to the United Arab Emirates of a missile defense system will go ahead.
[01:00:53.380 --> 01:01:00.380]  Yemen's opposition Tuesday set a two-week deadline for President Ali Abdullah Saleh to step down.
[01:01:00.380 --> 01:01:05.380]  Opposition leaders rejected a Saudi-brokered initiative to end the country's political turmoil
[01:01:05.380 --> 01:01:13.380]  after tens of thousands staged protests against the proposal Tuesday, saying it offered Saleh immunity from prosecution.
[01:01:13.380 --> 01:01:22.380]  Five people were killed in Sanaa Wednesday when forces loyal to a defected army general and pro-government fighters clashed.
[01:01:22.380 --> 01:01:30.380]  Arabic youth who underpinned the uprisings that have altered power dynamics across the Middle East are younger in Iraq than anywhere else.
[01:01:30.380 --> 01:01:36.380]  In Iraq, the median age is 21, while in Egypt it's 24 and in Tunisia 30.
[01:01:36.380 --> 01:01:40.380]  Nearly 40 percent of Iraq's population is 14 or under.
[01:01:40.380 --> 01:01:47.380]  Meanwhile, Iraq's national government is showing increased signs of splintering over a U.S.-backed power-sharing agreement.
[01:01:47.380 --> 01:01:54.380]  If the government fractures, a narrow majority of Shiite parties will likely coalesce around Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.
[01:01:54.380 --> 01:02:02.380]  A group of young Iraqis who used Facebook to organize protests in February demanding improved services and an end to corruption
[01:02:02.380 --> 01:02:06.380]  say they were detained and beaten by security forces after the protests.
[01:02:06.380 --> 01:02:12.380]  Much of the crackdown was perpetrated by al-Maliki's dispatching orders via text message.
[01:02:12.380 --> 01:02:20.380]  Law student Swash Ahmed said the youth of Iraq are disenchanted, adding they've started to unify, but they don't have power.
[01:02:20.380 --> 01:02:29.380]  U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told the U.S. Islamic World Forum Arab youths will not, quote, accept the status quo.
[01:02:29.380 --> 01:02:36.380]  Clinton said, quote, the long Arab winter has begun to thaw, praising Arab youths for rising up against, quote,
[01:02:36.380 --> 01:02:41.380]  false narratives that had choked political and economic reform for generations.
[01:02:41.380 --> 01:02:49.380]  While on a tour of the Mideast in North Africa in March, activists pivotal to Egypt's revolution refused to meet Clinton
[01:02:49.380 --> 01:02:53.380]  because of the U.S.'s support for former dictator Hosni Mubarak.
[01:02:53.380 --> 01:02:59.380]  For more details on these stories, visit INNWorldRecord.net.
[01:02:59.380 --> 01:03:13.380]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at ruleoflawradio.com, live free speech talk radio at its best.
[01:03:29.380 --> 01:03:52.380]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[01:03:52.380 --> 01:03:59.380]  All right, I just wanted to give, just to finish up, wrap up my presentation here.
[01:03:59.380 --> 01:04:04.380]  There are some other statistics that were very important that I wanted to put out there.
[01:04:04.380 --> 01:04:18.380]  Concerning the fatality rate, the fatality rate in traffic accidents, MADD loves to say is 40%, and that is simply not true.
[01:04:18.380 --> 01:04:24.380]  It's a blatant lie, at least as far as how they're trying to paint that picture.
[01:04:24.380 --> 01:04:34.380]  Now, like I said, the reason they come up with that number is because they are grossly distorting the statistics and using situation,
[01:04:34.380 --> 01:04:45.380]  including in that figure, situations like when you've got a sober driver that hits and kills a drunk pedestrian.
[01:04:45.380 --> 01:04:54.380]  Okay, now obviously it's the driver's fault, but, and yes, you could classify it as an alcohol-related traffic fatality,
[01:04:54.380 --> 01:05:01.380]  but to say we need checkpoints for drivers to make sure they're sober and to,
[01:05:01.380 --> 01:05:06.380]  based on statistics where a sober driver hits a drunk pedestrian, I'm sorry.
[01:05:06.380 --> 01:05:16.380]  That is pure deception, pure deception, and I have to say that MADD is losing its credibility by doing things like that.
[01:05:16.380 --> 01:05:24.380]  It's not a good idea. It's just not a good idea at all because it starts to make people wonder what their real agenda is.
[01:05:24.380 --> 01:05:29.380]  Are you guys trying to keep drunks off the road or not? You know, and why are you lying about statistics?
[01:05:29.380 --> 01:05:33.380]  It doesn't make that organization look very good. I just got to say that.
[01:05:33.380 --> 01:05:45.380]  And if you want a breakdown on how MADD distorts their statistics, you can go to a website called GetMADD.com.
[01:05:45.380 --> 01:05:48.380]  That's G-E-T-M-A-D-D.com.
[01:05:48.380 --> 01:05:53.380]  Now the color scheme and the font on the website is kind of crazy looking,
[01:05:53.380 --> 01:05:57.380]  but they do have some very good information and I got a lot of statistics from there.
[01:05:57.380 --> 01:06:07.380]  Now just one other piece of statistics that I wanted to go over before we go to the calls concerning the relationship between states
[01:06:07.380 --> 01:06:19.380]  that implement sobriety checkpoints and how that relates to their DUI rates or their traffic fatality, alcohol-related traffic fatality rates.
[01:06:19.380 --> 01:06:29.380]  MADD, the people from MADD show up with this big giant map of the United States and they have colored in, you know,
[01:06:29.380 --> 01:06:36.380]  one color all the states that have checkpoints and then a different color of all the states that don't have checkpoints.
[01:06:36.380 --> 01:06:42.380]  And then they try to say that, well, you know, Texas is number one and that's not even what my stats show.
[01:06:42.380 --> 01:06:52.380]  However, besides that, they try to make this relation that the states that don't have checkpoints are much higher in traffic fatalities.
[01:06:52.380 --> 01:06:55.380]  And that is another blatant lie.
[01:06:55.380 --> 01:07:01.380]  I'm going to cite some from an article here.
[01:07:01.380 --> 01:07:07.380]  Again, this is another article from California DUI attorney and author Lawrence Taylor.
[01:07:07.380 --> 01:07:18.380]  Now this was back in 2005. However, basically from my research, this is still true, you know, five, six years later.
[01:07:18.380 --> 01:07:24.380]  Let's look, we've got 50 states in the union as opposed to, what did Obama say?
[01:07:24.380 --> 01:07:27.380]  There were like 58, 59 states in the union.
[01:07:27.380 --> 01:07:28.380]  Okay, so.
[01:07:28.380 --> 01:07:31.380]  He's been to 57 with how many to go?
[01:07:31.380 --> 01:07:40.380]  Yeah, he's been to 57 states with like two or three to go. That's what Obama said. So anyway, we're not going to go by his figures here.
[01:07:40.380 --> 01:07:47.380]  We're going to go by what we understand as the correct figures, which is there is actually 50 states in the union.
[01:07:47.380 --> 01:07:58.380]  So according to Lawrence Taylor's statistical analysis, and he's a very reputable author here, he says, okay, let's look at both ends of the spectrum.
[01:07:58.380 --> 01:08:04.380]  Let's look at the five states with the highest alcohol-related fatality rates.
[01:08:04.380 --> 01:08:08.380]  And then let's look at the five states with the lowest.
[01:08:08.380 --> 01:08:12.380]  And let's see if there's any correlation between whether or not they use checkpoints.
[01:08:12.380 --> 01:08:24.380]  Well, in 05, the five states with the highest alcohol-related fatality rates were Hawaii, Nevada, North Dakota, Rhode Island, and South Carolina.
[01:08:24.380 --> 01:08:26.380]  Note, Texas isn't even in the list.
[01:08:26.380 --> 01:08:37.380]  All right. Well, according to what MADD would say, or the picture they're trying to paint, you would think that all five of those states would be non-checkpoint states.
[01:08:37.380 --> 01:08:46.380]  Wrong. In fact, four of the five use checkpoints. Rhode Island is the only one that doesn't.
[01:08:46.380 --> 01:08:50.380]  So out of the five highest states, four use checkpoints.
[01:08:50.380 --> 01:09:01.380]  Let's look at the lowest five states who have the lowest alcohol-related fatality accidents, traffic accidents.
[01:09:01.380 --> 01:09:06.380]  They are Georgia, Kentucky, Indiana, Iowa, and New York.
[01:09:06.380 --> 01:09:11.380]  Well, what's the breakdown with those states?
[01:09:11.380 --> 01:09:16.380]  Interesting. Again, four of the states use checkpoints.
[01:09:16.380 --> 01:09:18.380]  Only Iowa does not.
[01:09:18.380 --> 01:09:22.380]  So we have an interest. Now, I'm a math mathematician, folks, okay?
[01:09:22.380 --> 01:09:24.380]  I've got a degree in math from the University of Texas.
[01:09:24.380 --> 01:09:29.380]  I've got two years of graduate work at UT in the field of math.
[01:09:29.380 --> 01:09:31.380]  I've taken my share of statistics classes.
[01:09:31.380 --> 01:09:43.380]  So from a mathematician's perspective, what this says is that you look at the top five segment, 20 percent don't use checkpoints.
