Latest / WCHS Network Podcasts / 07/16/2026 Ask the Lawyer with Harvey and Tom Peyton

Transcript

07/16/2026 Ask the Lawyer with Harvey and Tom Peyton · WCHS Network Podcasts

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: The views and opinions expressed on this program do not
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: necessarily reflect the views and opinions of five eight WCHS
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: it's employees or WVRC media.
• 0:09
  Speaker 2: Of Court, Oh Creation Equal.
• 0:18
  Speaker 3: Well Nuch Come here and at Kate ray Can Rocks
• 0:22
  Speaker 3: and up top.
• 0:32
  Speaker 4: Good morning is Thursday and you are listening to five
• 0:35
  Speaker 4: eighty w CCHS. You don't have to fight the law.
• 0:37
  Speaker 4: You can put it on your side this morning. And
• 0:39
  Speaker 4: we have two for the price of one. Tom and
• 0:41
  Speaker 4: Harvey Payton in studio for you this morning. Give us
• 0:43
  Speaker 4: a call three zer A four three four five fifty
• 0:45
  Speaker 4: eight fifty eight. Threes are A four three four five
• 0:47
  Speaker 4: fifty eight fifty eight. You can text threes are A
• 0:49
  Speaker 4: four non three five fives zero zero eight. Peyton Law
• 0:52
  Speaker 4: Firm dot Com on line. Harvey and Tom, good morning,
• 0:55
  Speaker 4: how you doing this morning?
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: Doing great? Doing well?
• 0:57
  Speaker 3: Nice drive up today kind of be the third time
• 1:00
  Speaker 3: we've done it together. I enjoyed doing this and this
• 1:02
  Speaker 3: is very nice. I know we get a lot of
• 1:04
  Speaker 3: today this morning. Maybe we'll get some calls or some
• 1:06
  Speaker 3: tax but you get double trouble.
• 1:08
  Speaker 4: Here, so something attorney. You can give us a call
• 1:11
  Speaker 4: this morning and do the rest you can threes are
• 1:12
  Speaker 4: a four, three, four, five, fifty fifty eight. And it's
• 1:15
  Speaker 4: I used to say it's a rare occasion. We've had
• 1:17
  Speaker 4: it a little bit more recently. So if you want
• 1:19
  Speaker 4: to get Harvey and Tom on your side, give us
• 1:21
  Speaker 4: a call.
• 1:21
  Speaker 3: This kind of hard to stump us after just twenty six,
• 1:26
  Speaker 3: twenty seven years of doing this. Now we'll give an
• 1:27
  Speaker 3: answer one way or another. But you know, seriously, once
• 1:32
  Speaker 3: you know, if you do have a question or inquiry,
• 1:34
  Speaker 3: don't hesitate to send a text or give us a call.
• 1:38
  Speaker 3: And that's one thing I do, you know, having done
• 1:43
  Speaker 3: this forever, and it feels like forever practicing law that is,
• 1:47
  Speaker 3: and then of course grown up with dad practicing law
• 1:50
  Speaker 3: all the time. People do tend to think that lawyers
• 1:53
  Speaker 3: know everything about the law, and it's just not realistic.
• 1:57
  Speaker 3: And so, but if you have a question, your inquiry,
• 1:59
  Speaker 3: or need some help a subject matter that we're not
• 2:01
  Speaker 3: it's not really in our wheelhouse. I regularly, you know,
• 2:04
  Speaker 3: we've got a network, not really a network, but you know,
• 2:08
  Speaker 3: being around here for so long and being members of
• 2:11
  Speaker 3: various organizations, we can pretty much direct you to a
• 2:14
  Speaker 3: lawyer that has expertise in whatever field you need. Like,
• 2:17
  Speaker 3: we don't do bankruptcy, so you know, if we get
• 2:19
  Speaker 3: a bankruptcy somebody needs to file bankruptc here, make an
• 2:23
  Speaker 3: inquiry about filing bankrupt so we easily send them over
• 2:26
  Speaker 3: to Pepper and Nace, Andy Nason's office or Joe Caldwell,
• 2:31
  Speaker 3: guys we know that are really experienced in in bankruptcy law. Suh,
• 2:37
  Speaker 3: don't give a you know, don't hesitate to give us
• 2:40
  Speaker 3: a call or make an inquiry about whatever issue you have.
