Edit Transcript

Language

Format

Source

Auto-generated

Yes

Confidence

Content

good afternoon this is Daniel here with
Copwatch TV just want to welcome
everyone into our weekly live show and
we're going to break down some of the
most important interesting cases that
happened in policing this week and we
have a couple that are really
interesting and then we also have a
legal update here at the end just want
to say uh welcome everybody and and
really curious to see where everybody is
watching from looks like we got Sergeant
George who wishes everyone a Happy
Thanksgiving from California thank you
Sergeant George Happy Thanksgiving as
well we got Chris from Pennsylvania
Shane Morton from Illinois hey Shane
what part of Illinois you from I'm from
the Chicagoland area Pam Wallace from
New Hampshire and we've got someone u4a
from Ohio uh let's see we're gonna start
with a question here let's see uh
Richard Martin says if someone is on
bail for a DUI doesn't uh that mean
their license is suspended Richard
that's a good question so that's going
to be state byst state um so a lot of
times what happens is when someone gets
arrested for drunk driving while that's
going on or even after that's going on
your license is suspended or revoked
unless you get an interlock device so
that's one of the things that gets
installed inside your vehicle you have
to blow into so because a lot of times
you know courts and states and you know
prosecutors you know they they want they
don't want people to not be able to work
and not be able to drive they want
people to drive sober so typically
that's what happens is you have workout
some kind of an agreement where you have
a work out some kind of agreement where
you have an interlock device and then
your license is only suspended if you're
caught driving without that interlock
device it's not the same for every
single state but certainly the state
that I'm in that is how they get around
that idea great well we already started
out with a question that's pretty much
one of the things we like to do so as
I'm going through some of these cases if
you have a question about what I'm
talking about in a current case or or
other case or you have uh any questions
at all about you know policing and law
definitely put it in the chat because
one of the things that we like to do
while we're while we're going through
this is to one of the things that we
like to do while we are going through
this is uh really interact uh really
interact with our um uh audience as well
so if you haven't already please go
ahead and subscribe to the channel and
make sure you share it with friends and
family because not only do we want you
to see the awesome and raw body camera
footage that we get from around the
country and we post every single week
but we want as many people as possible
to get in here for our live shows just
so the interaction is is uh uh uh
something that's interesting for
everyone uh hey how's it going someone
from Jackson Florida and Sergeant George
says drive over or get pulled over and
again my name is Daniel if you want to
go ahead and follow me you can go ahead
and do so over at police law news pretty
much everywhere all right so we're going
to get into this very first case and
here's kind of the road map of what
we're going to do we have two really
controversial and and almost most
importantly interesting cases that we're
going to go ahead and cover first um
then we're going to get into a legal
update uh from the Derek shovin case
because there's always legal updates
with the Derek shovin case and then I'm
going to at the I'm going to end it with
a case that we covered a couple weeks
ago it was the the deputies who were
ambushed and almost killed in Florida um
I was actually on a podcast last night
called failure to stop and um we
discussed that case in detail and there
were some updates on that case and one
of the individuals Drew Breezy who I was
on the show with he actually just
retired a couple years ago from the
Hillsboro County Sheriff's Department he
had some inside information about that
so we'll go ahead and talk about that
here in a few one more question before
we get started Justin says what's your
opinion on Sovereign citizens and their
wild claims about not needing a license
to drive love the channel thank you so
much Justin my opinions is that they are
absolutely insane um their opinions are
insane or their opinions are wrong now
it's not illegal to have wrong and bad
opinions all kinds of people have wrong
and bad opinions that's fine but um
anytime they challenge something in
court it they're pretty much laughed out
of court by every single judge so um
their opinions are what they are but
it's not reality don't know where
they're getting this stuff from um I've
covered it a couple different times
where I've kind of gone into detail of
what they think um but no you absolutely
need a license to drive state laws work
um and uh as a as a police officer when
you deal with someone like this you know
how it's going to end it typically ends
with the police officer um having to
bash in the front driver side window and
extract the person from the car um
anyway so that that's my opinion on that
um that they're just legally they have
no standing uh in any in any
uh legal basis at all um yeah and uh uh
usually with these Sovereign citizens
usually see videos where uh cell phones
get you know flung out of their hands as
they're live streaming being extracted
from Vehicles okay so the first case I'm
going to talk about and those of you who
watch this channel on a regular basis
you know that this is the exact kind of
case that not that I like but that I
just find so interesting because what's
interesting to me about this topic of
police and law enforcement and and how
it all kind of interacts together when
it comes to social issues and legal
issues and you know what is when there's
a case and we have a little bit of
evidence and we're not really sure and
thinking about okay how do we go what
really happened in this case what are
some of the questions we need to ask
those are the kinds of cases that I find
really interesting and that's exactly
what happened in Charlotte North
Carolina a couple days ago so how this
started was there was a short cell phone
video that was shared on Facebook and
Instagram uh Ben Crump ended up picking
it up and basically it went viral after
that and it basically shows police
officers with a Charlotte mecklinburg
police officers arresting a woman on a
on a cell phone video um so the video
was recorded by a witness and you
obviously and con conveniently it
doesn't show what led up to the use of
force by police officers now in defense
of the woman taking or the man taking
the cell phone video you know if you see
police officers just talking to someone
you're not necessarily going to take out
your cell phone however if you see
police officers in the use of force it's
at that point that um
you might start recording so the idea
that the the the beginning of it the
idea that the beginning of it isn't
recorded not necessarily nefarious
because again you may have no idea that
something is going to happen however
when that does happen I think it's just
important for everyone to know okay we
see police officers in a use of force
pretending that that is alone on on an
island somewhere that police officers
just pluck that person for absolutely no
reason and started to use Force well
that's that's a pretty unreasonable
thing so I'm not saying the use of force
for is Justified or not justified based
on the video I'm saying we have to ask a
whole lot of questions and if you're
coming to an opinion and a conclusion
that no matter what happens you already
know well you know that's that's that's
not really honest and it's difficult to
have a conversation so here's what the
video shows the video shows three or
four police officers trying to get a
woman's hands behind her back in the
controversial part it shows one police
officer start punching the woman um he
punches her multiple times and you know
that's basically where the video stops
and that's where it stops and that and
that's where it starts with police
officers trying to get a woman's hand
behind her back and one officer punching
the woman several times you know this
has been described as brutal this has
been described as you know disturbing
video and and listen if you know nothing
about police work and you find a video
