foreign
good afternoon this is Daniel here with
cops and cons TV I want to welcome
everyone into our live show we're going
to go ahead and break down some of the
most interesting and important cases and
issues in policing from the last week or
so so let's see where everyone is
joining us from uh happy Cinco de Mayo
as well it looks like we've got Sergeant
George in from California uh we have
someone watching uh georgiana's watching
from Florida and uh Southern California
as well North Carolina it's good to see
everybody in um again if you haven't
already please go ahead and subscribe to
the channel make sure that you share it
with your friends um again my name is
Daniel you can go ahead and follow me
over at police law news on YouTube and
uh just about everywhere else oh we got
someone from Missouri Joplin Missouri uh
in here as well and um great so Ed like
we do every week as I'm going through
some of these cases and some of these
are pretty controversial cases as we're
going through it if you have any
different ideas or opinions or if you
agree with what I say almost more
importantly if you don't agree with what
I say put it in the chat because one of
our favorite things to do is really go
back and forth with the audience and
share information and really try to have
a conversation about these really
interesting and important police cases
so Steve says uh I was talking to Steve
Ladner earlier today do you think people
should trust the justice system if a D.A
refuses to prosecute cops after a grand
jury indictment I'll get to that here in
a few minutes uh let's see Armando
Chavez New York city so addicted to your
videos they make me laugh okay great so
the first case that we're going to talk
about and I'm pretty sure everyone knows
where we're going with this first case
because it's been in the news the last
couple of days
um this happened on May 1st of this year
in New York City on the subway an
individual
um was died in the New York subway his
name was Jordan Neely so let's talk a
little bit about Jordan Neely and just
before we get into the facts of this
case the Manhattan prosecutors are
looking at criminal charges but no one
has been charged as of yet so Jordan
Neely is an individual and they've liked
to been saying that he's a Michael
Jackson impersonator because sometimes
you know often he goes to the New York
City subway and he impersonates it he
pretends to be Michael Jackson well
listen if all he was doing was dancing
and pretending to be Michael Jackson he
would still be alive because that's not
what he was doing on May 1st of this
year on the New York City subway what
Jordan Neely did is he took off his
shirt he threw it on the ground he
started screaming and yelling on the
subway and what he was yelling was
things such as that he was Fed Up and
hungry that he was tired of having
nothing he said he doesn't care he
doesn't mind if he goes back to prison
he doesn't mind if he gets a life
sentence and he said that he will attack
and threaten anyone on the subway well
obviously there were a lot of normal
regular people on the New York City
subway who are trying to live their
lives who you know don't really feel
like they should be terrorized by a
random violent Maniac on the New York
Subway system so what happened was is
while he was screaming and yelling and
threatening people and pacing back and
forth a lot of people moved away from
him like women and older people and some
men because they felt threatened by him
so what happened was that there was a 24
year old individual who was in the
Marine Corps and he went behind after
Jordan Neely was you know randomly just
threatening people saying he was going
to beat everybody up and that he didn't
care if he went back to jail the Marine
went behind him got him in a Chokehold
and dragged him to the ground once on
the ground he did have him in a choke
hold or a submission hold two other
individuals two other adults there was a
white male and a black male also were
helping out so we don't know the names
of any of these individuals but there
this was captured on cell phone video
from an amateur journalist who happened
to be on that subway car
um the the black individual who was who
was helping out was grabbing Jordans and
controlling his his arms and there was
another individual a white guy who was
also trying to hold him down he was in a
choke hold for two minutes and 55
seconds after that tragically Jordan
stopped breathing he stopped moving
um and he did die while this was going
on some of the passengers did call for
police assistance so they were trying to
get police officers there so this has
caused an uproar in New York City black
lives matter has has been protesting
they are calling this the new George
Floyd case AOC went on the one on the
the the the the the Twitter and on TV
and did some interviews over the last
couple days and she said that
unequivocally that this is Murder She
said that Jordan Neely was lynched now
when you say that someone is lynched you
are essentially saying that not only
were they murdered but they were
murdered just because of their skin
color now we have no information on who
the Marine is we have no information on
who the two other individuals are who
also tried to hold Jordan Neely down but
what we do know is that there is no
information your evidence that this had
anything to do with race it seems like
this had everything to do with behavior
because again had he just been
impersonating Michael Jackson no one
would have had to intervene to stop
individuals to stop him from potentially
being violent
um now what's the protesters and black
lives matter they want the Marine charge
they want him charged with murder and so
far his name hasn't gotten out but that
can't last for very long so at some
point he's going to be a Target and his
name and his information is going to get
out there the mayor of New York City you
know a former police Commander Eric
Adams he did go on
he did do a news interview yesterday
where he basically said he essentially
said that he wanted the investigation to
play out and that's that's honestly
that's the right thing for any
politician to say so since there is an
ongoing investigation saying that you
think this is 100 Justified or saying
that this is 100 murder this is a
lynching both of those are wrong because
it is important for the investigation to
play out now what it seems like is there
is no indication that the marine and the
two other individuals who are trying to
hold down Mr Neely there's no indication
that they were trying to kill him so
what this seems like again there is an
ongoing investigation but it seems like
that this was an accidental death it
seems like that the marine and the two
other individuals were trying to control
and subdue Jordan Neely because he was
being violent he was being not violent
but he was threatening people and before
it got to violence this is what random
this is what these citizens did on the
subway car to try to make everyone safe
now this does touch on a couple
different issues so in 2020 the New York
City Police Department was defunded by a
billion dollars now you think well how
is that how is that related how does
that matter here's how this matters so
let's go from 2020 through now there
have been 20 before Jordan Neely from
2020 through the the earlier this month
there were 27 people who have been
killed on the New York City subway so
none of those other people get protests
and rioters and all that kind of stuff
just keep that in mind but there have
been 27 people who've died on the subway
since 2020 before that from 2004 to 2019
so a 15-year period before black lives
matter got involved before the protest
before George Floyd before the defunding
of the New York City Police Department
during that 15-year period 2004 to 2019
28 people died on the New York City
subway systems so what I'm saying is we
have since 2020 and since the police
were defunded we have as many murders
homicides on the New York subway in two
and a half years as they had in the
prior 15 years so we can't say it's all
because of defunding the police
department but I think reasonable people
can say well that didn't help multiple
times during the cell phone video that
was captured the people and the other