[01:09:43.380 --> 01:09:47.380]  You look at the bottom segment, the bottom end of the spectrum,
[01:09:47.380 --> 01:09:50.380]  again, 20 percent don't use checkpoints.
[01:09:50.380 --> 01:09:57.380]  From a statistical perspective, this is what one would expect from pure random coincidence,
[01:09:57.380 --> 01:10:02.380]  20 percent is what pure random coincidence is.
[01:10:02.380 --> 01:10:05.380]  So basically, from a mathematical perspective,
[01:10:05.380 --> 01:10:21.380]  there is absolutely zero correlation between checkpoints, using a checkpoint, and the rate of DUI fatalities on the roads.
[01:10:21.380 --> 01:10:25.380]  So that's another myth that I need to debunk by MAD.
[01:10:25.380 --> 01:10:32.380]  So at any rate, if you all want to find out more about that, again, go to GetMAD.com.
[01:10:32.380 --> 01:10:38.380]  There's a lot of interesting information on CheckpointUSA.com.
[01:10:38.380 --> 01:10:40.380]  Terry Bressi runs that website.
[01:10:40.380 --> 01:10:42.380]  We've had him on as a guest before.
[01:10:42.380 --> 01:10:47.380]  He's been fighting the situation with the border patrol checkpoints for many years,
[01:10:47.380 --> 01:10:55.380]  embroiled in civil lawsuits at the federal and state level concerning these multi-jurisdictional checkpoints that go on,
[01:10:55.380 --> 01:11:00.380]  where they've got officers from the Indian Reservation, the officers from the county,
[01:11:00.380 --> 01:11:06.380]  officers from the state, and the feds all working in coercion at some of these checkpoints.
[01:11:06.380 --> 01:11:10.380]  So he's had some very complicated cases going on.
[01:11:10.380 --> 01:11:16.380]  He basically started fighting these things because he works at the observatory in Arizona,
[01:11:16.380 --> 01:11:19.380]  and it's about 100 miles away from his home,
[01:11:19.380 --> 01:11:23.380]  and he'll go there for like three or four days out of the week and then go back home for three or four days.
[01:11:23.380 --> 01:11:28.380]  And so he's constantly having to drive through these multi-jurisdictional checkpoints.
[01:11:28.380 --> 01:11:30.380]  So he took that fight on.
[01:11:30.380 --> 01:11:33.380]  So you can go to CheckpointUSA.com for more information on that.
[01:11:33.380 --> 01:11:36.380]  So at any rate, folks, thank you for holding on on the board.
[01:11:36.380 --> 01:11:45.380]  But I did want to get this information out because I feel it's very important research that needs to be discussed concerning DUI rates
[01:11:45.380 --> 01:11:48.380]  and checkpoints and all these things and what your rights are.
[01:11:48.380 --> 01:11:51.380]  You don't have to go through them, all this, that, and the other thing.
[01:11:51.380 --> 01:12:00.380]  And I'm, you know, I hope I haven't offended anybody there who may have lost a loved one from an alcohol-related traffic accident, you know.
[01:12:00.380 --> 01:12:05.380]  But it is a sad situation to see these people distorting these statistics and lying
[01:12:05.380 --> 01:12:13.380]  and getting so out of control with what they're asking for that they are actually advocating keeping drunks on the road.
[01:12:13.380 --> 01:12:15.380]  And so this has to be stopped.
[01:12:15.380 --> 01:12:17.380]  The voice of reason has to come in at some point.
[01:12:17.380 --> 01:12:24.380]  So at any rate, Eddie, Randy, you all have any comments before we go to the caller board?
[01:12:24.380 --> 01:12:27.380]  No, I'm cool going to callers.
[01:12:27.380 --> 01:12:30.380]  Randy?
[01:12:30.380 --> 01:12:32.380]  I don't know if we still have Randy with us.
[01:12:32.380 --> 01:12:33.380]  There we go.
[01:12:33.380 --> 01:12:34.380]  There we go.
[01:12:34.380 --> 01:12:35.380]  I think I got it.
[01:12:35.380 --> 01:12:41.380]  Somebody muted my mic again.
[01:12:41.380 --> 01:12:48.380]  I'm sorry, I have to laugh because a friend just sent me a chat that says we should have,
[01:12:48.380 --> 01:12:56.380]  we should form an organization called D-A-M-M, Drunks Against Man-Mothers.
[01:12:56.380 --> 01:12:57.380]  I'm sorry.
[01:12:57.380 --> 01:12:58.380]  Okay, go ahead.
[01:12:58.380 --> 01:12:59.380]  Go ahead, Randy.
[01:12:59.380 --> 01:13:05.380]  Okay, well, this is one of those draconian measures.
[01:13:05.380 --> 01:13:15.380]  And I would like to think it's just a stupid bill by a legislature who doesn't have anything else to do
[01:13:15.380 --> 01:13:22.380]  and wants to make himself look to his constituents as if he's doing something.
[01:13:22.380 --> 01:13:25.380]  But it's ill-considered.
[01:13:25.380 --> 01:13:33.380]  And I'm concerned that it's deliberate in order to get us conditioned to the police state that we're living in.
[01:13:33.380 --> 01:13:36.380]  Absolutely.
[01:13:36.380 --> 01:13:40.380]  You know, would you recognize a police state if you were in one?
[01:13:40.380 --> 01:13:46.380]  And I keep asking this, 99.6% conviction rate.
[01:13:46.380 --> 01:13:52.380]  How does a prosecutor get 99.6% conviction rate?
[01:13:52.380 --> 01:13:56.380]  Well, he breaches every right you have.
[01:13:56.380 --> 01:14:02.380]  He lets you know for certain that you absolutely cannot trust the system.
[01:14:02.380 --> 01:14:07.380]  And then he offers you a perfectly reasonable deal,
[01:14:07.380 --> 01:14:12.380]  which deals down the severity of what you were charged with in the first place.
[01:14:12.380 --> 01:14:17.380]  And since the police know full well that the attorney's going to do this,
[01:14:17.380 --> 01:14:27.380]  they tend to charge you with the most egregious thing they can so that it doesn't get dealt away to nothing.
[01:14:27.380 --> 01:14:33.380]  Yeah, they don't even trump up extra charges just to ensure there's enough to keep you somewhere.
[01:14:33.380 --> 01:14:39.380]  Yeah, and when you look at the policeman side, they got these guys out here running over people and killing them.
[01:14:39.380 --> 01:14:41.380]  How do we get these guys off the road?
[01:14:41.380 --> 01:14:43.380]  We give them a DUI, they go to the prosecutor.
[01:14:43.380 --> 01:14:46.380]  The prosecutor doesn't want to waste his time in court.
[01:14:46.380 --> 01:14:51.380]  I ain't taking the time he could try one case in court.
[01:14:51.380 --> 01:14:55.380]  He could write 500 deals.
[01:14:55.380 --> 01:15:07.380]  I read an article by the Criminal Justice Committee that issues a report to the governor every two years.
[01:15:07.380 --> 01:15:18.380]  And they complained that the overcrowding of the jails was the result of prosecutors making all of these deals
[01:15:18.380 --> 01:15:23.380]  in situations where people shouldn't be prosecuted in the first place.
[01:15:23.380 --> 01:15:31.380]  And then if the person gets put on probation and if they violate probation,
[01:15:31.380 --> 01:15:38.380]  then they have mandatory jail time and the jail is being filled up with people for probation violations
[01:15:38.380 --> 01:15:44.380]  and not for the crimes that they were never convicted of.
[01:15:44.380 --> 01:15:49.380]  The real problem here is not the police.
[01:15:49.380 --> 01:15:53.380]  The police are doing a fine job stopping drunk drivers. They're doing well enough.
[01:15:53.380 --> 01:15:55.380]  Everybody knows.
[01:15:55.380 --> 01:15:59.380]  You get out there driving drunk, a good chance a cop is going to be watching you.
[01:15:59.380 --> 01:16:01.380]  We don't need more of that.
[01:16:01.380 --> 01:16:07.380]  But we need to assist the police so that when someone is arrested for drunk driving,
[01:16:07.380 --> 01:16:14.380]  they're tried for drunk driving, and they answer to the charge and don't get it dealt away time and time again.
[01:16:14.380 --> 01:16:20.380]  Exactly. That's one thing that I suggested in my report, that instead of doing ridiculous things
[01:16:20.380 --> 01:16:25.380]  like checkpoints, which actually can have a negative effect of more damage,
[01:16:25.380 --> 01:16:30.380]  maybe what they should do is they should amend the drunk driving laws that are on the books
[01:16:30.380 --> 01:16:37.380]  as far as the penalties to make them mandatory sentences and remove the prosecutor's discretion altogether
[01:16:37.380 --> 01:16:39.380]  so that the prosecutor can't deal at all.
[01:16:39.380 --> 01:16:43.380]  I would say that that would be much more effective.
[01:16:43.380 --> 01:16:44.380]  That works for me.
[01:16:44.380 --> 01:16:51.380]  Okay, folks. At any rate, we are going now to your calls, and we get back on the other side.
[01:16:51.380 --> 01:16:52.380]  This is a rule of law.
[01:16:52.380 --> 01:17:00.380]  Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, and Deborah Stevens will be right back, folks.