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: If we can't help you will we'll give you a referral.
• 2:44
  Speaker 3: But interesting, last week, we got a text about Flock.
• 2:50
  Speaker 3: Yeah right at the right here at the end of
• 2:51
  Speaker 3: the show f L O c K. And honestly I
• 2:53
  Speaker 3: didn't really I'd heard it, but I didn't know a
• 2:57
  Speaker 3: whole lot about it. And then I think I know
• 3:00
  Speaker 3: probably why we got that text, because in the last
• 3:03
  Speaker 3: week or two some local government entities have entered contracts
• 3:08
  Speaker 3: with Flock, which is a company name. It's an entity
• 3:12
  Speaker 3: that uses camera systems I think, for the most part,
• 3:18
  Speaker 3: or some type of sensors to do things like read
• 3:22
  Speaker 3: license plates and that kind of thing. And I think
• 3:26
  Speaker 3: another city of Huntington has entered a contract recently, and
• 3:30
  Speaker 3: I believe the Putnam County Commission did too for the
• 3:33
  Speaker 3: Sheriff's department. That's a contract to mount these sensors or
• 3:38
  Speaker 3: cameras in different public domains, public areas, and so we'll
• 3:47
  Speaker 3: see how that kind of develops. There's been a lot
• 3:49
  Speaker 3: of blowback on I mean, there's been multiple media articles
• 3:52
  Speaker 3: about it where folks feel like it's kind of a
• 3:55
  Speaker 3: big brother deal. And last week I kind of off
• 4:00
  Speaker 3: the cuff answered the question about whether they're maybe whether
• 4:03
  Speaker 3: they're legal or an unreasonable search. And you first thought
• 4:08
  Speaker 3: as well, if you're driving a car and they're taking
• 4:13
  Speaker 3: an image of your license plate, well that's you don't
• 4:15
  Speaker 3: really have a you don't have a reasonable expectation of
• 4:18
  Speaker 3: privacy and your license plate. Mean, that's the point of
• 4:20
  Speaker 3: a license plate is to is to be able to
• 4:23
  Speaker 3: identify at least the owner or registered owner potentially the
• 4:28
  Speaker 3: operator of the vehicle to usually law enforcement. And that's
• 4:32
  Speaker 3: the whole reason to have it. So you can hardly
• 4:33
  Speaker 3: complain that law enforcements taking pictures of your license plate.
• 4:39
  Speaker 3: But and Flock's been around for more than a decade,
• 4:44
  Speaker 3: I mean, it's been you know, automatic license plate imagery
• 4:50
  Speaker 3: has been around for a long time. You have it
• 4:52
  Speaker 3: on the turnpike when you go through the tollbooth. I
• 4:57
  Speaker 3: think the state police probably have them mounted randomly around
• 5:00
  Speaker 3: that we may not know about. You see the cameras
• 5:03
  Speaker 3: on intersections, some of those are probably flocked.
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: But the courts.
• 5:11
  Speaker 3: Almost universally, based on my research of found that it's
• 5:16
  Speaker 3: not an unreasonable search and seizure. And it's it's not
• 5:20
  Speaker 3: akin to, for example, getting self somebody's cell phone data.
• 5:27
  Speaker 3: It's not akin to the recent case we had on
• 5:30
  Speaker 3: geo fencing where Google turned over to the government.
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: It's data.
• 5:39
  Speaker 3: And you know almost everybody has a Gmail account and
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: if you do, then you've got Google Maps and all.
• 5:45
  Speaker 3: I mean, the amount of data that Google would have
• 5:48
  Speaker 3: on your activities would be extensive and and gets over
• 5:53
  Speaker 3: into the privacy realm. I think, however, I think, I think,
• 6:01
  Speaker 3: And there was a case actually out of South Carolina.
• 6:03
  Speaker 3: I read it just came out July one, just recently,
• 6:06
  Speaker 3: and in that case, flock had been used to just
• 6:11
  Speaker 3: get a couple images of a license plate from a vehicle.