Witnesses they were saying things like
we called the police where the police
why aren't they here that's a reasonable
question because when you have a city
where police officers not only are
defunded and there's not that many of
them but also when you we create an
environment where police are afraid to
be proactive they're afraid to do their
jobs when you have things like that it's
it's it creates a situation where normal
random citizens who again are just
trying to go about their daily lives
feel it necessary that they have to
intervene to keep everybody else safe
one of the things I always talk about
when it comes to uh and just so you know
Marines are trained when it comes to
ground control and and submission so so
it's likely this Marine did have some
training in this however it the intent
of this does not seem to be to kill Mr
Neely that doesn't seem like that was
the intent was
um so I think we'll we will we will get
to that what I would
what I would like to say so Corey says
sounds like you made your mind up of
what actually happened well no Corey
Thomas I've said multiple times it
doesn't seem like there was an intent to
kill Mr Neely if you have evidence
that's different absolutely as I said a
couple times well this is an ongoing
investigation meaning we're going to
find out more of exactly what happened
we can only go by what was happening on
the actual video now let's talk a little
bit more about Mr Neely now this is
relevant when it comes to like a global
sense of how does this city how does the
police department so if we're looking at
this globally like New York City is like
a laboratory of some sort this
information is relevant certainly the
Marine the individuals who help the
marine and the other passengers of
course they wouldn't have had this
information but on a global sense let's
talk a little bit about Mr Neely so from
2003 until recently he's been arrested
42 times multiple times he's been
arrested for assault one of those
assaults was actually against a 67 year
old woman on the day that he was killed
he actually had an active warrant for
assault why I'm saying this why I'm
mentioning this is someone is arrested
most people never get arrested once in
their entire life it is very rare that
anybody is arrested twice he's been
arrested 42 times since 2003. don't you
think there's a problem here's my
question obviously he's mentally ill
information has come out that he's
suffering from schizophrenia we should
be compassionate I'm not saying we
shouldn't be compassionate but my
question is allowing him to be arrested
and then let out arrested and then let
out onto the streets how is that
compassionate to Mr Neely who obviously
needs help that's obvious right this
isn't normal
he obviously needs help so this isn't
compassionate for Mr Neely to allow him
to live like this it also isn't
compassionate for the regular normal
decent people of New York City who are
just trying to go about their day who
honestly do not deserve to be victimized
and terrorized by violent Maniacs this
isn't compassionate even Eric Adams the
mayor of New York City he's one of the
very first Democrats in recent years to
say what I'm about to say that when it
comes to involuntary incapacitation or
involuntary mental health treatment that
those standards to do that that he wants
them to be lowered then Eric Adams the
the mayor of New York City has
specifically said that that you know
mentally ill people who are committing
crimes and who are violent and
threatening people that it isn't
compassionate not only for the people
the citizens but also for them that we
have to do something so Eric Adams has
actually been trying to work with the
state legislature to lower to lower the
requirements so that police officers and
mental health workers in combination can
get these people help because I think
we're all on the same page here is that
someone like Mr Neely yes he he's we
should have compassion because he's
suffering from Mental Illness but
allowing him to be out in the public to
threaten people to again if he's
arrested we all know that when you're
arrested for something arrest it's very
rare that you're arrested so if you're
arrested for something 40 times how many
times have you actually committed crimes
when you weren't arrested especially
when the police department has been
defunded and there aren't as many police
officers as they should so it's not
unreasonable the thing that he's been
arrested 40 something times how many
times has he been contacted by cops and
not arrested and let go or given a
ticket how many other times has he done
something like this threatened people
battered people
and he just hasn't been caught he wasn't
identified so again there is a lot to
this obviously the Marine didn't know
this information so I'm not saying so I
know people are going to be
um on people are going to be purposely
confused I call that dishonest criticism
they're going to say oh it seems like
you're saying because he had a bad
history because he had a because he had
this violent history that he deserved to
be killed no absolutely not if anything
what I'm saying is I want a world I want
to live in a society where Jordan Neely
gets the help that he so desperately
needs and he doesn't get killed but this
is a situation where where you put him
on the subway he's arrested over and
over and over again this is a situation
where at some point regular citizens
aren't going to take being terrorized by
him there's also been reports that
there's been different times where he's
been allegedly tried to push people onto
the subway tracks this is someone who
should not have been out in the general
public without medication let's see if
we have some comments on this Sergeant
George says even if the death of Jordan
Neely was accidental moments like this
is a very good reminder that some New
Yorkers just have no calm absolutely yes
yes and Sergeant George I'm curious what
you think do you think that what do you
think they should have done so so I
think we have a couple different
questions here and I hope we're all on
the same page because we can definitely
debate and discuss and discuss
um opinions but facts we should try to
come together on the fact so I hope
everybody's with me that the marine and
the two individuals with him weren't
trying to kill Jordan Neely so maybe and
again it's still an ongoing
investigation but I think that's pretty
obvious that they were trying to subdue
him they called the police department
the Marine didn't run away and hide in
the woods after this was done it seemed
like they were trying to Sedum and this
wasn't random this wasn't like Jordan
Neely was just standing there sitting
around and and he was randomly attacked
by a marine no he was acting in a
violent threatening Manner and it seems
like um the Marine went in and tried to
stop that from happening if anything it
seemed like the Marine was trying to
prevent violence don't think there's any
indication that there was an intent to
try to kill Mr Neely now the New York
City prosecutor is looking at charges
now we'll see now you remember the the
bodega worker um who killed the
individual um which was initially
charged and then um uh we covered we
covered that on this on on this on the
show the bodega worker in New York City
about six months ago was charged
everybody was outraged um so I don't
think this is as clear of self-defense
because again I don't think there is any
legal justification to kill Mr Neely I
think they're absolutely 100 is legal
justification to hold him down to stop
him to subdue him to put him in a choke
hold to try to try to knock him out to
anything like that to stop the violence
like I hope we can all get on the same
page it's like yes that was probably
reasonable but no death was not
appropriate so it seems like the death
was accidental so so let's go down that
rabbit hole so what would likely charges
be well I know that the medical examiner
called this a homicide and a lot of
people who think that well it's a
homicide that it must be something
criminal no that's not the case when it
comes to that what a homicide means from
a medical examiner is that this wasn't
an accident it wasn't natural causes or
anything like that essentially when one