like this disturbing that honestly might
be a reasonable initial reaction to
seeing something like this however in
that same vein if you have zero police
experience or education it's always a
good idea to ask questions instead of
just reflexively flying into a rage and
posting something on Twitter so what
here's what it looks like we see in this
video is that a police officer is
administering or or the the the punching
part is basically administering what
police officers call distraction strikes
or distraction techniques now let me
explain a little bit about this and this
is something that police officers are
trained to do and this this I've said
multiple times police officers are
actually really good at following rules
if you tell police officers what to do
write have them write a policy train
them on a policy train them how to do
something that most of the time they're
going to go ahead and do it so so but
when it comes to these distraction
techniques police officers are actually
trained and told to do this in certain
situations and the certain situations
are basically these strikes are
basically used in situations when
individuals are actively resisting
arrest now officers are trained to aim
for large muscle groups and to avoid
areas like the head the neck the throat
the groin and to only strike target
areas which is like large muscle groups
which would be like the legs and the
arms um this use of force these
distraction techniques police officers
are supposed to stop administering these
or stop using these as soon as the
individual is in handcuffs or under
control or is no longer a threat and but
the thing about this is is as you can
imagine from this video and just from my
description of what this is it's never
going to look pretty okay it's never
going to look pretty it's never going to
look perfectly because it's a police
officer literally punching or hitting
someone it's never going to look pretty
so if the if the if we're judging this
based on what looks good what looks good
to our aesthetic eye again that isn't
the way that this type of use of force
should be investigated because the
intent behind using this level of force
is essential essentially temporary pain
compliance because police officers want
wanted to administer and distract an
individual with temporary pain
compliance temporary meaning they're not
going to suffer long-term injuries
they're not going to have a broken arm
or or you know any any long-term
injuries temporary pain compliance in
order to briefly distract the individual
so that other officers can get the
person into handcuffs and listen the
logic behind this is hey if someone's
fighting with police officers the
quicker that we can the quicker that we
can get them into handcuffs the more
chance or the less chance that there's
going to be a higher level of force
utilized later um and to me that seems
that seems pretty reasonable right
because if you have someone who's
resisting arrest and listen my goal with
all this is what I want is less violence
between police officers and citizens so
if someone is resisting arrest from a
police officer it's my personal opinion
and it's also policy in most police
departments to use distraction strikes
on someone yes it's going to hurt them
and it's going to be painful for maybe 3
to 5 Seconds but during that 3 to 5
Seconds other officers can get the
person into handcuffs and it's over it's
done no more force is used and most
importantly the individual and the
officers are not injured or killed
because that's basically the goal that's
one of the reasons why I like tasers
listen a taser is Unc I've been tased
I've been tased twice because that's in
the police department that that I was
with you get tased twice during the
police academy being tased is
uncomfortable for about 5 Seconds
however after that it's over so yes I
don't want people hey Adam goson how's
it going I don't want I don't want Adam
I don't want um I don't want um I don't
want um anyone to think that I want all
kinds of people to be tased but again if
this is if if a taser is what is needed
to be utilized that is a thing and I
should say Adam goson did mention that a
lot of agencies are not teaching
distraction strikes anymore however in
this Police Department that we're
talking about Charlotte they still are
teaching distraction techniques and the
reason why I know that is because the
chief of police of Charlotte um Chief
Johnny Jennings he actually held a press
conference and explained that um but
before I get to what police chief Johnny
Jennings had to say is that you know
basically Ben Crump he posted this short
video and demanded Justice he didn't say
Hey listen we need to figure out what
happened there could be an issue here
this doesn't look good we have a meeting
with with the police chief so again
everything he says that that Ben Crump
says in this is is is basically you know
to in order to get out and and early get
out and and to um essentially set the
narrative early and order to distort any
truth that might be unfavorable to him
later uh let's see James no says that
temporary pain compliance technique is
interesting and I've never heard of it
before yeah so um yeah so it's uh uh you
know it's actually been it's actually
been utilized a lot a lot of police
departments aren't teaching it anymore a
lot of police departments aren't
teaching it anymore but some police
departments still do and again if you ju
if you just look at the the the the
theory behind it using temporary pain
compliance in order to distract someone
to get them into handcuffs quickly so
that you don't have to utilize more
Force later so like the idea behind that
is good right so the idea the end goal
is to get someone into handcuffs quickly
now is is distraction techniques
distraction strikes is that always the
best way to achieve that goal no is it
is it sometimes the best way to to
achieve that goal well yes yes it is and
you know I think it depends upon you
know a a caseby case basis and different
police departments are going to teach
different things cjun Randy yeah um uh
you gave false info on the Elijah mlan
case don't think I did uh Randy but go
ahead and put it in there uh and I'll
let you know oh we got Flynn uh sent us
a coin uh with a star um I'm not sure
what that is but awesome Flynn thank you
thank you so much uh let's see um uh
let's see uh oh he gave us a uh let's
see so Flynn gave us A110 cents Euro
donation thank you so much appreciate
that uh let's see Sergeant George says
accountability say uh officer blue gun
says people have been programmed by
movies to think that the the use of
force can we go back to Blue gun's
comment sorry uh let's see officer blue
gun says the people have been programmed
by movies to think that the use of force
is pretty use of force almost always
looks bad it absolutely does that is
100% correct so so um basically the Chie
police chief Johnny Jennings he he did
the right thing on this he he went out
almost as soon as the video became
public he did a press conference and he
he gave his opinion on the case and he
said a couple different things and this
is what police Chiefs police leaders
sheriffs the the law enforcement leaders
this is what a good law enforcement
leader does they don't hide they get out
and they honestly answer questions they
say hey if the police officer did
something wrong we're going to hold them
accountable but also if the police
officer did not do anything wrong and
their actions were within the law and
within policy we're going to go ahead
and say dead too so here are some of the
things that Chief Johnny Jennings said
in in a press conference which with
again I think it's important for a
police leaders to get out there and to
be honest not to make political
statements but to be honest so he said
that he completely understood that the
video didn't look good and that's what I
said too I agree it doesn't look good
but it's use of force like officer blue
gun said it's not supposed promise you
there's almost no use of force that
looks good because it's one person using
Force against another person in order to
try to gain compliance it's never going
to look pretty but here are a couple of
the so police chief Johnny Jennings he
he added some context into this video
from what we know so far here's what he
said he said that the woman was under
arrest he said that there was a man who
was with her and that he was actually