• 6:16
  Speaker 3: Then they use that to fall up with regular particularized
• 6:19
  Speaker 3: police work and arrest somebody. But as we the difference
• 6:29
  Speaker 3: is going to be now we have AI that's advancing
• 6:38
  Speaker 3: even by the folks who run the largest AI companies,
• 6:42
  Speaker 3: too fast for us to regulate, understand and perhaps control.
• 6:51
  Speaker 3: But it's a competitive field where everybody's trying to make
• 6:55
  Speaker 3: the next advancement. So you can't get all these entities
• 6:58
  Speaker 3: around the world just to and hold off on this
• 7:01
  Speaker 3: AI until we have a better handle on it. So
• 7:04
  Speaker 3: but that's where we'll see how this develops. But AI
• 7:10
  Speaker 3: now using a flock system that has AI in it,
• 7:16
  Speaker 3: can It's not like two detectives sitting there watching this.
• 7:19
  Speaker 3: You know, Let's find this car, look for a blue car,
• 7:22
  Speaker 3: look for a license plate. I mean within a probably
• 7:25
  Speaker 3: a few seconds. Using AI, it can, it will claim
• 7:30
  Speaker 3: it can populate significant data on a person a particular car,
• 7:36
  Speaker 3: not just to make a model. Facial recognition perhaps, and
• 7:41
  Speaker 3: of course license plates, and it depends on where they
• 7:44
  Speaker 3: mount them. But I mean that could turn into technology
• 7:48
  Speaker 3: that allows the government to track almost everywhere you are,
• 7:57
  Speaker 3: not when you go into private building, but it can
• 8:00
  Speaker 3: fact that you went in that particular building and being
• 8:03
  Speaker 3: able to do that instantly with that much data you know,
• 8:09
  Speaker 3: it's gonna be really interesting to see how this plays
• 8:11
  Speaker 3: out in the courts. You know, none of the real
• 8:14
  Speaker 3: recent cases have necessarily have those facts that I saw,
• 8:18
  Speaker 3: so it's probably gonna take years for it to filter
• 8:20
  Speaker 3: up through the court system. But I think as you
• 8:24
  Speaker 3: start getting into that type of technology through flock, the
• 8:30
  Speaker 3: company who're gonna, I mean, this privacy interest might tilt
• 8:36
  Speaker 3: into unconstitutional zone.
• 8:39
  Speaker 4: A follow up on that that I was curious about,
• 8:41
  Speaker 4: and a lot of the issues with something like flock
• 8:44
  Speaker 4: doesn't always necessarily stem from its individual use. Although one
• 8:48
  Speaker 4: of the things that I had checked in to localize it,
• 8:52
  Speaker 4: I think in Dayton, Ohio, flock cameras that they have
• 8:55
  Speaker 4: there were accessed like seven thousand times by government entities
• 8:58
  Speaker 4: and fishing expeditions for protesters and things along those lines,
• 9:02
  Speaker 4: people showing up a protest abortion clinics, things like that,
• 9:06
  Speaker 4: like not the use that the flock cameras are supposed
• 9:08
  Speaker 4: to be used for initially anyway, But then we have
• 9:11
  Speaker 4: you mentioned AI, and you also have all the other
• 9:13
  Speaker 4: data that the government can kind of circumvent. Again, they're
• 9:17
  Speaker 4: not allowed to quote unquote collect these things, but Facebook can,
• 9:20
  Speaker 4: and data brokers can and stuff like that. So you
• 9:21
  Speaker 4: take data broker information and combine that with what the
• 9:24
  Speaker 4: government has when you're from social security, election data, whatever
• 9:27
  Speaker 4: it might be, on top of flock data that you're
• 9:29
  Speaker 4: putting in, and you get a forensic fingerprint of a person,
• 9:33
  Speaker 4: which combined might be a prophecy violation. I don't know,
• 9:37
  Speaker 4: but it's impossible to prove that, I think because it's
• 9:39
  Speaker 4: like so many different streams that are coming together.