human whether it's just so medical
examiners don't get into intent or law
or anything like that medical examiners
basically say this is one human being
who killed another one it's under the
bread the broad category of homicide
okay so that's what we have we have a
broad category of homicide now under
homicide we have two different tracks we
have murder and we have manslaughter so
if you intend to kill someone if you say
I'm gonna walk across the street I'm
going to hit you in the head with a
hammer and I'm gonna kill you and then
we find notes saying that you were going
to do this you were telling people so
there's intent to kill that's murder
that's obviously the most serious now if
you kill someone and you didn't mean to
kill them so there's no intent to kill
then you go down the rabbit hole of
manslaughter under manslaughter you have
man manslaughter and involuntary
manslaughter so voluntary involuntary
and involuntary manslaughter so this
seems like if the charges were going to
be filed this would be under the guise
of voluntary manslaughter what voluntary
manslaughter is in a very broad way is
essentially you were trying to hurt
someone so it's essentially like you
were trying to commit some type of harm
whether the harm was justified or not
it's like if you're in a bar fight okay
if you're in a bar fight and you punch
someone and they fall back and they hit
their head and they die well that that
would be manslaughter or voluntary
manslaughter because you're trying to do
something it's not like it's only this
was a complete accident you were trying
to cause some harm but you weren't
trying to kill them so if criminal
charges are filed I would say
manslaughter or voluntary manslaughter
something around there is likely what
the charges would be trying to charge
him with murder now sometimes
prosecutors do this they charge High
hoping for a plea deal in the middle so
if if he's charged with murder just so
you know they're based basically saying
that the Marine had the intent to kill
that doesn't seem like the case but
against some prosecutors do overcharge
all right let's say we have some
comments here Denny says I was told if I
keep videoing my local police station
I'd end up uh going missing so I stopped
okay I'm not really sure uh let's see uh
uh let's see have any officer blue gun
the argument for holding him uh for so
long uh that he was fighting while being
restrained without police showing up in
15 minutes they did not have access to
handcuffs or other means of restraint uh
are we going to be surprised uh what the
talks come back with no um officer blue
gun really good question and comment um
no I I think what's going to come back
is that either
um you know and sometimes an officer
blue gun correct me if you think I'm
wrong with this sometimes it's difficult
to tell the difference between someone
who's in the throes of schizophrenia
mental illness and drugs so or if
someone is just completely high on drugs
sometimes especially if the video is
only a female if you're with someone for
an hour you can probably suss it out you
know but you know just watching a few
minute video it's difficult to tell
what's likely is a lot of times these
individuals people who are who are
suffering from schizophrenia or other
mental health and they're unmedicated a
lot of the times it's very common for
them to self-medicate with illegal drugs
so it wouldn't be surprising to me is if
we have a combination here that he was
high on some type of substance and also
in the throes of a mental health in the
throes of a mental health episode all
right any comments here uh let's see uh
Sergeant George says yes there's also
involuntary manslaughter yes yes there's
also involuntary manslaughter I don't
think that would be appropriate here um
if it's a lesser form of manslaughter so
if you weren't trying to do any harm
um if you weren't trying to do any harm
at all you weren't trying to make
physical contact could that be
involuntary manslaughter yes so so that
that would be involuntary manslaughter a
lot of times drunk drivers drunk drivers
are charged with involuntary
manslaughter because there's no specific
intent against a specific person here
the Marine seems like we don't know for
sure seems like the Marine had the
intent okay I'm gonna take this guy I'm
gonna subdue him I'm gonna choke him out
that's the intent so there is some
intent to do something physical but
certainly no intent to murder him that's
what it seems like um and I'm not saying
that charges should be filed but if
there are charges filed I would expect
it to be somewhere in the voluntary
manslaughter ah let's see Steve says I
remember when medical examiners uh was
ruling taser death's underlying health
conditions until police tased the corner
okay I'm not sure what that case is It's
My Life says it's not falsifying
government documents uh uh for over
charging it's my life that's such a good
that is such a good comment um so
typically it wouldn't be falsifying
government documents so essentially the
prosecutors have to get past probable
cause right so they have to get past you
know
um would a judge say yes based on this
there is probable cause so
um could they could the prosecutors make
an argument for murder that there was
some intent something inside the
Marine's mind where they were where he
was trying to kill
um now it's impod no one's a psychic so
it's impossible to really know without
outside evidence but you know could I
see them charging murder
um and then saying yeah we can show
based on this this this this that he's a
Marine he should have known he knew the
technique he did a technique wrong that
was on purpose could they go down that
rabbit hole to charge murder yes do I
think they would get a conviction on
murder no um but a lot of times
prosecutors they think that they'll
charge it a little bit higher hoping for
a plea deal somewhere in the middle that
wouldn't if they file charges it
wouldn't surprise me but my legal
opinion is that you know the appropriate
charges if there are going to be charged
as filed would be somewhere in the man
slaughter uh rate this manslaughter
range someone said it is blatant murder
if you say it's blatant murder that
means that you know something inside the
inside the marines mind uh where he had
intent to kill
um and you don't know that because you
don't have psychic powers that I don't
uh let's see uh officer uh uh Georgiana
Duckett says there were other options
okay yeah let's so let's talk about that
Georgiana what were the other options um
should the marina punched him in the
face
um should the Marine have
um roundhouse kicked him
um taking him down to the ground and
doing a technique that he thought was
going to subdue him with the help of two
other people remember
um yeah I don't know um but the thing is
it's easy to say if you're not the one
in the subway car being terrorized by a
violent Maniac it's very easy to say on
the star says uh Marines should have
minded his own business that's a that's
a fair point the Marine should have
minded his own business until when um
what if what if on his Stars what if
Jordan Neely like he had done 40
something other times at least started
hitting hitting and battering people do
you let two three or four elderly women
get attacked um before you step in so um
you know the Marine made a decision um
again it's only Jordan Neely was just
sitting there minding his own business
no he was actively threatening people
saying he didn't mind going back to jail
threatening people
um when this occurred so if you don't do
that
um this kind of stuff won't happen all
right so let's go let's go into the
let's go into the next case so the next
case I want to talk about I was actually
talking to officer blue gun about this
before the show today so this is a
really interesting case um it's out of
Chicago it happened on April 15th of
this past year as an officer involved
shooting and the reason that we're
talking about it now is because the body
cam footage just came out this is a a
shooting an officer involved shooting uh
the individual who was shot by Chicago
Police was a 24 year old named Reginald
clay now before the body cam footage
came out Reginald clay senior so his
father there they file the family filed