armed with a gun so it's unknown if at
the time if they knew exactly where the
gun was or if they thought the female
had the gun but someone at least in this
group of individuals that the police
officers were contacting and were under
arrest did have a firearm on them so
let's think about this so the idea that
you know they're trying to get her hands
behind her back and so they're trying to
get her hands behind her back and as
they're doing that she's not letting
them do that maybe they think she's
reaching for something in her waistband
again again I don't want police officers
to utilize excessive force but the idea
that a woman is going to be have a
couple different strikes and the strikes
run her thighs her her legs which is
which is one of the target areas that
police officers in some places are
trained to do but it's you know so yes
she's going to be uncomfortable for for
3 to 5 seconds but we're going to get
her hands behind her back there's no
chance at all she can get a gun if she
has one therefore there's going to be no
use of force that way there's going to
be no use of force that's any greater
than that like again that that's a win
getting someone into custody where they
don't sustain yes obviously had like no
Force but I'd rather have this small
level of force than a higher level of
force later and or have anyone uh
individuals or police officers um
sustain any major injuries so again so
she was under arrest there was a man who
was with her was armed with a gun um the
the the woman the chief Jennings said
that you know what wasn't shown on the
video is that the woman during the
arrest it was a lawful arrest is what
the chief said is that the woman
actually punched a police officer in the
face during the arrest and that's what
precipitated this fight this use of
force is she punched a police officer in
the face um the woman then resisted
arrest the woman then resisted arrest um
while she was while she was on the
ground um and the officer did punch and
utilize a distraction strike to the
woman's thighs which is a designated
Target area uh yes it's also possible um
yes Cajun Randy says that she was also
punched in the face which I I think is
what happened so um basically some of
the information that we have is is when
was when they were standing up and
trying to arrest her that she punched
the officer in the face and the officer
responded by punching her back in the
face which is likely we'll have to see
the body camera video but you know that
doesn't seem that doesn't seem
unreasonable now if a police officer
punches someone in the face first for no
reason I've got a problem with that cjun
Randy has a problem with that we all
have a problem with that but if you
punch a police officer in the face you
know they're they're going to use at
least that level of force in order to
take you down to the ground um then once
on the ground it seemed like the force
that was utilized was reasonable if they
were trying to get her hands behind her
back and all they did is um and and all
they did is um is uh uh all they did is
you know punch her in the thighs a
couple times but I mean if you
around with a police officer and punch
him in the face like the idea that
they're not going to respond at least in
kind like isn't isn't reasonable um okay
so um so um Chief Jennings also said
that he was working to have the body
camera footage released quickly and
asked that the public wait until the
investigation is complete to make a
final judgment that's a completely
reasonable thing to say so Chief Johnny
Jennings he's not saying this is 100%
Justified this is the officers did
everything perfect that's not what the
chief said the chief said hey we're
doing an investigation and then you know
we're waiting we want everyone to wait
for the investigation to make a final
determination whether or not something
is whether or not something is Justified
or not it just it's it's just funny that
we have people especially even some
people in these comments so I know it
goes out to the broader public that you
know people are saying like well you
know you know everybody is everybody is
uh everybody is um uh you know guilty
until proved inocent unless it's a
police officer if it's a police officer
in a case where you have very little
context then we're going to
automatically assume the worst
intentions possible and again that just
isn't very honest so the idea that we're
going to wait to see whether or not this
was justified yeah I mean absolutely of
course we should we should do that also
when it comes to the body camera footage
we have a lot of people who have a
misconception about body camera footage
they always say that well the cops
aren't in control of the body camera
footage listen there's a clear
difference between police who are on the
street and the politicians who run the
police department just um here's a
rhetorical question who do you think is
in control of the body camera footage
from a large Police Department like
Charlotte you think it's the cops on the
street or is it the politicians who run
the police department we know the answer
to that so the politicians who run the
police departments they are the ones who
are in control of the body camera video
now I'm again we run a body camera
channel here we love body cameras we
think all police officers should wear
body cameras and record every citizen
contact while they're having contact
with law enforcement while on a call for
service now I'm a big advocate of that I
said that a thousand times look at the
channel that we have here we love
interesting body camera video and we
think that transparency in law
enforcement is unbelievably important
that's why we have this channel so the
chief says he wants a released the body
camera video and and I think this gets
this puts a little bit of a window into
what police Chiefs face so you might
think well he's the chief of police why
can't he just release the body camera
video because listen if you think a
police chief runs every single part of a
police department or can do whatever
they want that absolutely is not correct
now a sheriff can because a sheriff is
an elected official who runs who runs an
agency it's very possible that a sheriff
can but there are record uh record uh
custodians who work work with the police
department who even if the chief makes
the decision and has that ability and
the mayor and the city council and
everybody gives approval to go ahead and
put those body camera videos out there
are also different types of state laws
where things have to be redacted in
those videos maybe it maybe it's a
victim maybe dur on the body camera
video an officer said give some personal
information about a birth date or a
social security number or the identity
of a victim or a witness those kinds of
things have to be redacted um you know
under state law or if there's
confidential information confidential
source undercover officers so again so
it's not just like okay release the body
camera video you guys get it today that
that's not how it works and again police
officers not only is it common sense to
do some of this stuff but there's also
state law that police departments and
government agencies have to follow when
they release this body camera footage
but the fact that the Chiefs said that
they're working on it so to me that
that's a good thing we want police
Chiefs who want to be transparent I
don't want a police chief who just like
a reflex automatically 100% supports
police officers no matter what what they
do I also don't want a police chief who
no matter what the officers do whether
it's good or bad they always they always
blame the police officer and say the
officer did did the wrong thing but what
they but what what what we want is
honest police Chiefs who are saying
we're going to do a thorough
investigation we're going to wait for
that investigation to be finished but in
the meantime we're going to get you guys
the public the body camera footage as
soon as possible that's what I want as
as a citizen of this country and someone
who lives 1500 miles away from North in
that's all I want I want accountability
and I want the body camera footage and I
want I want everybody to just wait until
the investigation is done just talk
about the case obviously because we're
talking about the case but you know wait
until we're who we're going to blame and
and and especially before there's like a
protest or a riot obviously we want to