• 9:41
  Speaker 3: Right, it's hard to I mean, other than of course
• 9:43
  Speaker 3: you can get people under oath, but it all depends
• 9:46
  Speaker 3: on the the particular facts of each case, because it's
• 9:50
  Speaker 3: kind of a totality of the circumstances type analysis under
• 9:53
  Speaker 3: right and amendment. So if the police say, well, we
• 9:56
  Speaker 3: didn't use it for all these other things you're talking about,
• 9:59
  Speaker 3: we just used it to you know, see a couple
• 10:01
  Speaker 3: of pictures of a license plate, So you get into
• 10:03
  Speaker 3: evidence youry issues, and then you always have the potential
• 10:11
  Speaker 3: for abuse of any system that allows I mean, the
• 10:15
  Speaker 3: government's just people, it's employees, and so you always have
• 10:20
  Speaker 3: the risk of somebody an employee or maybe more than
• 10:24
  Speaker 3: one employer. It could be systematic problem. But you know,
• 10:28
  Speaker 3: looking at that data for improper reasons. You know, maybe
• 10:31
  Speaker 3: where's my ex girlfriend Ben?
• 10:33
  Speaker 4: Or you know, a Texas sheriff attract a woman he
• 10:36
  Speaker 4: thought it was having an abortion. That's right, somebody was
• 10:38
  Speaker 4: tracking his ex wife. An officer attracted his kids. I mean,
• 10:42
  Speaker 4: now that that's a that's an issue.
• 10:47
  Speaker 3: Was that tilt the constitutional analysis Probably not a whole
• 10:52
  Speaker 3: lot in my mind, because you could take that same
• 10:54
  Speaker 3: rationale and apply to a lot of things that law
• 10:56
  Speaker 3: enforcement have access to, and you just got to hope
• 11:00
  Speaker 3: that it's not it's going to be abused some because
• 11:03
  Speaker 3: it's we're all humans humans. You know, you have bad police,
• 11:07
  Speaker 3: you have bad lawyers, bad doctors, and they're always going
• 11:09
  Speaker 3: to you can't vet them all out, so there's always
• 11:12
  Speaker 3: going to be someone with access that's going to abuse
• 11:14
  Speaker 3: it somewhat. So I don't think that's the significant factor
• 11:19
  Speaker 3: from a constitutional analysis. Then you have error rate, you
• 11:23
  Speaker 3: know they I think we saw some of this and
• 11:25
  Speaker 3: some of these ice raids that were in the media,
• 11:29
  Speaker 3: you know, six eight months ago, where AI was being
• 11:33
  Speaker 3: used to basically use stats and say statistics to indicate
• 11:37
  Speaker 3: where a legal person, you know, somebody in the country
• 11:40
  Speaker 3: illegally might be living here or there and they rated
• 11:42
  Speaker 3: the wrong homes. Air rates are are problems. I mean,
• 11:47
  Speaker 3: there's a n c i S database of stolen property
• 11:52
  Speaker 3: and things like that, and there are error rates in
• 11:54
  Speaker 3: that and in the courts of generally, you know, as
• 11:58
  Speaker 3: long as it's non intentional error or a reckless error,
• 12:05
  Speaker 3: if it's a system that's reasonably reliable, then you know,
• 12:11
  Speaker 3: the police can rely upon it in good faith. Now,
• 12:13
  Speaker 3: if they have the evidence contrary to what the AI
• 12:16
  Speaker 3: is showing them, for example, then that's that's a problem.
• 12:18
  Speaker 3: But and just ignore it and go with the wrong
• 12:21
  Speaker 3: evidence or wrong information. But because there's there are there
• 12:25
  Speaker 3: already error rates with FLOCK, I mean they've identified and
• 12:29
  Speaker 3: arrested or investigated people based on FLOCK type information and
• 12:34
  Speaker 3: have the wrong person. So that's a that's a concern practically,
• 12:40
  Speaker 3: I think for of course, to find that that's significant
• 12:44
  Speaker 3: enough to violate the Fourth Amendment, it would have to
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: be significant AIRR rates just to bar it completely. Otherwise, again,
• 12:50
  Speaker 3: it depends on the particular situation. If you know, if
• 12:54
  Speaker 3: if police are relying solely on FLOCK and it has
• 12:58
  Speaker 3: a significant error rate, then that's problem. If they don't
• 13:01
  Speaker 3: coroborate it properly, or if they ignore evidence that's contrary
• 13:06
  Speaker 3: to it flock showing and go with flock and then
• 13:08
  Speaker 3: it's wrong. That can be a problem, but a general
• 13:12
  Speaker 3: error rate, I don't think is the kind of thing
• 13:15
  Speaker 3: it's going to make flock on a on a grand
• 13:19
  Speaker 3: scale be road un constitutional.