[01:17:00.380 --> 01:17:04.380]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals,
[01:17:04.380 --> 01:17:07.380]  and coin supplies in the Austin metro area.
[01:17:07.380 --> 01:17:09.380]  We also ship worldwide.
[01:17:09.380 --> 01:17:14.380]  Your family owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin and metals purchases.
[01:17:14.380 --> 01:17:20.380]  Because of you, Austin, business has been so good that we've had to move to a new and bigger location.
[01:17:20.380 --> 01:17:27.380]  We're now located at 7304 Burnett Road Suite A, 1.2 miles north on Burnett from our previous location.
[01:17:27.380 --> 01:17:32.380]  We're on the west side of Burnett Road in the Stanley Insurance Building on the ground floor
[01:17:32.380 --> 01:17:35.380]  next to the Ishiban Sushi and the Jeannie Car Wash.
[01:17:35.380 --> 01:17:38.380]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 5.
[01:17:38.380 --> 01:17:44.380]  You're welcome to stop in during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440.
[01:17:44.380 --> 01:17:50.380]  Ask for Chad or Becky and say that you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio.
[01:17:50.380 --> 01:17:59.380]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion at our new location at 7304 Burnett Road Suite A or call 512-646-6440.
[01:17:59.380 --> 01:18:04.380]  My name is Randall Kelton, and I co-host on Rule of Law Radio.
[01:18:04.380 --> 01:18:09.380]  We specialize in showing people how to strike back against corrupt public officials.
[01:18:09.380 --> 01:18:15.380]  With the mortgage crisis worsening, we set our sights on finding a remedy for people who have been cheated by their lenders.
[01:18:15.380 --> 01:18:22.380]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of thousands, but there is a remedy.
[01:18:22.380 --> 01:18:30.380]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call me at 512-430-4140
[01:18:30.380 --> 01:18:37.380]  to find out how to use the consumer protection laws to recover what the lenders have stolen through fraud and deception.
[01:18:37.380 --> 01:18:43.380]  We will prepare for you a qualified written request that will expose the fraud and put the lenders on the don.
[01:18:43.380 --> 01:18:48.380]  Lender fraud is bankrupting this country, and it's time to fight back.
[01:18:48.380 --> 01:19:01.380]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call 512-430-4140 and get the information you need to stop the money changers in their tracks.
[01:19:01.380 --> 01:19:21.380]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of thousands, but there is a remedy.
[01:19:21.380 --> 01:19:36.380]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call 512-430-4140 and get the information you need to stop the money changers in their tracks.
[01:19:36.380 --> 01:19:51.380]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of thousands, but there is a remedy.
[01:19:51.380 --> 01:20:10.380]  Ain't gonna drop me with that same old sucker punch. I get it now, but then I must have been number one.
[01:20:10.380 --> 01:20:15.380]  Back then you had room to move, but now you're leaving the room.
[01:20:15.380 --> 01:20:21.380]  Ain't gonna get me with that same old sucker punch.
[01:20:46.380 --> 01:20:52.380]  However, I just recently did a motion to suppress, and the case was dismissed.
[01:20:52.380 --> 01:21:00.380]  And the funny part was that they kept saying, the judge kept saying, well, sir, you know, he kept telling my friend,
[01:21:00.380 --> 01:21:04.380]  well, the officer had probable cause, had probable cause to stop you, this and that.
[01:21:04.380 --> 01:21:11.380]  Well, the reason why they say that, I believe, is because they don't want to see that, well, they don't want to finish the sentence.
[01:21:11.380 --> 01:21:18.380]  And that is most officers don't have probable cause because that way they can confuse most that do not stay long.
[01:21:18.380 --> 01:21:25.380]  They have to have probable cause that a crime is being committed, has been committed, or is about to be committed.
[01:21:25.380 --> 01:21:31.380]  And if that's not the case, then motion to suppress will suffice.
[01:21:31.380 --> 01:21:32.380]  Well, Rick.
[01:21:32.380 --> 01:21:35.380]  And in California, your statutes are civil for traffic.
[01:21:35.380 --> 01:21:37.380]  No, they're criminal.
[01:21:37.380 --> 01:21:38.380]  Oh, are they?
[01:21:38.380 --> 01:21:42.380]  I thought yours were all in the civil statutes as part of the thing that you argued.
[01:21:42.380 --> 01:21:48.380]  My friend that's in Arizona, that's civil, which is why it got dismissed.
[01:21:48.380 --> 01:21:50.380]  But they were criminal.
[01:21:50.380 --> 01:21:53.380]  And even then, let me explain to you how I do it in California.
[01:21:53.380 --> 01:22:01.380]  I do a motion to suppress, including but not limited to the search for and seizure of records obtained.
[01:22:01.380 --> 01:22:03.380]  And I want people to think about this part.
[01:22:03.380 --> 01:22:10.380]  The records obtained from the California Department of Motor Vehicles and or the Department of Transportation without a valid warrant
[01:22:10.380 --> 01:22:11.380]  because that's their information.
[01:22:11.380 --> 01:22:15.380]  They can't just go and seize it without a warrant.
[01:22:15.380 --> 01:22:17.380]  That's an overstate.
[01:22:17.380 --> 01:22:26.380]  So when that cop is behind you, running my place, getting that information, guarantee you he had no warrant.
[01:22:26.380 --> 01:22:36.380]  Okay, you're saying that in California, in order to run a check on you of any kind, they have to have probable cause first?
[01:22:36.380 --> 01:22:39.380]  Right, for you to have committed a crime.
[01:22:39.380 --> 01:22:47.380]  Because I know to do a criminal history search, they have to not only have probable cause, but they have to sign for it.
[01:22:47.380 --> 01:22:53.380]  Well, Rick, are you saying that they don't have the sobriety checkpoints anymore?
[01:22:53.380 --> 01:22:54.380]  They do.
[01:22:54.380 --> 01:22:55.380]  But this is a thing.
[01:22:55.380 --> 01:23:01.380]  Most cases will say sobriety checkpoints, DUI checkpoints, are constitutional.
[01:23:01.380 --> 01:23:02.380]  And they are.
[01:23:02.380 --> 01:23:05.380]  Because you hear it, they're nail on the head.
[01:23:05.380 --> 01:23:07.380]  They're always on the side of the road.
[01:23:07.380 --> 01:23:14.380]  But they don't address the fact that the officer's stopping you without having probable cause, that you are in any criminal activity.
[01:23:14.380 --> 01:23:16.380]  Well, Rick, wait a minute.
[01:23:16.380 --> 01:23:19.380]  The Supreme Court of the United States did address that.
[01:23:19.380 --> 01:23:26.380]  You know, maybe you missed the beginning of the show that I spent like a whole segment on the Michigan v. Sitz case,
[01:23:26.380 --> 01:23:34.380]  where the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that sobriety checkpoints are constitutional under the U.S. Constitution if they fit certain criteria.
[01:23:34.380 --> 01:23:39.380]  Now, that doesn't mean they're constitutional under the state constitution of any particular state.
[01:23:39.380 --> 01:23:45.380]  But in California, they do have the statute in place for sobriety checkpoints.
[01:23:45.380 --> 01:23:47.380]  But you don't have to go through them.
[01:23:47.380 --> 01:23:51.380]  That's how they get around it, because they're technically not stopping you.
[01:23:51.380 --> 01:23:53.380]  Like you said, they're on the side of the road.
[01:23:53.380 --> 01:23:59.380]  All you have to do is turn around, make a UB, or go around them, or just go through them and don't even stop.
[01:23:59.380 --> 01:24:04.380]  I mean, if you're pulling over, if you're in a sobriety checkpoint that's on the side of the road,
[01:24:04.380 --> 01:24:11.380]  and they flag you to pull you over, and you pull over, you are willingly doing that, as Harmon Taylor would say.
[01:24:11.380 --> 01:24:13.380]  You just entered into a commercial agreement with them.
[01:24:13.380 --> 01:24:17.380]  Well, how I would track that rationale is this.
[01:24:17.380 --> 01:24:21.380]  Would an ordinary, prudent man believe he was free to leave?
[01:24:21.380 --> 01:24:23.380]  No. Okay, motion to suppress.
[01:24:23.380 --> 01:24:25.380]  Senator, did you ever wonder for his arrest?
[01:24:25.380 --> 01:24:26.380]  No.
[01:24:26.380 --> 01:24:28.380]  We were just doing sobriety checkpoints.
[01:24:28.380 --> 01:24:30.380]  Was he involved in any criminal activity that you can see?
[01:24:30.380 --> 01:24:31.380]  No.
[01:24:31.380 --> 01:24:33.380]  We were just doing sobriety checkpoints.
[01:24:33.380 --> 01:24:35.380]  Well, if you lose and you go to appeal,
[01:24:35.380 --> 01:24:39.380]  that would be suppressed for the simple fact that you were not involved in criminal activities.
[01:24:39.380 --> 01:24:43.380]  Have you fought these sobriety checkpoints and gotten the case thrown out, Rick?
[01:24:43.380 --> 01:24:44.380]  I have not.
[01:24:44.380 --> 01:24:47.380]  Not a sobriety checkpoint, but I did file a motion to suppress.