see exactly what happened and you know
so so that's what the police chief is
doing he's basically saying we're going
to do an investigation everybody hey
let's wait until this investigation is
finished I'm going to get you guys the
body camera footage I'm going to get you
guys the body body camera footage um as
soon as possible on the other hand Ben
Crump is encouraging people to jump to
conclusions and automatically just
assign the worst possible intentions to
police officers and that's the
difference right there that's the
difference between a leader and a
grifter uh I mean Ben Crump you know he
put out this short video um without
context and a cryptic message demanding
Justice um I mean that's that's just an
important part of Ben crump's scripted
grift and it goes something like this
lie Riot extort in that order um police
chief Jennings he appears to be prepared
with this early press conference and
with his honest public statements
hopefully Ben Crump has met his match
now we have someone who said bootlicker
in the comments everybody knows my
feelings about people who say
bootlickers if you're an adult and if
you say boot licker during a discussion
that means that you've applied for at
least 15 police departments and been
rejected from those police departments
so uh so rights Camera Action I I'm just
a question so were you too fat or too
dumb to be a cop please put it in the
comments and we'll see what everybody
else thinks too fat or too dumb um let's
see if anybody else has any comments on
this on this case uh let's
see officer blue gun uh let's see
account Sergeant George says
accountability goes both ways that's
absolutely correct and uh Shakil oatmeal
hey great to see you right Camera Action
not trying to kick you out just again
like we don't kick out people um
like to have honest discussions and if
you don't want to have honest
discussions that's fine I'll just ignore
you but again like if you think kind of
like what I said at the beginning maybe
you missed it right the camera action if
you disagree with what I'm saying that's
fine reasonable educated people can
absolutely agree we love the First
Amendment and we try to practice that
here so you know know again if you have
if you have something different to say
if you have a different opinion that's
why we have comments that's why I
respond to those comments bring the
debate we love the debate I love the
discussion listen again I have a
master's degree in criminal justice I
have a law degree as a cop for almost
almost two decades I I I went through
all I I do this Social Media stuff and I
do this channel because I like to have
the discussion I like to have the debate
I I think it's interesting that's why
I'm that's why I'm trying to do it uh
let's see Ziggy says two people had
objects in their hands one crossed the
okay uh yeah so again rights Camera
Action yeah if you have a comment put it
in there again if you're going to just
say ridiculous things that show that you
are incapable of complex thought about
these issues um you're just not an
interesting person to me to be to be
completely honest all right so that's
that case and listen this is one that
we're going to be following because we
are going to get that body camera
footage out and as soon as that body
camera footage does come out we're going
to go ahead and we're going to look at
it we're going to analyze it and then
we're going to go ahead and see what to
say uh Steve Steve lader says police lie
and extort people every day but somehow
that's okay again Steve like I say every
week give me an example um G give me an
example and um if uh police are um
extorting people and and lying and
committing crimes I'll go ahead and um
condemn that with you and you know that
I will all right so the next case that I
want to talk about is this Secret
Service case and this is a really
strange case um and you know what I like
to do is I kind of come up with
different standards because you know I
in in my opinion maybe maybe you think
I'm crazy for this I think that the
standards for police officers should be
pretty similar almost wherever you are
because again like I said before police
officers are pretty good at following
rules now cjun Randy and Steve lanard
you may not always like the rules and I
may agree with you that the people who
write the L the man the the the people
who make the rules and who write the
laws maybe those are aren't great um but
police officers are pretty good at
following the rules you give them a set
of policies you give them training most
of the time they're going to follow that
so so um yeah autistic she says Secret
Service case yeah this one this one is
this one is pretty interesting so um so
this was a secret service agent was on a
protection detail for Naomi Biden so um
well I'm going to get to it all autistic
shell um so on Naomi Biden so Naomi
Biden is Hunter Biden's 29-year-old
daughter um and the the secret service
agent who was you know in charge of
protecting this is also obviously you
know Joe Biden's granddaughter so this
is Joe Biden's granddaughter so um this
happened in the Georgetown area in
Washington DC and that secret service
agent was involved in an officer
involved shooting so here's what
happened so the agent while he was on
this detail protecting Naomi Biden um
the government vehicle so the Secret
Service car was parked outside of her
apartment or or her house there in the
Georgetown area the agent reported that
he observed three different individuals
trying to break into a government
vehicle the agent then fired a single
shot at the offenders um the offenders
fled the scene no one was struck by by
any gunfire now to me this seems like
this should be a pretty big case pretty
big story pretty big case we have people
in the comments who already saying that
they hadn't heard of this yet I mean to
me this should be a national story you
have someone a law enforcement agent who
is guarding and doing a protection
detail for the president's granddaughter
Fires at three people who were
essentially committing a property crime
now typically police officers and you
know maybe even some of the people who I
don't agree with um in this in in this
in this chat maybe you'll agree with me
on this that typically police officers
can only utilize deadly force to protect
life from an imminent deadly threat so
so they can protect themselves or other
people if there is something
lifethreatening happening now three
breaking into cars it's
frustrating but it's not
life-threatening so I I and let me be
clear though I I I don't want anyone to
think that I'm I'm going off track here
let me be clear I have zero sympathy for
thieves okay zero sympathy for thieves
um but the frustration is is what
happens if this were a city cop just
like a regular city cop anywhere else um
those police officers would un
undoubtedly be fired and prosecuted
black lives matter would be protesting
and rioting and the predictable Cadre of
race hustling lawyers would be
descending and swarming on whatever City
that happened to be but since it was a
federal agent that was protecting a
member of the political Elite this case
is soon going to be forgotten and a lot
of you didn't even know this happened um
so I basically dubbed this the secret
service standard where where essentially
police officers are allowed to shoot
criminals because they might break into
a car that has weapons in it and you
know I'm going to I'm going to say that
I'm going to say that
um so a Secret Service agents don't have
body cameras um so freedom of of
information requests are are are going
to go pretty much years before any of
them uh before you get anything um yeah
sha kill you haven't heard this um yes
so the Secret Service agents don't don't
have uh body cameras um you know so I'm
going to I'm going to I'm going to try
to steal man this case from the other
side right so so you know i' I've talked
about this this case a bunch this week I
did I did several videos on it and you
know what the other side says I'm going
steal man myself a little bit try to
keep myself honest so definitely if you
have any comments about this please go
ahead and put this in there you know
what the other side of this is the other
side is people saying this is a totally
legitimate lawful shooting I'm I'm crazy
for even questioning it here's what they
say they they said hey Dan that's a
government vehicle a secret service
vehicle they were all all kinds of