• 13:21
  Speaker 4: There was a huge city council meeting I think in
• 13:24
  Speaker 4: Huntington and talking about this legally in the courts. Outside
• 13:28
  Speaker 4: of the court aspect of this. Just in twenty twenty
• 13:30
  Speaker 4: six through May, there's been forty contracts across twenty eight
• 13:35
  Speaker 4: states that have been canceled through flock. So public pressure
• 13:37
  Speaker 4: does work in these cases. It may not have worked
• 13:39
  Speaker 4: in Huntington the other night, I think I went ahead
• 13:41
  Speaker 4: and passed. But outside of legal ramifications trying to see
• 13:45
  Speaker 4: or whatever else, it appears that if enough people start
• 13:47
  Speaker 4: making noise about this and with their local representatives at
• 13:50
  Speaker 4: a local level, you've seen cities, states, municipalities, all these
• 13:54
  Speaker 4: people that are canceling their FLOCK contracts because of public pushback.
• 13:57
  Speaker 4: So the public does have a say in this.
• 14:00
  Speaker 2: Well, they sure do, and not necessarily on a constitutional basis.
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: Tom has researched this and looked at the cases. There
• 14:07
  Speaker 2: was another case decided by the Virginia Supreme Court out
• 14:10
  Speaker 2: of Norfolk, Virginia, and they all pretty well follow the
• 14:15
  Speaker 2: same size, same line. It's not a constitutional violation. It's
• 14:21
  Speaker 2: not an invasion of any implied right of privacy to
• 14:25
  Speaker 2: look at a license plate number in a public at
• 14:27
  Speaker 2: an intersection and identify someone who's been there if they're
• 14:32
  Speaker 2: a suspect, if you have some reasonable basis. But you know,
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: we've never had a national identification card in the United States.
• 14:39
  Speaker 2: You're not required to quote show your papers wherever you are,
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: not necessarily that that would be unconstitutional, although it's a
• 14:46
  Speaker 2: significant issue, but just because the American people won't stand
• 14:49
  Speaker 2: for it. It seems an American to have the government
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: able to track you around. And as Tom says, when
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: you've got artificial intelligence with algorithms that perform I don't
• 15:00
  Speaker 2: think they perform quickly, Type a fairly sophisticated question into
• 15:03
  Speaker 2: your telephone or your iPad or your desktop computer and
• 15:08
  Speaker 2: see what generative AI does to answer it, sometimes not correctly.
• 15:14
  Speaker 2: So what happens then if the police force is saying
• 15:18
  Speaker 2: Huntington has the ability to track the movements of everybody
• 15:23
  Speaker 2: who's driving in the city on a given day, not
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: just track the movements of the vehicle, but who's the owner,
• 15:31
  Speaker 2: what their physical description is taken from driver's license records,
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: what their political persuasion is from voter records that are
• 15:39
  Speaker 2: all a part of that database. Then does it cross
• 15:45
  Speaker 2: the line? I think the ruling from the courts, as
• 15:47
  Speaker 2: time indicated, based upon the facts of each individual case,
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: are going to be. You know what if you turn
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: up you're looking for mister A who stole a package
• 15:56
  Speaker 2: off a porch and wait a minute, wait a minute,
• 15:59
  Speaker 2: Look here here's mister B. We see that he was
• 16:02
  Speaker 2: driving over here, Uh in the area where another crown
• 16:05
  Speaker 2: that we're not investigating was committed. What the stells is
• 16:09
  Speaker 2: where mister B was Well, you know that's just a
• 16:12
  Speaker 2: fishing expedition. Uh. Now there are those who will say, well, yeah,
• 16:16
  Speaker 2: but the ends justify the means. Well, that's a slippery
• 16:20
  Speaker 2: slope when you're talking about constitutional rights. So it's it's
• 16:25
  Speaker 2: a developing field of the law. What do you think
• 16:29
  Speaker 2: the line of the crossing the line is going to be.