the lawsuit against the police officers
and I quote in the news the family said
that the officer involved shooting was
unprovoked and unwarranted remember that
so because the thing is once there's an
officer involved shooting before the
body camera footage come out it's not
like the police officer or the
representatives for the police officer
or the police department can can come
out and say what happened right they
don't have to do that imagine being a
police officer you're involved in a
completely lawful Justified reasonable
shooting and you have the family and
maybe you were threatened with a gun and
you have the family out there just
spewing lies it has to be so
unbelievably irritating knowing you
can't go and fight back this is how
police officers and police departments
fight back with the truth by putting
body camera footage out so remember that
Reginald clay senior said that this
officer involves shooting involving his
son was unprovoked and unwarranted
here's what the body cam footage shows
the body cam footage shows that police
officers roll up in a high crime area a
high drug area and they see Reginald
clay who is in the the area leaning into
a car experienced police officers in
this case are going to testify that it
seemed like there was some type of a
drug activity going on police officers
got out approached and Mr Clay ran from
police officers and police officers gave
Chase I'm going to get into whether or
not that was legal here in a second but
police officers gave Chase and they're
kind of running through gangways and
Alleyways in Chicago as Mr Clay was
running from police officers and this is
all on body camera footage as he was
running from police officers he turns
around from his waistband he pulls out a
firearm and when he pulls out the
firearm he faces towards the police
officer pulls out a firearm and then
changes Direction starts going towards
the police officer it's at that point
the police officer pulls out his firearm
and shoots Mr Clay
um so after that body camera footage
came out
um the family so Mr Clay senior and the
family no longer said use the words
unprovoked and unwarranted because it
obviously was right I mean if someone
pulls out a gun and starts to point the
gun at you you know reasonable person
can say that that's an unreasonable
shooting so they pretty much changed the
narrative instead of criticizing the
police officer in the police department
about the actual shooting they change it
to oh well the police officer never
should have been chasing him in the
first place okay that's great but again
I think we should all
talk about the truth and you're only
making that argument because your son
was had a gun and was pointing it and
pulled it on a police officer so the
shooting is obviously Justified now
they're complaining about the reason for
the stop so that is a good question this
is what me and officer blue gun were
talking about before the show today can
police officers chase you because you
run that is such a good question so
there's actually a case out there it's a
Supreme Court case but it's from
Illinois it's called Illinois versus
Wardlow and here's what Wardlow said
that police that flight alone is not a
reason for that a police officer can
chase so in order for let's start let's
start a little bit higher police
officers have to have Reasonable
Suspicion in order to detain someone
okay Reasonable Suspicion what that is
is specific facts that can be
articulated by the police officer that a
crime has been is being or will be
committed Reasonable Suspicion okay of a
crime being committed that's what police
officers have the lowest level in order
to detain someone and that really isn't
a high bar okay that's not a high bar so
is running is just police officers
seeing someone running is that
Reasonable Suspicion so the court said
no that isn't so as I think a lot of
people know because I broke my nose a
few months ago doing it but I'm a trail
Runner so I typically run Trails I run
about 20 miles a week and um you know
where I run it's up in the Foothills in
the mountains and there's really no one
around so there really aren't a whole
lot of police officers I see but let's
say I was running on the street for some
reason I got my headphones in and a
police officer sees me running can they
just stop me for no reason no of course
not so that's what the Supreme Court
said running alone flight alone is not
reasonable suspicion but what the court
also said in Wardlow is that running or
flight upon sight of a police officer
it's not like someone's running police
officer rolls up and sees them no it's
someone who's standing still or just
kind of hanging out there's they see the
police officer and then they flight the
court call that unprovoked flight in
combination with it being a high crime
area a high drug area that that though
that combination effect actors actually
does give police officers Reasonable
Suspicion to stop someone so in this
case it does seem like and I'm not
saying I agree with this case um to me
that it that it almost gives police a
little bit too much leeway I think a lot
so
um you know I'm not I'm not even sure I
100 agree with the Supreme Court on this
but it's important for me to say this is
what the law says is that if it's a high
crime area high drug area and someone
who wasn't previously fleeing upon sight
of a police officer flees Illinois
versus Wardlow says that that is
reasonable suspicion for police officers
to stop someone
um and and at least attain them under
Reasonable Suspicion if a crime has been
committed so it does seem like this case
does meet that Ward low standard so I
think that's going to be the case that
legally on a legal level this probably
is a real legal reason to stop
um Mr Clay however Chicago Police
Department and we have covered this on
the show before does have a foot chase
policy it's basically an internal policy
that says when police officers can
engage in foot chases so most of so if I
remember correctly most of the time
police officers can chase four
misdemeanors but they have to have
pretty concrete misdemeanors right
domestic violence drunk driving reckless
driving
um they can still Chase for pretty much
all felonies but
um when it comes to foot chases
um this without a specific crime unless
you saw the hand-to-hand drug drug
transaction or you know someone has a
warrant which at least now isn't being
alleged right um basically like the
basic elements for Wardlow the high
crime area unprovoked flight um so it
seems like that's the at least from
again from what we know right now it
seems like that was the reason for going
after Mr Clay
um so it seems like this is a situation
where this could be legal under the law
however police departments have the
ability and often do make policies that
police officers have to follow that are
more restrictive than case law so I
think this is likely a case where this
is probably a violation of the foot
chase policy but it is likely a lawful
foot chase a lawful detention and then
because a gun was pulled on him
obviously a lawful officer involved
shooting so then we have to tell what's
going to happen to the officer well if
it's a lawful officer-involved shooting
there shouldn't be any charges for the
police officer of course not and you
know it's likely that the actual time
that the trigger was pulled I mean the
guy was that guy had a gun was pulling
it on the officer so that should be
within policy right
um so you know what is the punishment
for police officers who violate the foot
chase policy maybe a day off so that's
what I would expect for the police
officer maybe a day or two off whatever
that is you know if the officer has
violated the foot chase policy four
times in the past that could be
accelerated to a little bit more
um you know maybe the first time you
violate the foot chase policy it's only
a written reprimand who knows I don't
know the ins and outs of the Chicago
Police Department's disciplinary system
but that's likely what would happen
whatever the punishment is for violating
the foot chase policy that's the maximum
that I would expect because I do think
that this was actually legal under the
law let's see if we have any comments on
this case in Chicago officer blue gun
says uh okay so you're going back and