weapons in that car so the idea that the
secret service agent did wanted to
prevent the thieves from getting access
to those guns weapons rifles shotguns
tasers who knows what yeah it's
reasonable for the secret service agent
to want to do that um okay so again I'm
I'm I'm not I'm good with it I'm good
with it if if that's the new standard
for police officers that police officers
can utilize deadly force when someone is
breaking into a car and they might get
possession of a weapon I'm good with it
I'm just asking apply that standard
broadly to all police officers because
think about this and here's the
frustrating part we have cases literally
cases now where people are pointing guns
at police officers and while they are
pointing guns at police officers police
officers utilize deadly force and in
those cases in some of those cases black
lives matter and protesters an anti-
police activists are rioting and
protesting and burning down cities so
again air lock Steven Perkins these are
cases that we've covered multiple
different times cases where police
officers use deadly force as a gun was
pointed at them and people have problems
with those cases people want those
police officers charged so if you're
going to do that to city cops but on the
federal side on the federal side because
someone because an agent was protecting
a member of the political Elite Joe
Biden's granddaughter that that's going
to be okay I'm not good with that I'm
not good with the double standard but
let me be clear about one thing the
secret service agent he's not the bad
guy in all this okay the bad guy are the
thieves the bad guy are the thieves I
have no sympathy for thieves I hope
nobody does nobody else does either the
thieves are the bad guys the secret
service agent isn't the bad guy it's all
I'm asking for is a little bit of
exactly what all listen all I'm asking
for is that standard be applied broadly
to all police officers not just that
secret service agent let me see what you
guys have to say about this um yeah so
it seems like a lot of people hadn't
heard about this case Da Vinci says it's
a double standard I think it's a double
standard um you know if you think about
this it's like the Department of Justice
goes around the country and you know
does cons puts in and monitors consent
decrees but then other federal agents
they don't even have they don't even
have um they don't even have um they
don't even have um body cameras and
officer Blu gun says Daniel you going to
contrast this case with the citizen of
New York who fired a couple of shots in
a Subway being robbed he got arrested gu
officer blue gun I actually covered this
um uh earli this week and um I was going
to get there um but you just reminded me
officer blue gun yeah so let's let's
contrast the thank so so thank you
officer blue gun um so let's go ahead
and contrast this case um to the case in
New York City you know we actually
covered the case in New York City last
week but it was before this happened so
let's just go back so there was a case
in New York City where an individual
named John wrote he was a passenger on
on a subway he observes a woman who is
being mugged essentially robbed um by a
49-year-old homeless guy um Mr Root take
goes in his backpack pulls out a gun
fires a warning shot purposely doesn't
try to hit the guy fires a war a couple
warning shots the offender fleases the
the the he's caught by police um the
victim is safe and then he is arrested
so yeah let's officer blue gun think
that that's let's contrast those two
cases okay so here we have a case where
um uh someone is John wrote fires a
warning shot to stop a violent crime in
progress and he is immediately arrested
Ed then we have a secret service agent
protecting Joe Biden's granddaughter who
uses deadly force you know maybe it was
a warning shot I don't know but either
way uses deadly force to stop a property
crime and that's supposedly okay again
that makes that makes absolutely no
sense now I get it it's a different
jurisdiction U Mr RH is not a law
enforcement officer I get it but again
the standard for a law enforcement
officer is not to fire warning shots or
utilize deadly for for to stop a
property crime that that isn't the case
at all right so yeah so that um so that
distinction is is pretty is pretty
strange and I get it's a different
jurisdiction we in Washington DC as
opposed to you know um New York City
where they love to prosecute uh
Vigilantes um or people who are you know
basically trying to make this the city
safer and people like you know Jordan
Neely and other people who are um you
know just out there menacing the city
are seen as Heroes it's it's absolutely
crazy but yeah that's a that is U that
is a a distinction that we absolutely
should talk about um uh yeah it's uh you
know so a good guy with a gun or or self
a good guy with a gun or people who
possess reasonable self-defense skills
those are seen as the criminals in some
of these places which is absolutely
insane um officer Blu gun says the
center for law enforcement and citizens
um uh uh utilizing deadly force should
not be different Chang my mind no I
agree with you officer blue gun I I
agree 100% And I think that pretty much
is the law I mean if you're I mean
typically you know people can't use
deadly force um to stop someone maybe in
different maybe maybe the law is
different maybe there's some law in
Texas or that I don't know about but
yeah I mean typically you can't use
deadly force to stop a property crime
again there could be a state out there
that I'm not aware of the laws but um
certainly in the two states that I've
lived in one here in the southwest and
then in Illinois you can't use deadly
force to stop a property crime police
officers cannot do that either um let's
see uh any other comments on this case
Sergeant George says even as a secret
service agent um an officer involves
shooting uh you don't have to worry
about uh the fear of death use deadly
force um yeah and uh you only have to
worry about uh the the fear of great bam
yeah great bam so I say deadly force
it's basically if you think someone's
life is in danger or or great bodily
harm so if you can articulate that
someone is about to suffer either death
or great bodily harm that's essentially
what that standard is thank you Sergeant
George um yeah officer blue gun says
it's different in New York absolutely um
all right uh rights Camera Action says
oh my God a knife bang bang bang that's
a comment from someone who's never been
in a fight um and never been threatened
with a knife which is a good thing
because um I don't think it would farare
too well for them so it's good that uh
people like Daniel peny and John rot are
out there to protect people like that um
so the the next so the legal update I'm
going to do is on the George Floyd case
um is on the George Floyd case and um
yeah this is this is uh with Derek
shauvin so Derek shovin has filed
another appeal and listen I'm going to
break this down pretty simply okay so
Derek chovin there are going to be a lot
of different appeals um and every time
this legal update I'm not going to talk
about it but there was just a new one
this past week and I just want to at
least kind of put it in into perspective
exactly what's going on with this case
just so you kind of have it in your mind
so think about it this way so Derek
shovin was basically uh Derek shovin was
basically um prosecuted um in two
different ways what do you mean by that
he was prosecuted on State charart
charges and also prosecuted on federal
civil rights violations essentially the
same stuff but he was prosecuted by the
state and by the Fed so Derek shovin
went to trial on the state case for the
second degree murder third degree murder
um and those charges and he was found
guilty okay he was found guilty and he
was sentenced to you know approximately
21 years in prison so after he was found
guilty in the state case he's doing 21
years in prison then they did the
federal civil rights violations charges
against him so what Dereck chovin
decided to do and from a legal
standpoint you know it's not
unreasonable he basically pled guilty to
the federal civil rights violations now
you think well if he thinks he's
innocent or not guilty why would he
plead guilty well here's why is because
doing time in federal prison is better
right it's a better standard of living
than doing time in state prison so the
deal that Derek chovin worked out he
basically said hey I'm in prison for the