[01:24:47.380 --> 01:24:50.380]  Well, I'm not going to say I did, but a friend of mine filed a motion to suppress,
[01:24:50.380 --> 01:24:54.380]  and he had a good amount of marijuana on him, and they got dismissed.
[01:24:54.380 --> 01:24:55.380]  Of course, they gave him another reason.
[01:24:55.380 --> 01:24:59.380]  They said, well, you know, a D.V. is really busy, of course,
[01:24:59.380 --> 01:25:03.380]  and that's because, you know, they know that it's civil in Arizona.
[01:25:03.380 --> 01:25:04.380]  It's civil.
[01:25:04.380 --> 01:25:07.380]  I mean, the fact is, in Texas, if they're civil, doesn't matter what it is,
[01:25:07.380 --> 01:25:09.380]  the motion is supposed to be repeated every time,
[01:25:09.380 --> 01:25:13.380]  because it can't be a criminal activity if you have no probable cause,
[01:25:13.380 --> 01:25:15.380]  but that's why they never finished the sentence.
[01:25:15.380 --> 01:25:17.380]  Probable cause for what?
[01:25:17.380 --> 01:25:20.380]  To believe you are engaged in criminal activity.
[01:25:20.380 --> 01:25:25.380]  Well, I would like to see that argument get the sobriety checkpoints that were turned in California.
[01:25:25.380 --> 01:25:28.380]  It would have to, they would have to, because there's a statute in place,
[01:25:28.380 --> 01:25:33.380]  it would have to, somebody would have to prove in state court that the sobriety checkpoints
[01:25:33.380 --> 01:25:37.380]  were not constitutional under California constitution.
[01:25:37.380 --> 01:25:38.380]  Right.
[01:25:38.380 --> 01:25:41.380]  Randy, you have any comments on this?
[01:25:41.380 --> 01:25:44.380]  California doesn't have a constitution.
[01:25:44.380 --> 01:25:51.380]  But yeah, even if they are constitutional, the point is you don't have to stop.
[01:25:51.380 --> 01:25:57.380]  But if a policeman orders you over and you fail to pull over,
[01:25:57.380 --> 01:26:01.380]  now you're disobeying an order of a police officer and they charge you for that.
[01:26:01.380 --> 01:26:03.380]  Right.
[01:26:03.380 --> 01:26:06.380]  But if you pull over and say, what do you want,
[01:26:06.380 --> 01:26:10.380]  and they'll say pull in there and you tell them, no, I don't want to,
[01:26:10.380 --> 01:26:15.380]  now you've indicated that you do not intend to contract with them.
[01:26:15.380 --> 01:26:17.380]  Well, like I said, Randy, in some states,
[01:26:17.380 --> 01:26:22.380]  the Supreme Courts of the states have ruled that you don't even have to stop.
[01:26:22.380 --> 01:26:24.380]  I know, but if you don't stop...
[01:26:24.380 --> 01:26:28.380]  Yeah, but that's a new way to get a bullet through your back window these days, too.
[01:26:28.380 --> 01:26:35.380]  I'm just pointing out that the Supreme Courts in some states have ruled
[01:26:35.380 --> 01:26:38.380]  that you don't even have to stop. That's all.
[01:26:38.380 --> 01:26:44.380]  I'm just not suggesting that people do anything to provoke these guys with guns.
[01:26:44.380 --> 01:26:56.380]  No, the best thing to do is to turn around and travel on an alternate route to your destination.
[01:26:56.380 --> 01:26:58.380]  That's the best thing to do.
[01:26:58.380 --> 01:27:04.380]  It's like throwing a piece of red meat in a pen full of sharks.
[01:27:04.380 --> 01:27:08.380]  Our police are out of control and they go into a feeding frenzy.
[01:27:08.380 --> 01:27:16.380]  Oh, boy, we got somebody we can chase drag out of his car and stomp into senselessness
[01:27:16.380 --> 01:27:20.380]  because he didn't do exactly what we said, when we said, how we said.
[01:27:20.380 --> 01:27:22.380]  These are the police we have now.
[01:27:22.380 --> 01:27:30.380]  If they order you to pull over, pull over and then tell them, then register your objection.
[01:27:30.380 --> 01:27:33.380]  But if you don't pull over, you're going to have them all over you.
[01:27:33.380 --> 01:27:36.380]  Yeah, it's probably not a good idea to just roll right through them,
[01:27:36.380 --> 01:27:39.380]  even though the Supreme Courts of some states have said it's okay.
[01:27:39.380 --> 01:27:44.380]  The best thing to do is to, when you see it ahead, just turn around
[01:27:44.380 --> 01:27:50.380]  and make sure you are within lawful traffic code.
[01:27:50.380 --> 01:27:56.380]  The reality and the sad reality is that it doesn't matter what happens,
[01:27:56.380 --> 01:28:00.380]  the state and that's every state, okay, they make a lot of money.
[01:28:00.380 --> 01:28:06.380]  And one thing I wanted to talk about as far as this goes is that when they're saying,
[01:28:06.380 --> 01:28:10.380]  oh, it's for educational purposes, even though they're admitting they're not stopping drunk drivers
[01:28:10.380 --> 01:28:14.380]  and they're not being effective, my opinion and my belief,
[01:28:14.380 --> 01:28:18.380]  because I'm digging deeper and deeper and I do this every day,
[01:28:18.380 --> 01:28:25.380]  is that it's a colorful way of them saying, well, look, you're right, it's not being effective.
[01:28:25.380 --> 01:28:29.380]  But what they want to tell you is we stopped so many with no licenses,
[01:28:29.380 --> 01:28:32.380]  suspended licenses, warrants, and whatever the case may be,
[01:28:32.380 --> 01:28:37.380]  and they won't tell you how many tickets they hand out because that way they can say,
[01:28:37.380 --> 01:28:42.380]  well, it's just for educational purposes because everybody that's ever been through a checkpoint
[01:28:42.380 --> 01:28:47.380]  knows there's about 10 constructs parked lined up.
[01:28:47.380 --> 01:28:49.380]  So we all know it's not about DUI.
[01:28:49.380 --> 01:28:53.380]  The reality is to take your car from you and sell it back to you,
[01:28:53.380 --> 01:28:55.380]  and if you can't afford it, then guess what?
[01:28:55.380 --> 01:29:01.380]  We'll sell it at an auction and then we give you the bill for whatever, you know, you should have paid us.
[01:29:01.380 --> 01:29:09.380]  Yes, that was actually one of the big complaints about DUI checkpoints by State Senator Gil Cedillo.
[01:29:09.380 --> 01:29:18.380]  It said that, and there are official statistics released in California concerning the numbers of impounds
[01:29:18.380 --> 01:29:21.380]  and people that have lost their vehicles over these checkpoints
[01:29:21.380 --> 01:29:25.380]  and people that are taken down for not having a driver's license and stuff like that.
[01:29:25.380 --> 01:29:34.380]  Now, the particular bill here in Texas forbids the officers to ask for your ID or driver's license
[01:29:34.380 --> 01:29:36.380]  or proof of insurance or anything like that.
[01:29:36.380 --> 01:29:38.380]  They can't ask for any of that.
[01:29:38.380 --> 01:29:43.380]  All they can do is try to engage in a conversation with you for one to three minutes
[01:29:43.380 --> 01:29:45.380]  to try to determine whether you're sober or not.
[01:29:45.380 --> 01:29:46.380]  Okay, do you have anything else, Rick?
[01:29:46.380 --> 01:29:48.380]  We've got a full board of calls here.
[01:29:48.380 --> 01:29:49.380]  No, that's it.
[01:29:49.380 --> 01:29:51.380]  All right, great. Thank you, Rick.
[01:29:51.380 --> 01:29:54.380]  Okay, when we get back, we'll continue to take your calls.
[01:29:54.380 --> 01:29:59.380]  Norm, Valerie, Jeff, Evangeline, we'll be back on the other side.
[01:29:59.380 --> 01:30:02.380]  Are you tired of depending on the supermarket for your family's food?
[01:30:02.380 --> 01:30:05.380]  Would you like to grow fresh produce in the convenience of your own backyard
[01:30:05.380 --> 01:30:08.380]  as well as offering professional lawn care services, Austin Clean and Clear
[01:30:08.380 --> 01:30:11.380]  will customize an independent garden for your family's needs and budget.
[01:30:11.380 --> 01:30:18.380]  Call 512-294-8429 today and let us bring you closer to a healthier, more independent lifestyle.
[01:30:18.380 --> 01:30:23.380]  That's 512-294-8429 or find us at austincleanandclear.com.
[01:30:23.380 --> 01:30:26.380]  Our gardens are the perfect combination of beauty and practicality.
[01:30:26.380 --> 01:30:30.380]  Call 512-294-8429 today.
[01:30:30.380 --> 01:30:33.380]  Move over, beef, lamb, and pork.
[01:30:33.380 --> 01:30:36.380]  There's a new kid on the block, and it's taking America by storm.
[01:30:36.380 --> 01:30:39.380]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back in just a moment
[01:30:39.380 --> 01:30:43.380]  with a tender, juicy morsel on the latest in carnivore cuisine.
[01:30:43.380 --> 01:30:47.380]  Your search engine is watching you, recording all your searches
[01:30:47.380 --> 01:30:51.380]  and creating a massive database of your personal information.