• 16:31
  Speaker 3: Tom, Well, I think when they I mean, I think
• 16:36
  Speaker 3: it's getting close. But there's just not been cases where
• 16:40
  Speaker 3: they fleshed out the ai US, but it's going to
• 16:45
  Speaker 3: filter up through the court system soon or or maybe political.
• 16:48
  Speaker 3: What I said kind of last week is for the
• 16:50
  Speaker 3: most part, it's probably more of a political question. And
• 16:52
  Speaker 3: what I meant there was kind of like what you're
• 16:55
  Speaker 3: talking about, what keep we're talking about, is you know,
• 17:00
  Speaker 3: institutional or not? Is there going to be enough political
• 17:02
  Speaker 3: pressure just to cause the government to even though they
• 17:05
  Speaker 3: I mean Huntington's executed a contract, Putnam County Commission has
• 17:09
  Speaker 3: I haven't read the details of if Flock's been around,
• 17:13
  Speaker 3: Like I said, I don't know how long, at least
• 17:16
  Speaker 3: more than ten years, because I found cases back to
• 17:18
  Speaker 3: maybe twenty thirteen and Flocks. I think it's a brand name.
• 17:22
  Speaker 3: I mean, it's this company. It's not really you know,
• 17:26
  Speaker 3: it's just a it's turned into a generic name for
• 17:28
  Speaker 3: this type of observational system. But it's a it's a vendor.
• 17:32
  Speaker 3: So I don't know in Huntington and Putnam County. You know,
• 17:38
  Speaker 3: it's just like anything you buy a legal research engine
• 17:42
  Speaker 3: or some kind of tool or program you have on
• 17:45
  Speaker 3: the computer, you can get different levels. And if you
• 17:48
  Speaker 3: know they bought they contracted just to get license plate
• 17:52
  Speaker 3: readers that are kind of conventional that might have a
• 17:54
  Speaker 3: little bump from AI to help them identify it quickly,
• 18:01
  Speaker 3: versus maybe getting the quote full package that can you know,
• 18:08
  Speaker 3: track through facial recognition. AI could maybe fill the gaps
• 18:14
  Speaker 3: it has in its data with probable information about where
• 18:18
  Speaker 3: a person might be, and then police are relying appoint
• 18:22
  Speaker 3: I mean, the n c I S database is like
• 18:25
  Speaker 3: the national database where stolen properties entered and and things
• 18:32
  Speaker 3: like that, and.
• 18:37
  Speaker 2: It has.
• 18:39
  Speaker 3: Significant error rates. And the FBI in their manual says,
• 18:45
  Speaker 3: you know, it shouldn't be relied upon for probable call.
• 18:49
  Speaker 3: I mean, it shouldn't be relied upon alone for probable cause. Mean,
• 18:52
  Speaker 3: I have a case right now pending it's on appeal
• 18:54
  Speaker 3: where uh, it on its face indicated my client had
• 18:59
  Speaker 3: a stolen firearm which resulted in a police raid on
• 19:06
  Speaker 3: his home and somebody killed. In the end, it wasn't
• 19:09
  Speaker 3: it wasn't a stolen firearm because it was it was wrong.
• 19:14
  Speaker 2: But so.
• 19:17
  Speaker 3: You know, despite disclaimers maybe on what it can or
• 19:20
  Speaker 3: can't be used for, if it starts filling in gaps
• 19:23
  Speaker 3: of you know, it's got keep going here here and
• 19:26
  Speaker 3: here and in here and in here, well, AI could
• 19:31
  Speaker 3: potentially say, well, then he was also here, here, and here,
• 19:34
  Speaker 3: and this is what he did. Because it's gonna it's
• 19:37
  Speaker 3: just using data and statistics, and so you think, well,
• 19:40
  Speaker 3: police shouldn't rely upon that, but we all know. I mean,
• 19:44
  Speaker 3: if you have any sense, if it spits out a
• 19:46
  Speaker 3: conclusion and it's something that the person using it likes,
• 19:52
  Speaker 3: they're probably going to use that data, whether it's right
• 19:55
  Speaker 3: or wrong.