next two decades anyways so if I plead
guilty to the federal charges those
charges go away right I'm not going to
get any more time and I could serve my
time in federal prison instead of in
state prison again like that's not
that's not an unreasonable legal
decision to make I'm not talking about
his actions we're talking about a legal
decision of lawyers sitting in rooms
thinking about what's the best thing for
my client okay that's not an
unreasonable legal decision so he pled
guilty in federal court so we have the
state conviction after a jury trial and
then because of that state conviction he
was he was found um he um and then
because of because of uh uh because of
the he was already found guilty he pled
guilty to the federal civil rights
violation so he's basically appealing
both but they're on different ground so
one of the appeals I think it actually
has some legs it actually may have a
chance um the other appeal I think is
kind of nonsense and the one that I
think is kind of nonsense that's the one
that was filed this week so that's what
I'm going to talk about I'm going to
recap them both real quick but here's
the new one that was that he filed this
week so basically he's appealing the the
federal sentence so this is the sentence
that he basically this is the federal
charge that he plead guilty to so you
might think well hang on how how in the
world is he going to appeal something
that he pleed guilty to like that
doesn't make any sense well here's the
ground basically here's what he is
saying and his defense team is saying is
that there is some doctor out and I
don't have the doctor's name you could
Google it D there's some doctor um out
of I think Kansas or somewhere else that
um you know B basically said that um
looking at the case fil so wasn't part
of the case wasn't present at the
autopsy you know didn't didn't do
certainly do his own independent autopsy
but this doctor looked over the case
File in the autopsy report from hennipin
County everything like that and that
doctor basically has a theory that says
you know what George Floyd he died from
a tumor and I have this there's this
disease this tumor that's what killed
George Floyd it was a tumor it wasn't
Derek schin it wasn't the knee on the
back or anything or anything like that
so Derek schin is basically filing an
appeal here's what the the basis of his
appeal is he's saying hey I didn't know
about this information so this
information this the fact that I'm not
saying it's a fact that that's what this
is what Derek Chin's legal team is
saying is that the fact that um I
believe that there's evidence now that
George Floyd died of this tumor had I
known that and then had the more
importantly had the jury known that I
never would have been found guilty and
if I wasn't found guilty in state court
I wouldn't have pled guilty to these
federal charges and that's what his
appeal is based on um now I I think it's
kind of okay I I don't think
it's going to be successful and here's
why so there are different cases out
there where sometimes new evidence comes
to light right like new just like
in big Labowski new has come to
light so that happens sometimes in cases
and people do get their cases dismissed
or overturned or new trials right most
of the time and here's what most of you
are going to be thinking about because
you should be thinking about most of the
time it's with like DNA evidence or
forensics let's say someone was
convicted of murder in the 70s or 80s or
or criminal sexual assault in the 70s or
80s when there wasn't Advanced DNA and
forensic like they are now so 10 20 30
years later now we have this new
technology and we're able to prove that
someone didn't commit the crime that
they were convicted of and so that's
typically these appeals when when
there's new evidence that you know new
has come to light it it's it's new
information that's usually what it is
now the idea that some doctor somewhere
who wasn't part of the case has a new
theory about how George Floyd died that
just isn't going to be that convincing
because guess what there's probably 5 10
50 10,000 different theories on how
George Floyd died and every time some
doctor I'm not saying anything bad about
the doctor he may be a legitimate Doctor
Who honestly believes this okay I don't
have any idea but what I'm saying is
that just because some doctor somewhere
has a new opinion on how George Floyd
died that isn't the basis for the appeal
okay now also they added in other things
so also in in Derrick Chin's appeal he
said that this doctor because think like
well why is the doctor contacting you
know three years later well what the
doctor basically said is that while this
was going on he had this Theory years
ago back in you know 2020 2021 whenever
this case went to trial that he said the
doctor says I had this Theory then and
actually contacted the prosecutor and
Derek chauvin's defense team in order to
try to get this information but I was is
ignored so now Derrick chovin is saying
that you know ineffective assistance of
council all this kind of stuff listen
that's that's nonsense um Eric Nelson is
a fantastic criminal defense attorney um
Derrik schin was lucky to have someone
like Eric Nelson representing him I was
at a conference a use of force
conference back in April um in Scottdale
Arizona where Eric Nelson basically g g
gave a presentation with did take some
questions about representing Derek
Chauvin in this case it was really
interesting so I guess what I'm going
with this is the idea that that that ER
Nelson somehow didn't do as good of a
job as he possibly could have done under
you know basically being the defense
attorney for the trial of the century
for the most hated man almost the most
hated man in the world like that's an
incredible task that Eric Nelson had to
do he did a fantastic job now with that
do you think that Eric Nelson he
probably got one to 10,000 emails every
single day from normal people from crazy
people I think he read every single one
when you're trying to represent someone
literally in defending someone literally
at the center of the trial of the
century do you think that you respond to
every single email or crazy thing that
someone might send you no of course not
so just because this doctor emailed Eric
Nelson three years ago with this Theory
and and Eric Nelson didn't didn't you
know use that as part of the defense no
of course not that is not going to be
grounds for ineffective uh ineffective
Council to get to get um a retrial so I
guess something thing is that appeal I
don't think is going to go anywhere I
get his legal team trying always try
right um but my legal opinion is that
that's not going to be successful now
the other appeal the appeal on the state
case on the state level where he went to
jury trial and found guilty I think that
one does have some legs so um Derek
chovin has appealed this to the Supreme
Court and let me just let me just just
talk about that a little bit and I think
that there's a real possibility that it
could be successful if it's heard here's
what I mean by that what they are
basically saying is that Derrik schin
didn't get a fair trial and I know
you're going to send comments well well
um um um George Floyd didn't get a fair
trial that's fine not that interesting
because that's not the standard right
the legal standard isn't if you kill
someone well because you were unfair to
them that you don't get a fair trial and
your constitutional rights are waved
okay so before you put those comments in
um again like we know that isn't what
the legal standard is so those are just
silly trolling comments right um and
people say that kind of stuff all the
time so it's it's whether or not Derek
schin did something bad or committed a
crime is a completely separate issue
than whether or not he got a fair trial
we all every American gets a fair trial
under the Sixth Amendment that is
incredibly important whether it's
someone who kills a police officer or a
police officer who kills George Floyd it
doesn't matter we all have the same
constitutional rights I hope we can at
least get on the same page at least with
that theory now whether or not dererk
shovin got a fair trial that's that's a
different story so here's what Derek
schin his legal team is saying he's
saying that it wasn't a fair trial and
here's the reasons why so it's the main
reason is because the case wasn't moved
out of hennipin County so again this is