forth with someone Steve says if we have
a second amendment how can police shoot
someone if they may have a gun oh Steve
that's such a good question so uh that's
not the facts of this case Steve so so
it's not like Mr Clay was standing there
he had a gun
um holstered wasn't holding it in his
hand
um that he was just standing there
police officers roll up and shoot a guy
because there's a gun in his pocket not
the case not not the case what happened
here Steve so facts are important Steve
Ladner so in this case he was running
from a police officer he turned around
pulled a gun out of his waistband and
started moving the gun the direction of
the police officer that's not covered
under the Second Amendment okay that is
it would be reasonable for a police
officer to think that this person who's
running from them in that moment was
going to use the gun against the police
officer this is objectively reasonable
all day now again so like I said so we
have a set of facts that happen in this
case Steve Ladner gave an example of a
different case that literally doesn't
exist in reality but you know if someone
is just standing there with a gun and
let's say the gun is holster just
standing there randomly and the person
is talking to their wife or kids or
friend police officers obviously cannot
cannot walk up and just start shooting
at people because they have a gun on
them somewhere so under that fact
pattern police officers cannot do that
Steve but that is not what happened in
the case that we're talking about now uh
let's see
um why says cops also mute audio to
conceal collusion um no they they
absolutely don't wise Metro says cops
moved audio as they choose that's not
correct um wise metric so um what I'm
going to say about that is do a little
bit of research on body cameras and I'm
gonna I'm gonna explain how body cameras
work so let's talk about axon cameras
made made by the taser company
um and that's made by the uh that's made
by the taser company
um uh and and we can go I'll I'll
explain kind of how these work but just
in general Illinois state law does say
that police officers can mute audio when
they're talking to each other about
tactics or about an investigation and
stuff like that so just quickly for an
example let's say police officers are
about to do a right on a house and they
want to talk about tactics that you go
in the back I'll go in the front we'll
do this talking about tactics they are
allowed to mute that
um and then when they go when they
actually make contact with people like
citizen contact they have to record but
here's how the body cameras work
typically here's how they're set up so
body cameras are essentially they're
kind of like in a in a standby mode when
a police officer presses the button and
turns it on what it does it captures
video from 30 seconds prior to when you
hit the button but you get audio
immediately now the reason why that's
good is you can imagine it's a situation
where a police officer is standing there
when a police officer is in their car or
anything like that and someone runs up
to the them all crazy crazy crazy and
they hit the button because they didn't
have their camera on before because
they're not contacting anyone right so
when things happen quick it's very
reasonable
um that when you hit the button that you
get an extra 30 seconds of video now the
way this cameras are set up that's not
it doesn't catch audio that's not the
fault of the police officers that's
literally the hardware the software of
how these cameras work so a lot of times
when it shows that there's 30 seconds of
video without audio that's nothing the
police officer did it's just from the
time the police officer hit the button
you get video from 30 seconds back and
the video and audio from the time you
hit the button so that is not police
officers muting or doing anything funny
that's just literally how the taser axon
cameras work
um yeah so um we also there used to be
days where um tasers had to be uh
plugged into body cameras and stuff like
that but but so again so if you're
saying that police officers shouldn't be
able to mute when they're having
conversations about tactics and
investigations well that's a different
conversation point to a case and yeah we
can go go ahead and discuss that
specific one but I think you have a
misunderstanding of exactly how police
body cameras work so I'm happy to
educate that's why I'm here Officer
bluchen says the civilian office of
police accountability investigated and
found no wrong doing absolutely yeah so
the police department found no
wrongdoing uh let's say I think
therefore I am you can't say some cops
haven't muted body camps to commit
conspiracy no I'm not uh I think before
I am I'm not saying it's never happened
and if a police officer violates policy
or law they should absolutely be
punished for it but what I'm saying is
that typically police officers can mute
if they are going to talk about tactics
or an investigation that's normally how
body camera policies work how state law
Works in most places when it comes to
body cameras but citizen contact that
doesn't count you have to record citizen
contact so again if you have an issue
with that police officers be able to to
when they talk about tactics not being
able to mute again that's that's a
different conversation obviously if
police officers are doing conspiracy to
commit crimes well obviously see that's
criminal and I want those officers
prosecuted just as much as you do
Sergeant George says uh let's see uh
moments like this is exactly why
qualified immunity exists absolutely 100
uh the real Cynthia says we have plenty
of evidence of footage needed to protect
cops from collusion
um the real Cynthia again so so General
criticism um I I don't think is all that
helpful so name one case put one case in
the chat and what I will do is I will
look into it and I will get back to you
and cover it next week how about that
does that sound nice um so yeah so put
in a case and when you just say General
things cops are racist cops are bad cops
are tyrants okay that's not very helpful
that makes you seem uneducated say
here's a case here's what the police did
and the police weren't punished for it
because of some reason tell me about
that case if that's what happened
Cynthia I'm probably gonna agree with
you because I do not want Cops to
violate policy or violate law I will be
standing with you saying those cops
should be should face consequences for
those actions if that's what happened
but when when you just have General
criticism again not very helpful put in
a specific case to the chat I promise I
will look into it alright so so that's
that case um there's a couple of other
cases that are older cases but like
really big and important cases that
really got a lot of news attention over
the last couple years and they kind of
wrapped up in this last week so I'm
gonna go over them a little bit quickly
because you know when we talk about
cases on the show and in the media you
know and when a case finally comes to
conclusion I think it's important to
wrap it up and just kind of put a bow on
it just to see where everybody's at with
it so the case that I'm going to talk
about it's officer Tau and he was one of
the officers in the George Floyd case so
he was actually just convicted of state
level charges of aiding and abetting
second-degree murder so if you remember
the George Floyd case like everybody
does right so what officer Tao did he
was the Asian officer who actually had
no contact with George Floyd he had no
physical contact with George Floyd what
officer Tao did is he was on crowd
control there was an Angry Crowd and
they were becoming agreeing angry they
would become aggressive and they were
advancing towards police officers now
here's the thing it was reasonable for
them to be angry it was reasonable for
them to be aggressive with police
officers because officer Chauvin was
committing unnecessary and excessive
force on George Floyd we can talk about
we don't have to get into exactly you
know about yes George Floyd was high in
fentanyl we wouldn't have to get into
any of that all I'm making in the
statement is and I hope everyone agrees
the force that Derek Chauvin was using
was unnecessary and excessive that's all