• 19:56
  Speaker 4: It's crazy. It's very literally the plot of Philip K.
• 19:59
  Speaker 4: Dick novel A Minority Reports basically based off of this
• 20:02
  Speaker 4: type of thing where algorithmically you're trying to predict crins
• 20:05
  Speaker 4: before they happen, and things along those lines. I'm wondering,
• 20:07
  Speaker 4: is this ushering in And and by the way, if
• 20:10
  Speaker 4: you have questions more on a local level, something that
• 20:12
  Speaker 4: the paidon law froom can help you with, give us
• 20:14
  Speaker 4: a call this morning three zero four three four five
• 20:16
  Speaker 4: fifty fifty eight three four five fifty eight fifty eight.
• 20:18
  Speaker 4: You can text re zer of four non three five
• 20:19
  Speaker 4: five zero zero eight. One of the things that this
• 20:21
  Speaker 4: goes along with Tom mentioned a few times is the
• 20:23
  Speaker 4: facial recognition, and one of the things I was following
• 20:26
  Speaker 4: along with was a couple of years ago, most of
• 20:29
  Speaker 4: the companies that were that were working on facial recognition
• 20:32
  Speaker 4: took them offline because they found out that their their
• 20:35
  Speaker 4: training data was much focused on frankly, Anglo faces, and
• 20:41
  Speaker 4: and it's and it's and it's a success rate on
• 20:43
  Speaker 4: Anglo faces was pretty good, but when it came to
• 20:45
  Speaker 4: minority faces, it was terrible. It had tons of false
• 20:48
  Speaker 4: positives and it wasn't doing very well. And if I
• 20:50
  Speaker 4: remember correctly, the the the facial recognition that the government
• 20:54
  Speaker 4: adopted was actually against the recommendation of the company that
• 20:58
  Speaker 4: that made it. They were like, Hey, this isn't ready
• 20:59
  Speaker 4: for prime time yet. And I'm just wondering with things
• 21:02
  Speaker 4: like that that are hanging out there, does that usher
• 21:05
  Speaker 4: criminal defense into a new era where we have all
• 21:07
  Speaker 4: these different tools that we really don't know the reliability
• 21:09
  Speaker 4: of yet.
• 21:10
  Speaker 2: It probably does. In our legislature, we're behind the curve.
• 21:14
  Speaker 2: We have a statute in West Virginia that's been in
• 21:16
  Speaker 2: a fact for years regarding automatic license plate readers and
• 21:21
  Speaker 2: what they can be used for. It actually it defines
• 21:23
  Speaker 2: the use that can be made a valid law enforcement purpose,
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: and it makes it a misdemeanor to misuse the data
• 21:30
  Speaker 2: up to a year in jail on a five hundred
• 21:32
  Speaker 2: dollars fine. And then there's, of course the fear about
• 21:37
  Speaker 2: a permanent database. Our statute requires that the information be
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: purged in not more than one year. That's a long time.
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: My understanding of the standard flock contract is they have
• 21:48
  Speaker 2: to purge the data after ninety days. Kentucky just passed
• 21:52
  Speaker 2: the statute that requires the data gathered the database to
• 21:56
  Speaker 2: be purged every twelve days. And perhaps that's but you
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: can immediately see that the issues for a defense attorney
• 22:06
  Speaker 2: is going to be, well, let's define a valid law
• 22:09
  Speaker 2: enforcement purpose. If you're out here fishing in a manner
• 22:13
  Speaker 2: that violates the fourth and fourteenth Amendments, that's not a
• 22:20
  Speaker 2: valid law enforcement purpose. And what may happen if we
• 22:25
  Speaker 2: retain the exclusionary rule, which I'm not sure if the
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: exclusionary rule which says that evidence that's obtained in violation
• 22:34
  Speaker 2: of the Bill of Rights has to be excluded from
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: the trial, often resulting in people going free who are
• 22:42
  Speaker 2: fairly obviously guilty, but because their rights have been violid
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: either can't be prosecuted. If that gets to our Supreme Court, again,
• 22:52
  Speaker 2: who knows press. The half life of precedence not very
• 22:56
  Speaker 2: long with our current United States Supreme Court, but I
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: certainly can see the grounds for litigation. There a lot
• 23:03
  Speaker 2: of criminals. We'll just have to fill in the blanks.