literally the trial of the century um
there were protests and there were riots
a police station was literally burned
down in Minneapolis um there was half a
billion dollars of damage that riers
caused
and the fact that this case was held in
hennipin county is his defense team is
basically saying he couldn't get a fair
trial and the reason is because the
jurors had something else on their mind
other than the facts of the case and
that is had they found Derek chovin not
guilty that the community would have
been destroyed there would have been
riots there would have been there would
have been riots there would have been um
destruction maybe your kid's school
maybe your house maybe you had Maxine
Waters you know a congress person from
California came into Minneapolis and
said on the news if you do not find if
the jury does not find Derek shovin
guilty we are staying in these streets
you had President Biden also saying
something similar that he wanted Derrik
shovin to be convicted did um so again
so the idea that there were going to be
if they if the juror if the jurors found
Derek chovin not guilty their Community
their homes their maybe their personal
lives could literally be destroyed and
burned down um in in interviews with um
like the interviews that that in the
questioner that they fill out before
people are selected as jurors um every
single juror who was on the case said
that they were worried about more riots
um one of the jurors who said that um
you know he had no he wasn't no
interaction with police nothing negative
otherwise again he wouldn't have been on
the jury um so he basically lied dur
during juring questioning this
particular juror we know this because
right after right after the jur the the
verdict came out he went on multiple
different podcasts and he said that um
that he was an activist that he had
attended black lives matter protest and
he lied about that on the on the jury
question here that he wanted to be on
the jury that he tried to get on the
jury um he said that he actually did
have negative interaction with police
officers and one of those he complained
about a police officer pointing a gun in
his face again had had these things been
disclosed had he been honest like he was
supposed to be he never would have been
selected as a juror um also the jurors
weren't sequestered meaning typically
what that means that the jurors are
basically held at a hotel they're not
able to look at social media or the news
so so they're not getting any outside
influence a lot of times that does
happen in very controversial cases well
again this was if if if that's going to
happen in controversial cases this is
literally the most controversial case so
those are the grounds for appeal like do
I think some of those are legitimate
yeah I do now now again now saying he
didn't get a fair trial is different
than if he's if he's guilty or not um
you know if he does get a new trial and
this trial is held somewhere else could
he still be convicted based on the facts
yeah I mean maybe probably I don't I
don't know my guess he'd be convicted of
something right um but so I I think that
one does have a chance so I I mean so so
you're saying there's a chance well yeah
kind of but the issue with that so the
issue with that is that he appealed this
case to the Supreme Court um well the
Supreme Court um again they get about
7,000 cases a year where people filing
appeals saying hey Supreme Court look at
my case about 7,000 a year and they
choose to hear about a 100 so Derek
Chin's case is one case out of 7,000
they're going to hear about a hundred a
year so the chances that Derek chauvin's
case actually gets in front of the
Supreme Court it's slim now if it does
go to the Supreme Court I'm not saying
he's definitely gonna win but I'm I'm
saying I'm saying that there's a chance
there's a chance because again I I think
no matter what Derrick Chauvin did
everybody deserves a fair trial cjun
Randy says isn't that the same appeal
that's been turned down twice already um
yeah cjun Randy uh once before yeah so
um uh cjun Randy really good question
yeah so he took he tried to appeal so
it's you you're you're convicted in
State Court then your next um remedy is
the court of appeals um the court of
appeals rejected this appeal now he went
to the Supreme Court and you know and
the Minnesota Supreme Court um declined
to hear the case that's why they
appealed to the uh Federal um to the
federal uh Supreme Court um yeah so
that's that's where that case is going
we'll see we'll keep everybody we'll
keep everybody up to dat um but again
there was that new appeal that was filed
this week just want to let you know what
that was that it was with the federal
case and honestly I don't think it has a
chance um okay so the last case I'm
going to talk about um uh before we go
is this case in Hillsboro County Florida
um so again like I like I said I was on
the failure to stop podcast last night
and we we kind of did a deep dive into
this case one of the individuals I was
on the show with his name is Drew Breezy
um he is a retired lieutenant from the
Hillsboro County Sheriff's Department he
retired approximately two years ago or
so so he knows the sheriff real well he
knows the he knows some of the officers
who were involved in this case so we
kind of did a deep dive on that and and
here's what I want to say on this this
is the case where the officers were um
uh at someone's house because their mom
called for a mental health evaluation
essentially the 28-year-old son was in
the middle of a mental health crisis um
Mom called because they wanted to get
him some help so police officers get
there on scene in Hillsboro County
Florida um they contact the individual
he's in the driver's seat of the car
they contact him with the intent to
basically get him out of the car and to
get him some help take him to the
hospital he wasn't under arrest he
hadn't committed a crime um this
individual this 28-year-old he did not
cooperate he drove away from the scene
police officers did not chase him that
was the correct move again they're
trying to get him help he was not under
arrest um so the police officers not
getting involved in a vehicle chase that
was absolutely the 100% correct move for
the police officers they go back and
they talk to the mom as they're talking
to the mom um they give her some
resources and they say Hey you know um
here are here are some here are some uh
here are some cases here are some here's
some some information you know here's
the here's information for the crisis
and intervention team which the momm
already had contact in they were
wrapping up the call one of them
actually went on the radio over the air
and um said they were going to be in
route to a different call all three
police officers um were near the backs
of their of of one of the vehicles as at
that point they heard screeching tires
and around the block before they knew it
um this 28-year-old guy this violent
Maniac he he smashed into the police
officers he rammed his car um uh a
deadly assault into the police officers
right into them um two of the police
officers were hit it is unbelievable
that any of the officers survived um as
after the officers were hit the both two
of the officers were on the ground they
suffered serious injuries um miss the
individual gets out of the car and he
gets out and he starts walking away from
police officers and it's at that point
police officers do use Force to get him
into custody they use a Taser they don't
utilize deadly force and I just want to
highlight right there that the restraint
and the professionalism that was shown
by police officers think about that here
you have a guy who literally just tried
to kill you and
now you're not going to use deadly force
you're going to use a Taser which is an
incredibly low level of force the amount
of professionalism and restraint that
was displayed by the members of the
Hillsboro County Sheriff's Department
was almost an unheard of level for most
humans most people would not be able to
regulate their emotions and the
adrenaline when someone literally just
tries to kill you um so they should be
commended commended for that um and not
not only you know were they trying do
the right thing on the call um but how
they acted right after the call matters
and you know and I just want to I'm just
highlighting that because again this was
a case where you know I think it really
shows it really shows that when you have