[01:30:51.380 --> 01:30:52.380]  That's creepy.
[01:30:52.380 --> 01:30:54.380]  But it doesn't have to be that way.
[01:30:54.380 --> 01:30:57.380]  Startpage.com is the world's most private search engine.
[01:30:57.380 --> 01:31:00.380]  Startpage doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches,
[01:31:00.380 --> 01:31:03.380]  or use tracking cookies, and they're third-party certified.
[01:31:03.380 --> 01:31:07.380]  If you don't like Big Brother spying on you, start over with Startpage.
[01:31:07.380 --> 01:31:10.380]  Great search results and total privacy.
[01:31:10.380 --> 01:31:13.380]  Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:13.380 --> 01:31:17.380]  It's lean, it's trendy, and it isn't half bad.
[01:31:17.380 --> 01:31:21.380]  Goat meat, it's fall off the fork tender and buttery when it's properly marinated
[01:31:21.380 --> 01:31:23.380]  and grilled or braised, and it's not gamey.
[01:31:23.380 --> 01:31:28.380]  In fact, some gourmets say goat meat is perhaps the most flavorful meat on the planet.
[01:31:28.380 --> 01:31:32.380]  Word's gotten out, and goat meat, also called chevonne or cabrillo,
[01:31:32.380 --> 01:31:35.380]  is finding its way to the menus of high-end U.S. restaurants,
[01:31:35.380 --> 01:31:38.380]  and it may soon be at your local grocery store.
[01:31:38.380 --> 01:31:40.380]  Goat meat may be new to Americans,
[01:31:40.380 --> 01:31:43.380]  but it's long been considered a staple of third-world countries.
[01:31:43.380 --> 01:31:48.380]  In fact, it's estimated that 63 percent of red meat consumed in the world is goat meat.
[01:31:48.380 --> 01:31:50.380]  No kidding.
[01:31:50.380 --> 01:31:51.380]  I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht.
[01:31:51.380 --> 01:32:01.380]  More news and information at KatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32:21.380 --> 01:32:31.380]  Thank you.
[01:32:51.380 --> 01:32:53.380]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[01:32:53.380 --> 01:32:55.380]  We're continuing to take your calls.
[01:32:55.380 --> 01:33:00.380]  We've got Norm from California, some California folks out there tonight.
[01:33:00.380 --> 01:33:01.380]  Thanks for calling in.
[01:33:01.380 --> 01:33:03.380]  Norm, what is on your mind?
[01:33:03.380 --> 01:33:06.380]  Hello, you wonderful people.
[01:33:06.380 --> 01:33:13.380]  I have an evolving civil action case that started in the state court,
[01:33:13.380 --> 01:33:20.380]  and somehow the U.S. Attorney's Office got involved and removed it into federal court.
[01:33:20.380 --> 01:33:28.380]  So I did a brief back and forth of Randy about our grievance.net and whatnot.
[01:33:28.380 --> 01:33:35.380]  By the way, Randy, I just filed my first one, submitted it to that today, so great site.
[01:33:35.380 --> 01:33:40.380]  Oh, and by the way, the judicial misconduct site doesn't really have anything.
[01:33:40.380 --> 01:33:43.380]  The hyperlink isn't working for federal judges.
[01:33:43.380 --> 01:33:44.380]  Yes, I know.
[01:33:44.380 --> 01:33:47.380]  We're working on trying to get that one up.
[01:33:47.380 --> 01:33:49.380]  Okay, because that would be really handy.
[01:33:49.380 --> 01:33:59.380]  There's a magistrate judge who sort of kind of stuck his head way into a noose on this.
[01:33:59.380 --> 01:34:03.380]  He's going to be complained about.
[01:34:03.380 --> 01:34:06.380]  But I wanted to ask you, you talk about running the routine,
[01:34:06.380 --> 01:34:10.380]  but it's always about state officials or municipal people.
[01:34:10.380 --> 01:34:14.380]  How do you do that on federal attorneys and judges?
[01:34:14.380 --> 01:34:22.380]  Okay, then the federal, it's a little bit different in that you make your first complaint
[01:34:22.380 --> 01:34:29.380]  to the U.S. Attorney, and he will, as a matter of course, refuse to act.
[01:34:29.380 --> 01:34:36.380]  And then you prepare a complaint against the U.S. Attorney and file it with a federal judge,
[01:34:36.380 --> 01:34:44.380]  who you send it to him in the form of a verified criminal affidavit, and he will refuse to act.
[01:34:44.380 --> 01:34:50.380]  And then you make up 23 folders, one for each grand jury member.
[01:34:50.380 --> 01:34:51.380]  Federal grand jury.
[01:34:51.380 --> 01:35:01.380]  And label them Foreman of the Grand Jury, Grand Jury 1 through 23, the 22.
[01:35:01.380 --> 01:35:07.380]  And you mail those in an envelope addressed to the Foreman of the Grand Jury
[01:35:07.380 --> 01:35:14.380]  to the U.S. Attorney's address, registered restricted.
[01:35:14.380 --> 01:35:18.380]  So that means only the person named can sign.
[01:35:18.380 --> 01:35:25.380]  Well, there's always going to be a little guy down in the mailroom who signs for everything.
[01:35:25.380 --> 01:35:27.380]  And he's not going to know any different.
[01:35:27.380 --> 01:35:31.380]  And the address says the U.S. Attorney's office.
[01:35:31.380 --> 01:35:33.380]  So the U.S. Attorney will get it and open it.
[01:35:33.380 --> 01:35:36.380]  And inside you have a letter.
[01:35:36.380 --> 01:35:44.380]  This letter is to the Foreman of the Grand Jury, and it includes a stamp safe address return envelope.
[01:35:44.380 --> 01:35:53.380]  You ask the Foreman to initial and return this document in the enclosed envelope
[01:35:53.380 --> 01:35:57.380]  so that you will know he actually received it.
[01:35:57.380 --> 01:36:04.380]  Ask him not to sign it, as the U.S. Attorney has a rubber stamp with his name on it,
[01:36:04.380 --> 01:36:09.380]  and you want to make sure it wasn't simply rubber stamped by the U.S. Attorney.
[01:36:09.380 --> 01:36:17.380]  Well, the U.S. Attorney's going to get this, and he is not going to send that letter back to you.
[01:36:17.380 --> 01:36:26.380]  And when he doesn't, then you file a second criminal complaint against the U.S. Attorney
[01:36:26.380 --> 01:36:33.380]  for tampering with the U.S. Mail and obstruction of justice.
[01:36:33.380 --> 01:36:40.380]  You send that to his office, and he'll refuse to act on it, of course.
[01:36:40.380 --> 01:36:47.380]  And you go back to a district judge and ask the district judge to appoint an attorney pro tem
[01:36:47.380 --> 01:36:50.380]  to hear your complaints against the U.S. Attorney,
[01:36:50.380 --> 01:36:56.380]  and you call the postal inspectors and ask them to investigate the U.S. Attorney.
[01:36:56.380 --> 01:37:00.380]  This creates politics.
[01:37:00.380 --> 01:37:10.380]  You create political pressure, because now you're, oh yeah, and when the judge refuses to act on the complaint
[01:37:10.380 --> 01:37:19.380]  in his capacity as a magistrate, you file a judicial conduct complaint against him for obstruction of justice.
[01:37:19.380 --> 01:37:28.380]  And what you do is you create problems, primarily you want to create problems for this U.S., for the district judge.
[01:37:28.380 --> 01:37:31.380]  The district judge is essentially innocent in this matter.
[01:37:31.380 --> 01:37:33.380]  He didn't have anything to do with it.
[01:37:33.380 --> 01:37:39.380]  He's just up there minding his own business, and he gets this complaint from some pro se nobody,
[01:37:39.380 --> 01:37:45.380]  and he says, I'm not going to take a complaint against the U.S. Attorney, and he trashes it.
[01:37:45.380 --> 01:37:50.380]  And now all of a sudden he's getting judicial conduct complaints, which harm his career,
[01:37:50.380 --> 01:37:55.380]  and he's got somebody trying to get him indicted by a grand jury.
[01:37:55.380 --> 01:37:59.380]  It's not going to be a happy camper.
[01:37:59.380 --> 01:38:05.380]  But it's not going to say anything to you, because that would be tampering with a witness.
[01:38:05.380 --> 01:38:12.380]  And if anybody says anything to you about it, that's tampering with a witness,
[01:38:12.380 --> 01:38:20.380]  and you accuse the judge of sending the person to threaten and intimidate you.
[01:38:20.380 --> 01:38:30.380]  It's better if the judge didn't do it, because when he gets a complaint of tampering with a witness
[01:38:30.380 --> 01:38:37.380]  because a U.S. Marshal said something to you that you didn't like,
[01:38:37.380 --> 01:38:45.380]  the judge will go ballistic on the U.S. Marshal.
[01:38:45.380 --> 01:38:55.380]  We create politics this way, and it goes to the fact that everything they do
[01:38:55.380 --> 01:38:59.380]  opens the door for you to do something else.
[01:38:59.380 --> 01:39:03.380]  So start this rolling. They'll recognize it.
[01:39:03.380 --> 01:39:12.380]  What we're looking to get when you send the complaints to the U.S. Attorney's office addressed to the grand jury,
[01:39:12.380 --> 01:39:16.380]  one of the things you're likely to get from the U.S. Attorney
[01:39:16.380 --> 01:39:24.380]  is a threat of charging you with tampering with the grand jury.