I'm saying so when individual bystanders
see a police officer obviously using
unnecessary and excessive force it's
reasonable for good decent citizens to
be upset with that right so I'm not
saying that the citizens didn't have a
reason to be upset they did have a
reason to be upset but from officer
tau's position all officer Tau knows
there are three police officers behind
me one guy has 19 years on and he's a
field training officer so and there's
two kind of rookies that that are with
him as well but officer Tau it would be
why would officer Tao think hey this guy
Derek Chauvin he's had a 19-year career
he's still around in the police
department he's a field training officer
no one would think that this guy who's
close to retirement is going to commit
one of the most heinous acts on video
right behind him no one reasonable would
think that was going to happen so the
idea that officer Tau was concentrating
on the crowd and trying to keep them
away was reasonable I don't think that
officer Tau should have been charged I
think it was a political prosecution
again he never had contact with with
George Floyd and again there was no way
for officer officer Tau to know what was
happening behind him that George Floyd
was actually going to die there was no
way for him to know that but he was
sentenced to three and a half years but
the thing is he was already sentenced to
three and a half years on the federal
level because these officers in the
George Floyd case all four of them they
were charged with federal civil rights
violations and state level crimes so
officer Tau he's already serving three
and a half years for either
the civil rights violations this was the
state level charges so essentially and
the way this happened was is it actually
didn't go to trial what happened was his
attorneys essentially wrote up a brief
and the attorneys for the prosecution
wrote up a brief and they came to an
agreement that okay if officer tau is
found guilty he will only be sentenced
to three and a half years that he was
already doing so essentially um um he
would serve he would serve it at the
same time
um so the time served would be
concurrent with the federal charges he
was already facing so again it didn't go
to trial that's why it wasn't in the
news it was just each side wrote a brief
and the judge rule the judge found him
guilty but again just served him uh to
serve three and a half years but he's
already doing three and a half years for
the federal civil rights violation um
that is the last police officer um two
gets sentenced for the for the state or
federal charge in the George Floyd case
so from now essentially all we have are
appeals and jail time that's really it
but because they're Federal convictions
I wouldn't really expect any appeals to
be successful unless it's the Derek
Chauvin trial um at the Supreme Court
level the court of appeals already said
that they're not gonna they're not gonna
do anything uh with the with the Derek
chauvin's case so we'll see what happens
at the Supreme Court level but um so
that case is pretty much over and what a
lot of people ask is isn't that double
jeopardy like how can the government
charge you with on the federal level and
also on the state level how is that not
Double Jeopardy well here's how so
because so you have to look at it this
way you can only be charged with a crime
in the jurisdiction that it happened so
if you can admit a murder in Minnesota
only the Minnesota Government right that
really that county that city
um only the Minnesota Government can't
charge you with that crime maybe you're
from Wisconsin or the victims from
Louisiana so Louisiana can't go ahead
and charge you if it happened in
Minnesota Wisconsin can't charge you if
it happened in Minnesota so only the
jurors so when it comes to double
jeopardy only the jurisdiction where it
happened can't charge you with a crime
so the way that this is looked at is
okay so the jurisdiction was Minnesota
so we go ahead and charge him in
Minnesota court but the way it's seen is
that federal courts are a different
jurisdiction even though it's the same
act the same crime in the same
jurisdiction they're allowed to charge
you on the federal level as well now I
think that's kind of and I'm
not just saying that in this particular
case a lot of defense attorneys who are
typically not fans of police officers
have been complaining about this
literally since I started studying
criminal justice stuff you know
approximately 20 years ago when I was
doing my undergrad that defense
attorneys were complaining about this
and here's normally where this comes
into play normally it comes into play
with like higher level Financial crime
so someone will be charged with fraud on
the state level and then some type of
computer conspiracy computers on my
thing right so some type of a federal
can conspiracy or embezzlement or
something else on the federal level so
defense attorneys would complain well
like it's the same crime like why
are you why are you charging so why are
you charging State Crime and fed crime
so it's normally
um federal financial crimes
um and again and defense attorneys
including Mark gargos have been
complaining about this for
years I've always thought it was wrong
and weird like if you want to charge
someone on a federal level charge them
if you want to charge them on the state
level charge them but if it's literally
the same action even though technically
per the law it's not Double Jeopardy it
feels like double jeopardy so
not only for police officers but all
defendants and again when it comes to
this federal charges police officers are
not the majority of people who fall into
this where they're charged really twice
um and it's mostly defense attorneys um
who again aren't fans of police officers
who are been saying that this is wrong
for at least 20 years
um I I to me it seems wrong curious what
you guys think uh Sergeant George says
who can blame the civilians for the
outrage that came out of what uh Derek
Chauvin did now not me
thank you Sergeant George you always
have great comments yeah I I agree
um uh again I I don't I I think that
what the civilians were doing seeing
what what Chauvin was doing
um it should be upsetting I get why they
were upset um I have no no beef with
that at all I think that what they were
doing
um um how aggressive they were um I
think it was reasonable under the
circumstances because they had a very
clear view of what shelvin was doing uh
officer blue gun says uh uh I guess
rationally and logically while taking
effect circumstances of what specifics
uh uh into the count is Warped uh
Sergeant George says even Iowa and or
Michigan can't charge you for what
happened in Minnesota exactly uh let's
see okay um thank you Dave London you
have a brilliant comment today uh let's
see okay so that's that case the other
case that wrapped up the other case that
wrapped up this week is the Kim Potter
case now we all remember the Kim Potter
case so this also happened in Minnesota
in 2020 this is the case where Kim
Potter did a traffic stop on Dante
Wright she did traffic stop on Dante
right for expired license plates it was
a legal traffic stop upon contact with
Dante Wright he's a 20 year old found
that he had a warrant for weapons
violation she tried to make a legal
arrest Dante Wright decided that hey I'm
just not going to go to jail today so he
fought with police officers he tried to
leave the scene Kim Potter tried to tase
him she pulled at her she she yelled
Taser Taser Taser but in all the
commotion in in the dynamic situation
she pulled out her handgun and fired it
and shot him one time instead of
utilizing her taser it's called taser
confusion from 2000 to now from about
the time we started to use tasers it
happens about one time with the United
States police officers where an officer
usually in a dynamic fast-moving use of
force situation pulls out their handgun
instead of their taser and the
individual ends up dying again it
happens about once a year this happened
in 2020 the exact wrong time for Kim
Potter for this to happen so um and the
thing is uh so so some people have said
that you know Kim daughter purposely did
that listen she didn't purposely use her
gun the reason is is Kim Potter had been