good policies intact when you have not
only good policies but that is ingrained
in police officers and backed up by good
extensive and intense training continual
training that when a police officer is
in a moment like this where adrenaline
dumps and it's a serious and something
serious happens and someone tries to
kill you you are able to just act and
instinctively do the right thing and
only use the appropriate reasonable
level of force in order to take someone
into custody that's what happened here
um so uh one of the officers I reported
last week that he was going to have to
have uh the Corporal um the initial
reports is that he was going to have to
have his leg amputated um it doesn't
look like it at least from what I I
learned from Drew Breezy last night it
doesn't look like he's going to have to
have his leg amputation
um the officers so um the officers um
did start did have tourniquets on them
the tourniquet not only saved the
officer's leg but probably saved uh the
the the the the corporal's life um
because without that tourni kit um he
probably would have bled out um we
started to get turn kits in the police
department that I was with probably
about 10 years ago or so um Drew Breezy
says that the Hillsboro County Sheriff's
Office started carrying these maybe five
years ago or so and that's a good thing
for police officers to carry this is the
situation why why police officers need
to know how to use them quickly um the
police department that I was with um we
had an officer's life saved uh by uh by
a a tourniquet as well within the last
couple years um so a couple more
comments then we are going to be out of
here let's see Sergeant George says it
would be crazy to be a social worker um
uh to be people like that um yeah thank
you Sergeant George so I'm gonna I'm
going to address that issue we actually
talked about that on the on the show
last night because there are people who
say that hey when someone's in a mental
health crisis that police officers you
know that's not the people who should be
going it should be social workers and
listen I don't I don't disagree but the
idea that you're going to send a team of
social workers with crazy blue hair to
deal with this guy um it that isn't that
isn't the reasonable thing um some
police departments do have these mobile
crisis teams and I honestly I think that
they're a good idea Hillsboro County
Sheriff's Office they actually have one
of these teams officers who are assigned
to this and I'm explain what is here in
a second but they were actually busy so
they tried to get them to go to this
call but they weren't able to so here's
what these teams typically look like and
again I think it's a good idea I think
it's what reasonable Progressive and and
good police departments you know how are
kind of at The Cutting Edge this is what
they're doing so they essentially have
teams it's a team of one or two police
officers um who have extra training in
Crisis Intervention teamed are usually
in the same car the same truck with a
mental health clinician so at least like
someone would like at least a master's
degree uh when it comes to being a
mental health clinician and they work
together now the thing is is that even
under the this is this is the best the
police leaders mental health
professionals these teams I mean is from
what I can tell this is the best idea
that anybody can come up with but even
in a situation like this these
individuals this this Mental Health
crisis team they would not have been the
first ones on scene what would have
happened is just like it was here in
this Cas is police officers would have
been dispatched once the situation was
safe so once this individual was out of
the car on the curb made sure that he
didn't have any weapons or inside of his
house inside the kitchen you know um or
in the backseat of a police car
sometimes but once the situation is safe
right that's the most important thing
once the situation has been deemed safe
then you call in this Mental Health
crisis team that has the officer who has
extra training in Crisis Intervention
along with the mental health clinici
that's where they come in so again this
situation with this 28-year old
individual was never safe it was never
safe it was never under control um so so
the so the idea that just sending out
these teams like I said the best idea
which I think is a good idea it really
wouldn't have mattered here because the
situation was never safe um all right uh
so that's about um all we're going to
have for today I want to thank everybody
for being um in the show today and
please if you haven't already please go
ahead and subscribe to the channel and
um uh definitely share it with your
friends and family so we can get as many
people in here as possible I I want to
say thank you to the uh um uh Steve
Ladner said one more question from Steve
have you seen the video of police
snapping a man's leg off in zabata Texas
no Steve but I will look at that for the
next time I absolutely haven't one more
from C and Randy uh Randy RMA says uh
Randy RMA was convicted of criminal
negligent homicide in Elijah mlan Cas
yeah so I I guess I said that um uh not
all the police officers were convicted
or or something to that effect um yeah
listen C and Randy if I was wrong about
that then I'm wrong about that then you
know what that's okay because I have a
full-time job I have kids I have all
kinds of stuff going on and so sometimes
if I talk about things I might get
something wrong and if I do if I say
something that's factually WR I'll admit
it yeah so let me look back into the to
the to the to that case um I think in
the Elijah mlan case an officer had just
been found not guilty in a case and I
was reporting on that but also I think
that I also said that you know no other
officer had been convicted in that case
so if I'm wrong on that uh to totally
totally admit that I'm that I'm I'm
wrong wrong on that kjun Randy so yeah
so thanks for letting me know I'll go
ahead and look into that to see what the
statuses of all the officers because it
would be impossible to know every single
fact about every single case so if I get
something wrong I'm absolutely happy to
admit it and please put it in the
comments if uh if I do say something
incorrect and I will go ahead and and
fix myself on the record um I just want
to say thank you for everyone for being
in you know one of the things that I
think is enjoyable and I hope that you
find enjoyable is when people make
comments that are serious honest
questions or comments and they disagree
with me I like going back and forth
that's why I do this otherwise we would
just turn off the comments or I wouldn't
even listen to the comments so um I like
the back and forth I think that is
interesting one of my favorite Parts
about law school was going back and
forth with people that I didn't agree
with on a lot of these cases and issues
I think that's interesting again I can't
say enough I enjoy that that's why I do
that I I think that we did get a lot of
uh comments and questions um and I want
to thank everyone for being in here
today um as we've done before you know
definitely if you watch this video later
or you think of a case that you want me
to cover that we didn't get to this week
definitely put it in the comments that
is something that I check throughout the
week and um uh that's something that I
check throughout the week so definitely
put it in the comments and we'll try to
get to it um next week is thanks
Thanksgiving so I will not be doing the
show next week I will be in uh in that
little town and you guys know I always
talk about that little town in South
Dakota that my wife is from where I
always get pulled over in at 2 o'clock
in the morning when we're driving back
from the gym so we are headed there for
Thanksgiving so um I'll let you know um
here in a couple weeks if I do in fact
get pulled over again and uh so I want
everyone to have a happy holiday have a
great Thanksgiving um I have I hope um
uh I hope everyone has a great and safe
uh Thanksgiving and um uh you know what
here's the thing if if I do get pulled
over um I'll definitely try to get the
body camera I'll definitely try to get
the body camera video of the of of the
of the the the the ticket or the verbal
warning that I get um all right so
everyone have a great Thanksgiving
please subscribe to the channel if you
haven't already and we will see everyone
in two
weeks

Cancel