[01:39:24.380 --> 01:39:27.380]  You hope you get that.
[01:39:27.380 --> 01:39:33.380]  What we're trying to do here is wedge the U.S. Attorney out from in front of the grand jury.
[01:39:33.380 --> 01:39:39.380]  That's why you want to go to the grand jury with charges against him.
[01:39:39.380 --> 01:39:49.380]  Now he's going to say that only the U.S. Attorney may present to the grand jury,
[01:39:49.380 --> 01:39:53.380]  and that is not true.
[01:39:53.380 --> 01:39:59.380]  Only the U.S. Attorney may present to the grand jury as a matter of right,
[01:39:59.380 --> 01:40:02.380]  whether the grand jury likes it or not.
[01:40:02.380 --> 01:40:11.380]  However, anyone can present to the grand jury if they are so requested by the grand jury.
[01:40:11.380 --> 01:40:15.380]  But do not want to present anyway.
[01:40:15.380 --> 01:40:21.380]  Present in this venue is a term of art.
[01:40:21.380 --> 01:40:27.380]  Present means a formal presentation to the grand jury of criminal accusations
[01:40:27.380 --> 01:40:31.380]  while the grand jury is in quorum in session.
[01:40:31.380 --> 01:40:34.380]  That's not what you want to do.
[01:40:34.380 --> 01:40:41.380]  You want to notify the grand jury that you have reason to believe a crime has been committed
[01:40:41.380 --> 01:40:45.380]  so that the grand jury can investigate into your allegations,
[01:40:45.380 --> 01:40:49.380]  and if they find sufficient evidence, give that to the U.S. Attorney
[01:40:49.380 --> 01:40:54.380]  and ask him to make the presentation.
[01:40:54.380 --> 01:40:58.380]  We need this distinction of law argued.
[01:40:58.380 --> 01:41:03.380]  If I can get a U.S. Attorney to threaten me with tampering with a witness,
[01:41:03.380 --> 01:41:06.380]  we are going to town.
[01:41:06.380 --> 01:41:09.380]  That's exactly what I want,
[01:41:09.380 --> 01:41:15.380]  because then I'll accuse him of tampering with a witness in obstruction of justice,
[01:41:15.380 --> 01:41:21.380]  because you want to get a complaint against him as quickly as possible.
[01:41:21.380 --> 01:41:26.380]  Once you have a complaint against him, he is absolutely compromised.
[01:41:26.380 --> 01:41:30.380]  Does that answer your question?
[01:41:30.380 --> 01:41:32.380]  Major question on this.
[01:41:32.380 --> 01:41:36.380]  You're talking about a federal grand jury or a California grand jury?
[01:41:36.380 --> 01:41:38.380]  In this case, I'm talking about a federal grand jury.
[01:41:38.380 --> 01:41:41.380]  That was the question that I had.
[01:41:41.380 --> 01:41:43.380]  I was thinking that was the case.
[01:41:43.380 --> 01:41:45.380]  It's almost the same thing.
[01:41:45.380 --> 01:41:49.380]  It's essentially the same routine for a state grand jury.
[01:41:49.380 --> 01:41:56.380]  Except you don't tell the foreman that the prosecutor has a rubber stamp with his name on it.
[01:41:56.380 --> 01:41:59.380]  That's really the only difference.
[01:41:59.380 --> 01:42:03.380]  Really, my main complaint is with the U.S. Attorney's Office,
[01:42:03.380 --> 01:42:07.380]  not with the magistrate judge, who kind of got set up by this guy.
[01:42:07.380 --> 01:42:09.380]  They scheduled...
[01:42:09.380 --> 01:42:11.380]  Oh, wonderful. That's even better.
[01:42:11.380 --> 01:42:13.380]  They worked together.
[01:42:13.380 --> 01:42:20.380]  I'm sure that the attorney went to him and said, I'm scheduling this oral motion hearing with you.
[01:42:20.380 --> 01:42:22.380]  I wasn't invited.
[01:42:22.380 --> 01:42:24.380]  It was ex parte.
[01:42:24.380 --> 01:42:30.380]  And even after I said, no, no, no, no, no, that magistrate judge I have not consented to,
[01:42:30.380 --> 01:42:35.380]  nobody's consented to, he cannot partake, they had the hearing anyway.
[01:42:35.380 --> 01:42:39.380]  And I found out about three weeks after the fact.
[01:42:39.380 --> 01:42:40.380]  Okay, good.
[01:42:40.380 --> 01:42:43.380]  Hammer the magistrate.
[01:42:43.380 --> 01:42:48.380]  If the U.S. Attorney talked him into it, he is not going to be happy with the U.S. Attorney.
[01:42:48.380 --> 01:42:54.380]  Okay, so would the complaint be originally against the magistrate judge or the attorney?
[01:42:54.380 --> 01:42:55.380]  Magistrate.
[01:42:55.380 --> 01:42:56.380]  Okay.
[01:42:56.380 --> 01:43:04.380]  It's not illegal for the U.S. Attorney to have a private meeting with someone about your case.
[01:43:04.380 --> 01:43:05.380]  Right.
[01:43:05.380 --> 01:43:10.380]  It is illegal for the magistrate judge to have a private meeting with someone.
[01:43:10.380 --> 01:43:17.380]  And this way you hammer the magistrate and the magistrate's going to be upset at the U.S. Attorney.
[01:43:17.380 --> 01:43:20.380]  This is the politics we want to get.
[01:43:20.380 --> 01:43:21.380]  Yeah.
[01:43:21.380 --> 01:43:26.380]  We want pressures separate from law.
[01:43:26.380 --> 01:43:31.380]  We want personal individual pressures that we can bring to bear.
[01:43:31.380 --> 01:43:33.380]  We really have to move along.
[01:43:33.380 --> 01:43:36.380]  We've got a stack of callers and we want to get one more segment.
[01:43:36.380 --> 01:43:38.380]  Thank you so much.
[01:43:38.380 --> 01:43:39.380]  You might call in tomorrow night.
[01:43:39.380 --> 01:43:40.380]  We'll have more time.
[01:43:40.380 --> 01:43:42.380]  I think you've got it covered.
[01:43:42.380 --> 01:43:43.380]  All right.
[01:43:43.380 --> 01:43:44.380]  Thank you.
[01:43:44.380 --> 01:43:45.380]  Okay.
[01:43:45.380 --> 01:43:48.380]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:43:48.380 --> 01:43:50.380]  This is Thursday night.
[01:43:50.380 --> 01:43:52.380]  We've got one more segment.
[01:43:52.380 --> 01:43:54.380]  We've got a whole stack of callers.
[01:43:54.380 --> 01:43:56.380]  We'll try to take as many as we can.
[01:43:56.380 --> 01:44:00.380]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:00.380 --> 01:44:02.380]  More energy.
[01:44:02.380 --> 01:44:04.380]  Stronger immune power.
[01:44:04.380 --> 01:44:07.380]  Improved sense of well-being.
[01:44:07.380 --> 01:44:11.380]  How many supplements have you heard boast of these benefits?
[01:44:11.380 --> 01:44:16.380]  The team behind Shentrition believes that supplements should over-deliver on their promises.
[01:44:16.380 --> 01:44:20.380]  And Shentrition does just that.
[01:44:20.380 --> 01:44:24.380]  Shentrition utilizes the ancient healing wisdom of Chinese medicine.
[01:44:24.380 --> 01:44:27.380]  In conjunction with the science of modern nutrition,
[01:44:27.380 --> 01:44:32.380]  adaptogenic herbs serve as the healing component, and organic hemp protein and greens
[01:44:32.380 --> 01:44:36.380]  and superfoods act as a balanced nutrient base.
[01:44:36.380 --> 01:44:40.380]  Plus, Shentrition tastes great in just water.
[01:44:40.380 --> 01:44:46.380]  This powder supplement is everything you'd want in a product, and it's all natural.
[01:44:46.380 --> 01:44:54.380]  Visit Shentrition.com to order yours or call 1-866-497-7436.
[01:44:54.380 --> 01:44:59.380]  After you use Shentrition, you'll believe in supplements again.
[01:44:59.380 --> 01:45:03.380]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.380 --> 01:45:06.380]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[01:45:06.380 --> 01:45:14.380]  the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:14.380 --> 01:45:18.380]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.380 --> 01:45:22.380]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.380 --> 01:45:27.380]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:27.380 --> 01:45:33.380]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:33.380 --> 01:45:38.380]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[01:45:38.380 --> 01:45:42.380]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.380 --> 01:45:48.380]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:48.380 --> 01:45:54.380]  pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com
[01:45:54.380 --> 01:46:22.380]  and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:22.380 --> 01:46:26.380]  Some things in this world I will never understand
[01:46:26.380 --> 01:46:30.380]  Some things I realize foolish
[01:46:30.380 --> 01:46:35.380]  Somebody's gonna police that policeman
[01:46:35.380 --> 01:46:39.380]  Somebody's gonna police the police
[01:46:39.380 --> 01:46:44.380]  There's always a room at the top of the hill
[01:46:44.380 --> 01:46:48.380]  I hear through the grapevine and it's lonely left too
[01:46:48.380 --> 01:46:52.380]  They're wishing it was more than our position to fill
[01:47:19.380 --> 01:47:21.380]  All right, we're gonna go to Valerie in Texas right now.