a cop for like 26 years 26 years with an
unblemished record literally no problems
for 26 years
um she yelled Taser Taser she was
visibly upset afterwards so so what you
would have to say is Kim Potter is just
about to retire but instead of retiring
after like a really good and decent and
successful career what she's going to do
is she's going to murder a 20 year old
black person for no reason risk 15 years
in prison just because she felt like it
like that's absolutely insane the thing
is even Dante Wright's family the
attorneys for the family the prosecutor
and the judge so all of those people
know more about the situation than
dishonest Critics on the internet they
all agree this was not intentional this
was negligence maybe even Reckless but
it was a mistake so just so you know
even people representing Dante Wright's
family no one's saying that this was
intentional so Kim Potter was sentenced
to just on under two years in prison she
just got out and what I've been asked
about a lot on my Tick Tock Channel
police law news that's where I do daily
videos and stuff like that but I've been
asked a lot of times I did a video on
this well what do I think about the Kim
Potter sentence good thing you asked I'm
gonna tell you so the Kim Potter
sentence so essentially she was charged
with you know some type of negligence
negligence resulting in death which I
think that's correct I think she was
negligent and I think her negligence did
cause or partly cause the death of Dante
Wright so I do think and understand and
I agree with her being arrested
prosecuted and charged how do I feel
about the sentence which was just around
two years well so essentially what she
was looking at was a maximum of 15 years
in prison but the sentencing report when
you look at her background you know the
court does like a pre-sentencing report
that's um you know pretty it's more like
a computer generated thing where like
type in a bunch of stuff and it spits
out what they think a sentence should be
a lot of different or what like an
average sentence with be for this you
know um depending upon the person's
history and some of the facts you know
all that kind of stuff
so what the pre-sentence report
recommended and the judge doesn't have
to follow this judge could have censored
to 15 years but with the pre-sentence
report sentence said with seven years is
what was recommended for Kim Potter so
let's start there so we've got seven
years well Dante Wright because he you
know he was at least half responsible
for his own death and I'm being generous
there at least half responsible probably
more but at least half responsible for
his own death so I'm gonna take that
seven years I'm gonna cut it right in
half right in half so I'm at about three
and a half years for Kim Potter then I
have to think okay well what else am I
looking at when it comes to the sentence
well intent goes a long way with me so
intent is what was someone trying to do
and and you know you can you can
criticize me but I'm gonna be just as
honest as I can be I put a lot of weight
on intent when I do all of my breakdowns
the reason is what someone was trying to
do to me is very important because if
someone has we want people to have good
intents we want people to to not have
bad intent so what was Kim Potter's
intent well she was did legal traffic
stop she was trying to make a legal
arrest if Kim if everything went
perfectly for Kim Potter she would have
arrested Dante Wright without incident
and went home and enjoyed her evening so
that was Kim Potter's intent now what
was Dante Wright's intent Dante Wright's
intent was to commit more crimes and
flee from police and not go to jail well
that's bad intent so because of that I'm
going to call this an tax and
I'm gonna take that three and a half
years I'm gonna Lop off another year so
I'm at about two and a half years for
Kim Potter so I think two and a half
years would have been a fair and
reasonable sentence for Kim Potter you
know with good time and stuff like that
in two years that's about right so I
think Kim Potter's sentence of two years
you know what I think that was about
right and what I like about talking
about this case is I'm going to get
from both sides I'm gonna have some
people say that no she should have done
15 years she's a murderer I'm gonna have
other people yell at me and say she
never should have been prosecuted so you
know I think that I'm being reasonable
and you're kind of like alt middle when
I know I'm gonna get from both
sides and I've written several articles
and done a lot of videos about the Kim
Potter case and I'm telling just what
happens I get almost no one who agrees
with me and people tell me that she
should have done 15 years other people
say she shouldn't have been prosecuted I
think the way that I came to this two
years two and a half years I think
that's about right for Kim Potter all
right let's see if we have any comments
on this uh Steve says Derek Chauvin is
in jail because police have pissed off
the population yeah I think it was
partly yeah Sergeant George says In the
Heat of the Moment it becomes a
challenge for a police officer to tell
the difference between a firearm and a
taser yeah taser confusion happens about
once a year uh Susan says until police
training is completely changed nothing
will ever change they literally deny
applicants with too high of an IQ no
joke Susan Susan why did you say that
because now you're going to force me to
talk about this Susan that's not correct
I've actually written an article about
this so I'm only going to talk about it
for about 30 seconds but Susan why don't
you go follow me over on substack over
at police law newsletter
um about last October I wrote a long
form article basically debunking what
you said because it's and it's
not true
um so I wrote a whole article about it I
cite the case but what Susan is
referring to is one time 25 years ago
um someone scored high on an IQ test and
they weren't hired by the police
department not because they had too high
of an IQ but what the police this one
small Police Department in like New
Hampshire I can't even find New
Hampshire on a map okay this is like the
90s in New Hampshire what they found
what the police department thought like
this few this few administrators what
they thought that if someone had a high
IQ that they would get bored of the job
because it's a small town they would get
bored of a job and they would they would
not stay with the department for 20
years which is what the police
department was looking for so they had
some type of personality test that said
this and this case went to the Supreme
Court
um and basically the Supreme Court sided
with the police department that you know
because he sued for an unlawful unlawful
like not hiring or something so um um
what so what the Supreme Court said is
hey now not hiring someone because of an
IQ of not a high IQ that's a bad idea
that's a really bad idea but you know
when it comes to discrimination there is
no discrimination class for people with
high IQ so basically
um what the Supreme Court said is that
having an IQ isn't a protected class now
what I mean by that is race sex age
gender sexual orientation family status
all of those things are protected
classes high IQ like being a Chicago
White Sox fan or someone who wears a
purple shirt or someone who just got a
haircut those are categories of people
that's not a protected class so again
the Supreme Court in that case said yeah
it's a bad idea but you're not in a
position to where you can sue so saying
that police officer so what I'm getting
at here Susan this was this was one case
from a state that I can't find on a map
that's because I've never been to the
Northeast one state that I can't find on
a map 25 years ago is the only case of
where this happened since then there
have been millions of police officers
hired and people not hired by police
departments since then this has never
happened since uh read the article Susan
all right so free talk says when you
give somebody without a college
education a badge this is the results
um uh well Kim Potter had a college
degree so um yeah I know what to tell
you there uh let's see officer blue gun
says because college degrees make people
intelligent and proficient yeah so I