[01:47:21.380 --> 01:47:25.380]  Valerie, thank you for calling in. What is your question for us tonight?
[01:47:25.380 --> 01:47:27.380]  Hello. How are you guys doing?
[01:47:27.380 --> 01:47:29.380]  Pretty good. Go ahead.
[01:47:29.380 --> 01:47:32.380]  Eddie, I had emailed you the other day about my brother Anthony,
[01:47:32.380 --> 01:47:41.380]  and I was wondering if when we file our criminal complaint against the court recorder and the judge,
[01:47:41.380 --> 01:47:45.380]  do we turn in the evidence then or should we wait?
[01:47:45.380 --> 01:47:49.380]  You want to turn in a copy of the evidence, not your only evidence,
[01:47:49.380 --> 01:47:54.380]  but you want to turn in a copy of the evidence with an affidavit certified
[01:47:54.380 --> 01:47:57.380]  that it is a true and correct copy of the evidence,
[01:47:57.380 --> 01:48:04.380]  and you want to take it to whoever the county or district attorney is in your area.
[01:48:04.380 --> 01:48:06.380]  Okay.
[01:48:06.380 --> 01:48:09.380]  And you're gonna let them know this is not gonna slide, it's not gonna fly.
[01:48:09.380 --> 01:48:14.380]  Do your job or we'll add you to the list and take it directly to the grand jury.
[01:48:14.380 --> 01:48:15.380]  Mm-hmm.
[01:48:15.380 --> 01:48:22.380]  But you have in your hand a recorded confession of tampering with a court record.
[01:48:22.380 --> 01:48:25.380]  Mm-hmm. Yep.
[01:48:25.380 --> 01:48:27.380]  And make them do their job.
[01:48:27.380 --> 01:48:29.380]  I'm in jail because of it.
[01:48:29.380 --> 01:48:30.380]  Yeah, exactly.
[01:48:30.380 --> 01:48:32.380]  I'm sorry?
[01:48:32.380 --> 01:48:35.380]  Go ahead.
[01:48:35.380 --> 01:48:37.380]  So what else did you have on that, Val? Is that it?
[01:48:37.380 --> 01:48:41.380]  That was it. As of right now, we're just still trying to get my brother out
[01:48:41.380 --> 01:48:44.380]  and seeing how fast we can do it.
[01:48:44.380 --> 01:48:47.380]  They want to keep him in there for 30 days because...
[01:48:47.380 --> 01:48:51.380]  Yeah, fill out affidavits as to the authenticity of the recording,
[01:48:51.380 --> 01:48:54.380]  that it is a true and correct copy, get that notarized,
[01:48:54.380 --> 01:48:58.380]  and if possible, see if you can get the notary to make the copy.
[01:48:58.380 --> 01:49:01.380]  That would be even better because at least they can verify they got it from one
[01:49:01.380 --> 01:49:03.380]  and made it on the other.
[01:49:03.380 --> 01:49:04.380]  Okay.
[01:49:04.380 --> 01:49:12.380]  But if not, then it may not be a bad idea to prepare a transcript of the recording to go with it.
[01:49:12.380 --> 01:49:14.380]  Okay.
[01:49:14.380 --> 01:49:17.380]  By the way, did you get the copies that I sent you?
[01:49:17.380 --> 01:49:19.380]  Yes, ma'am, I did.
[01:49:19.380 --> 01:49:21.380]  I have not had an opportunity to go through them today.
[01:49:21.380 --> 01:49:23.380]  As you can tell, I have a bit of a cough.
[01:49:23.380 --> 01:49:26.380]  I haven't slept for 10 solid days.
[01:49:26.380 --> 01:49:29.380]  I am a highly functioning catatonic right now.
[01:49:29.380 --> 01:49:35.380]  And when I go to bed tonight, I am seriously considering rocking myself to sleep with a real rock.
[01:49:35.380 --> 01:49:39.380]  But as soon as I am thoroughly able to get this done,
[01:49:39.380 --> 01:49:46.380]  I will go through this and be contacting you more directly and with more reasoning about here is what we do next
[01:49:46.380 --> 01:49:50.380]  and here is what we do next and making sure that we get this done for your brother's sake.
[01:49:50.380 --> 01:49:51.380]  Okay.
[01:49:51.380 --> 01:49:52.380]  All righty.
[01:49:52.380 --> 01:49:53.380]  Thank you so much.
[01:49:53.380 --> 01:49:54.380]  Yes, ma'am.
[01:49:54.380 --> 01:49:55.380]  Thank you for calling in.
[01:49:55.380 --> 01:49:56.380]  All right.
[01:49:56.380 --> 01:49:57.380]  Thank you, Valerie.
[01:49:57.380 --> 01:49:58.380]  Okay, thank you.
[01:49:58.380 --> 01:50:02.380]  Let's go to Evangeline in Pennsylvania who has been holding since the beginning of the show.
[01:50:02.380 --> 01:50:04.380]  Evangeline, thanks for calling in.
[01:50:04.380 --> 01:50:13.380]  So I understand the call screener is saying that you confirmed that the so-called instructor is not credited.
[01:50:13.380 --> 01:50:15.380]  Yes, I did.
[01:50:15.380 --> 01:50:23.380]  I came across some information a few days ago that I found out that the thing that he did,
[01:50:23.380 --> 01:50:29.380]  the whole instructor thing and hypnotism and all that, that there is a number of people that have done such a thing
[01:50:29.380 --> 01:50:32.380]  and you have to be wary of them presenting with false credentials.
[01:50:32.380 --> 01:50:38.380]  So I contacted the college and I told the executive director who hired him my concerns
[01:50:38.380 --> 01:50:42.380]  and I asked her if she could confirm his credentials and, you know, his doctorate.
[01:50:42.380 --> 01:50:44.380]  And she said, oh, yes, of course, absolutely.
[01:50:44.380 --> 01:50:47.380]  He has been with us since 1999 and let me check.
[01:50:47.380 --> 01:50:49.380]  And she took a few minutes, couldn't find it.
[01:50:49.380 --> 01:50:53.380]  So she would get back in touch with me.
[01:50:53.380 --> 01:50:58.380]  I asked her to contact me before the start of the next class because I didn't want to continue, you know,
[01:50:58.380 --> 01:51:01.380]  if he was, you know, a fraud.
[01:51:01.380 --> 01:51:08.380]  And so anyway, she finally emailed me today and said that she was going to get the information from him
[01:51:08.380 --> 01:51:11.380]  because for whatever reason she didn't have it on file.
[01:51:11.380 --> 01:51:15.380]  And when she got it from him, she forwarded it to me and she must not have looked at it
[01:51:15.380 --> 01:51:18.380]  because it was like a four-page brag sheet.
[01:51:18.380 --> 01:51:20.380]  And it didn't have any credentials on there?
[01:51:20.380 --> 01:51:23.380]  It had.
[01:51:23.380 --> 01:51:31.380]  His doctorate came from a Eurotechnical Research University, which is a diploma mill.
[01:51:31.380 --> 01:51:32.380]  Oh, I see.
[01:51:32.380 --> 01:51:37.380]  Okay, so basically listeners who aren't familiar with Evangeline's story,
[01:51:37.380 --> 01:51:41.380]  you're trying to basically get out of this course.
[01:51:41.380 --> 01:51:43.380]  You put stop payment on a check.
[01:51:43.380 --> 01:51:45.380]  You suspected that this guy wasn't credited.
[01:51:45.380 --> 01:51:48.380]  He was threatening to turn you into the police for writing a bad check.
[01:51:48.380 --> 01:51:54.380]  And we discussed last week that it's not a bad check if you put a stop payment on it.
[01:51:54.380 --> 01:51:57.380]  It's only a bad check if you write a check and someone tries to cash it.
[01:51:57.380 --> 01:52:00.380]  The person you wrote it to and the funds are not there.
[01:52:00.380 --> 01:52:02.380]  That would be a bad check.
[01:52:02.380 --> 01:52:03.380]  That is a crime.
[01:52:03.380 --> 01:52:07.380]  However, you put a stop payment on it because there's a legitimate question here
[01:52:07.380 --> 01:52:09.380]  concerning this instructor's credibility.
[01:52:09.380 --> 01:52:15.380]  And so at this point in time it becomes a civil issue if this guy really wants to get paid,
[01:52:15.380 --> 01:52:16.380]  he would have to sue you.
[01:52:16.380 --> 01:52:18.380]  So what is this?
[01:52:18.380 --> 01:52:19.380]  We need to move quickly here.
[01:52:19.380 --> 01:52:22.380]  So tell us quickly, what is the legal status at this point?
[01:52:22.380 --> 01:52:25.380]  Is this guy, has he tried to file a criminal complaint against you?
[01:52:25.380 --> 01:52:26.380]  Is he trying to sue you or what?
[01:52:26.380 --> 01:52:30.380]  The third party has made payment for the materials.
[01:52:30.380 --> 01:52:36.380]  And I'm really peoed about having taken this course and gone through what I've gone through.
[01:52:36.380 --> 01:52:42.380]  And I want to do whatever I can to set this guy down and I also want to pursue legal action,
[01:52:42.380 --> 01:52:45.380]  like maybe a tort letter or something with the community college.
[01:52:45.380 --> 01:52:46.380]  Okay.
[01:52:46.380 --> 01:52:48.380]  That's certainly possible.
[01:52:48.380 --> 01:52:51.380]  Now be aware, I'm not sure about what state are you in?
[01:52:51.380 --> 01:52:52.380]  Pennsylvania.
[01:52:52.380 --> 01:52:53.380]  Pennsylvania.
[01:52:53.380 --> 01:53:01.380]  In Texas it is a felony to use falsified degrees or credentials of an academic nature.
[01:53:01.380 --> 01:53:06.380]  Yeah, it is and I looked at all the states under which it is a felony.
[01:53:06.380 --> 01:53:11.380]  It's not in Pennsylvania, but it is a problem.
[01:53:11.380 --> 01:53:18.380]  I'm having some trouble differentiating right now between statute and code.
[01:53:18.380 --> 01:53:24.380]  And I came up with something in the code that says, you know, I don't know,
[01:53:24.380 --> 01:53:31.380]  I just started doing this yesterday after I got confirmation and I just, you know,
[01:53:31.380 --> 01:53:36.380]  was really, really aggravated and disappointed.
[01:53:36.380 --> 01:53:38.380]  Okay, let's clear that up for you real quick.
[01:53:38.380 --> 01:53:41.380]  The difference between statute and code.
[01:53:41.380 --> 01:53:50.380]  Code is a collection of statutes given a particular subject, like the health code, the education code.
[01:53:50.380 --> 01:53:54.380]  They're all statutes related to that subject matter.
[01:53:54.380 --> 01:53:58.380]  And also, Evangeline, I wanted to tell you too something you may want to look for.
[01:53:58.380 --> 01:54:01.380]  The guy apparently has a Ph.D.,
[01:54:01.380 --> 01:54:10.380]  but you're saying he has a Ph.D. from some educational entity that is known as a diploma mill.
[01:54:10.380 --> 01:54:17.380]  And so what you may need to look for in either the statute or the code concerning degree requirements
[01:54:17.380 --> 01:54:29.380]  for a community college or a university is whether or not the Ph.D. is required to be obtained
[01:54:29.380 --> 01:54:34.380]  from like a state university or something like that.
[01:54:34.380 --> 01:54:41.380]  That's what you need to look for because if he does have a legitimate Ph.D. from an entity,
[01:54:41.380 --> 01:54:43.380]  then technically he's not lying.
[01:54:43.380 --> 01:54:52.380]  Technically it's not a false credential, but what you need to look for is to see if the accreditation
[01:54:52.380 --> 01:54:55.380]  has to be obtained from a state university.
[01:54:55.380 --> 01:55:00.380]  If there's no requirement for that, then you may not have a case for fraud,
[01:55:00.380 --> 01:55:04.380]  but you certainly would have grounds to say,
[01:55:04.380 --> 01:55:07.380]  well, I changed my mind and I don't want to take a course from this guy
[01:55:07.380 --> 01:55:12.380]  because I was under the impression that I was taking a class from somebody who was state accredited.
[01:55:12.380 --> 01:55:20.380]  Real quickly, in the P.A. code, it's 45 something or other, fraud or dispute.
[01:55:20.380 --> 01:55:27.380]  It's misrepresenting or concealing material facts and obtaining payment for services, falsifying record.
[01:55:27.380 --> 01:55:32.380]  Number four says misrepresenting credentials by using the word doctor or similar word abbreviation
[01:55:32.380 --> 01:55:38.380]  is similar if the use is not accurate or if the degree was not conferred by an accredited institution,
[01:55:38.380 --> 01:55:45.380]  which it's not. It's operated out of a post office box in Hawaii.
[01:55:45.380 --> 01:55:46.380]  Hello?
[01:55:46.380 --> 01:55:47.380]  That's not about right.
[01:55:47.380 --> 01:55:48.380]  Oh, sorry.
[01:55:48.380 --> 01:55:50.380]  This is good. Sounds like you got it.
[01:55:50.380 --> 01:55:52.380]  Yeah, I would say so.
[01:55:52.380 --> 01:55:57.380]  And like you said, one of the reasons you hadn't paid is because you were waiting on some funding to come in for the class,
[01:55:57.380 --> 01:56:04.380]  but now it sounds like you don't want to pay anyway because the guy basically looks like a fraud.
[01:56:04.380 --> 01:56:13.380]  Right. Now that funding came from the other question I have is the college lists them as a doctor in their brochure
[01:56:13.380 --> 01:56:18.380]  and they are the ones that advertise for this guy and this particular course.
[01:56:18.380 --> 01:56:29.380]  So I feel like I have a grudge with them as well for not checking and doing a background check.
[01:56:29.380 --> 01:56:38.380]  And the funds that went to the college and to this guy were government funds for veterans.
[01:56:38.380 --> 01:56:43.380]  Yeah, depending upon the rules, there could definitely be some fraud in there at the government level
[01:56:43.380 --> 01:56:46.380]  that could have some severe repercussions for somebody.
[01:56:46.380 --> 01:56:51.380]  Well, what I don't understand here is why does this guy care so much
[01:56:51.380 --> 01:56:53.380]  whether you're not paying for the class or not?
[01:56:53.380 --> 01:56:55.380]  Because if this is a community college,
[01:56:55.380 --> 01:57:00.380]  would he be making the checkout to the community college and not him directly?
[01:57:00.380 --> 01:57:06.380]  Yes, the course fee went to the community college, but the course materials was to him.
[01:57:06.380 --> 01:57:07.380]  He sold his own materials.
[01:57:07.380 --> 01:57:11.380]  You know how normally you get like a textbook or something from a bookstore?
[01:57:11.380 --> 01:57:15.380]  Well, he provided the materials and books and they were things that he produced himself.
[01:57:15.380 --> 01:57:17.380]  That sounds like a scam.
[01:57:17.380 --> 01:57:21.380]  Well, no, actually most of the textbooks you get in the bookstores
[01:57:21.380 --> 01:57:24.380]  are produced by the professors at the university you're attending.
[01:57:24.380 --> 01:57:27.380]  That's why they're expected course materials.
[01:57:27.380 --> 01:57:31.380]  But not necessarily by the same professor that's teaching the class.
[01:57:31.380 --> 01:57:35.380]  It was quite out of the ordinary according to the organization that funded everything
[01:57:35.380 --> 01:57:38.380]  that he took the money himself.
[01:57:38.380 --> 01:57:41.380]  Normally even if an instructor produced the materials,
[01:57:41.380 --> 01:57:44.380]  they would sell them through the university.
[01:57:44.380 --> 01:57:48.380]  But the reason for that is because it was 13 DVDs that were made in like 1990
[01:57:48.380 --> 01:57:50.380]  with a home VHS camera.
[01:57:50.380 --> 01:57:54.380]  Oh, my goodness. Well, Evelyn, did you return the course materials?
[01:57:54.380 --> 01:57:56.380]  No, I still have them in my possession.
[01:57:56.380 --> 01:58:00.380]  You may want to return them if you're not going to do the course or if you're not going to
[01:58:00.380 --> 01:58:03.380]  if you're going to stop payment on the check, you may want to return the materials.
[01:58:03.380 --> 01:58:06.380]  They have been paid for by the third party now.
[01:58:06.380 --> 01:58:07.380]  Oh, okay.
[01:58:07.380 --> 01:58:10.380]  Yeah, you're going to want them for evidence anyway.
[01:58:10.380 --> 01:58:13.380]  I do want the third party to be reimbursed, you know,
[01:58:13.380 --> 01:58:16.380]  and I want that money to go back to where it came from.
[01:58:16.380 --> 01:58:18.380]  All right, excellent. Okay, we're at the end of the show.
[01:58:18.380 --> 01:58:23.380]  Please call back either tomorrow or next week so we can finish discussing this.
[01:58:23.380 --> 01:58:25.380]  Jeff, Mary, I'm sorry we weren't able to get to you.
[01:58:25.380 --> 01:58:27.380]  Call back tomorrow night.
[01:58:27.380 --> 01:58:29.380]  We're going to be going over House Bill 1937.
[01:58:29.380 --> 01:58:32.380]  We're going to have a guest on about that.
[01:58:32.380 --> 01:58:40.380]  A victim of a sexual assault is going to be discussing her take on this bill.
[01:58:40.380 --> 01:58:44.380]  And we're also going to be playing some audio from some of these committee hearings.
[01:58:44.380 --> 01:58:49.380]  The 1937 bill and from the hearing on Tuesday night,
[01:58:49.380 --> 01:58:52.380]  a classic Eddie rant at the committee hearing.
[01:58:52.380 --> 01:58:54.380]  We're going to be playing that tomorrow night,
[01:58:54.380 --> 01:58:58.380]  and Eddie will be going over his meeting with the representative as well.
[01:58:58.380 --> 01:59:00.380]  We'll be back tomorrow night.
[01:59:00.380 --> 01:59:14.380]  Thank you very much.
[01:59:30.380 --> 01:59:58.380]  Thank you.
[01:59:58.380 --> 02:00:00.380]  Thank you.