haven't seen any research or anything
that says people with college degrees um
don't have taser confusion Steve says
I'm at a high officer uh he helped me in
the oil fields because uh it was not
okay all right uh let's see
um any other comments on this uh no
other comments on that case but um sorry
I get a little bit worked up about the
IQ thing it's because now we're not
going to hear from Susan for the rest of
our lives but um uh if you haven't
followed me on sub stack please go ahead
I make uh I make I write articles about
these issues and debunk this
um all the time uh okay so the last case
that I'm going to talk about is a case
that happened in Cleveland Texas
um um kind of in the kind of On the
Border
um this happened in Cleveland Texas a
tragic case uh Cleveland Texas earlier
this week there were five people who
were killed here's what happened so um
this is about 11 o'clock at night um
there's a Honduran family that's how
they were described in the media a
Honduran family was trying to put down a
newborn to sleep at 11 o'clock at night
well again again and tent goes a long
way with me that seems like a reasonable
thing for a family to do to put down a
newborn at 11 o'clock at night but they
have a neighbor Francisco or a pace as a
38 year old man and for whatever reason
he was outside firing his gun at 11
o'clock at night that made it difficult
for the newborn to fall asleep so the
family did what any normal family might
do they walk over to the neighbor's
house they didn't call the police they
didn't weren't Karen's or anything like
that they walk over to the neighbor's
house and they say hey we're trying to
put a newborn down it's 11 o'clock at
night can you stop shooting your gun
that's again very reasonable that's a
good intent that goes a long way with me
um well he didn't like that Francisco
orpesa decided that he's going to be an
absolute piece of and what he did
is he took his rifle he walked over to
the neighbor's house he went in and he
started shooting he killed five people
including an eight-year-old some of the
people who were killed were literally
protecting the infant who were in there
um of course after after the shooting he
was an absolute coward he ran from the
scene and there was a huge Manhunt um I
got to give props to the the law
enforcement in Texas local police County
Police State Police in coordination with
the feds um they did a huge Manhunt they
actually did get him into custody I
think within 24 hours
um his wife he was still in the area um
he was still in the area he hadn't
gotten far there's a wooded area nearby
his uh his wife or his like long-term
partner and also a friend they have also
been arrested in connection with this so
we don't know exactly what their charges
are but I think we can all assume it's
like hard bring him or something some
are lying to police lying to the feds
something like that now what's important
to note in this case besides it being a
tragedy is that this was absolutely 100
preventable the reason this was
preventable is because Mr oral PESA had
been deported four different times from
the United States four different times
he was deported and he came back he
never should have been in the country in
the first place now what the police
police one that he was apprehended what
they were saying is that he was trying
to go back to Mexico so he was trying to
find a plan in order to flee the country
to avoid these charges yeah the only
time he wants to go back to
Mexico is after he kills five people
um so glad that he was apprehended glad
that he was arrested by police officers
like I said it was a it was a great
effort by not just local police officers
but state county and the FEDS to get
this guy into custody
um so yeah so he's a 38 year old he will
be charged with the five murders
completely unreasonable I mean what kind
of person because a neighbor asks them
to stop shooting their gun walks over to
the neighbor house into the house and
kills five people including an
eight-year-old that level of evil I I
can't even I can't even begin to speak
about it that was a horrible tragedy
that happened this weekend again he
never should have been in the country
he's been deported four times so I know
we can talk about you know immigration
stuff like that but I think most people
are on the same page or we should all be
on the same side of this is that this
kind of stuff shouldn't be able to
happen we should have a safe and secure
border and normal regular families who
are just trying to put an infant to
sleep should not have to deal with this
kind of stuff
um so that's going to be a little you
know we'll take a couple more comments
before we take off for the day let's see
uh Steve said no Steve right already got
that comment up uh let's see I think for
therefore I am uh where do we send stuff
for you to review uh found several
incidents of police turning off body
worn cameras for question on purpose I
would like to send it in an email if
possible oh yeah okay yeah cool um I
think we will put our email in the chat
yeah put our email in the chat or um
again what you can always do is you you
could always just put videos in there so
what I do throughout the week even after
the show is I do check comments
throughout the week and I answer
questions and I go back and forth with
people and have nice conversations so um
yeah so what um uh yeah so that's so
that's what we do
um but we did just put our email in the
chat if you want to go ahead and email
it I'll take a look at it and again so
here here's my point it's just just so
I'm clear just because I want to be
clear on this I'm not saying that police
officers are perfect I'm not saying
police officers don't do this what I'm
saying is that if police officers do it
and it's a violation of policy they
should face whatever charges or internal
charger for the policy violation if they
do it it's a conspiracy and a conspiracy
that's against the law those police
officers should be arrested and
prosecuted so that's my point on it what
I was saying is that is that um you know
I was explaining to ever asked the
question specifically about how body
cameras work and that typically what you
don't see is a police officer who's in
the middle of a fight with someone and
specifically mute their camera or or
turn off their camera that typically
isn't something that happens
um again could it happen yes but that's
not the normal thing I watch body camera
we have a body camera channel right I
watch body camera video all of him that
typically isn't what happened but if it
does and it's wrong you know what's
going to happen but I'm gonna agree with
you hey this is wrong and we're all
going to denounce it together all right
less comment is uh officer blue gun if
someone could actually say something
against uh police and a chat backed up
by facts logic I'll be amazed that's so
funny uh truth says uh no they mute when
they talk to partner in a car truth yeah
exactly that's exactly it when they're
talking about uh uh what's your body cam
Channel thank you for asking our body
cam channel is cops and cons TV so what
we do is we put a body cam video really
the this raw interesting just awesome
body cam video from all around the
country and we upload we we it pro those
and we we upload those
um for you every single week and then
once a week I do a live show and we talk
about um really interesting uh uh uh uh
really really interesting uh uh issues
in policing
um but uh yeah this is our Channel we do
we do we do excellent uh fake cops uh
politicians being arrested
um other fine human beings being
arrested by police officers for the most
interesting body cam video that we can
find we put on this channel and I do the
show once a week so um that's going to
be it for this week I really want to
thank everyone for coming in the
participation again I really enjoy it
when people have different opinions
other than me because I think that's
where we disagree that's where the
discussions have to happen where we stop
having conversations of things that we
agree with or things that we disagree on
I think that's where communication and
Society break down so um I really want
to appreciate everyone from coming in
thank you so much have a safe weekend
and we will see you all very soon