• 23:06
  Speaker 2: We're in an area where the law is changing, if
• 23:09
  Speaker 2: reality is changing so fast, I never conceived. I mean,
• 23:13
  Speaker 2: Tom's been practicing a law quarter of a century or more,
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: and I've been practicing off for over a half century.
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: I never conceived when I walked out of the law
• 23:24
  Speaker 2: school it would be in a situation where I would
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: have a box underneath my desk that's wired up to
• 23:29
  Speaker 2: a screen where I can almost immediately at my fingertips
• 23:34
  Speaker 2: access advanced data about anything and everything. I don't have
• 23:39
  Speaker 2: to go to a library anymore. And we had a
• 23:41
  Speaker 2: nice story Hopies commentary about deep reading, which is almost
• 23:46
  Speaker 2: a lost art. So how are we going to deal
• 23:50
  Speaker 2: with that in the context of a country that's governed
• 23:55
  Speaker 2: by a written constitution and the first ten amendments, without
• 24:00
  Speaker 2: which the constitution wouldn't have been adopted. I don't know
• 24:04
  Speaker 2: as for the courts to sort out.
• 24:06
  Speaker 4: Let's do this. Let's go ahead and take our break.
• 24:08
  Speaker 4: We still have several minutes left in the program. Interesting
• 24:10
  Speaker 4: discussion this morning. If you want a wig in, if
• 24:12
  Speaker 4: you have comments on that, or if you have questions
• 24:13
  Speaker 4: for Tom and Harvey Payton from the Payton Law Firm,
• 24:15
  Speaker 4: feel free to give us a call. And more to
• 24:17
  Speaker 4: the point, if you have a legal issue that's been
• 24:19
  Speaker 4: rattling around in your brain, maybe you've been wanting to
• 24:22
  Speaker 4: ask some legal advice, or another situation that's come up
• 24:25
  Speaker 4: where maybe you can put the power of Payton on
• 24:26
  Speaker 4: your side. Give us a call this morning. Tom and
• 24:28
  Speaker 4: Harvey are here in studio. It is a rare opportunity,
• 24:32
  Speaker 4: not as rare as it once was. We enjoy having
• 24:34
  Speaker 4: Tom and Harvey here, So give us a call this
• 24:36
  Speaker 4: morning at three zero four three four five fifty eight
• 24:38
  Speaker 4: fifty eight three four five fifty eight fifty eight. You
• 24:39
  Speaker 4: can also text three zero four non three five five
• 24:42
  Speaker 4: zero zero eight. More information online Peyton Lawfirm dot com.
• 24:45
  Speaker 4: That's p E Y T you and Peyton Lawfirm dot com.
• 24:47
  Speaker 4: We'll take a break and be back right after this.
• 24:49
  Speaker 4: You're listening to Ask the Lawyer with Harvey and Tom
• 24:51
  Speaker 4: from the Peyton Law Firm right here on five eight WCHS.
• 24:53
  Speaker 4: The voice of Charleston.
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: Why do so many West Virginians choose the Peyton Law
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: Firm after an injury Because Tom and Harvey Payton are
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: from here and they fight for their neighbors every day.
• 25:03
  Speaker 1: When you're dealing with an injury claim, you need experience,
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: straight answers and results you can trust. Don't let insurance
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: companies or out of state firms push you around. Call
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: seven five five fifty five fifty six or visit Peyton
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: Law Firm dot com.
• 25:18
  Speaker 4: The attorney's referenced in this ad our lifelong residence and
• 25:21
  Speaker 4: our license to practice law in the state of West Virginia.
• 25:24
  Speaker 4: The Hussin's Pizza Special for July by any regular price
• 25:28
  Speaker 4: large eighteen inch pizza can get a two liter bottle
• 25:30
  Speaker 4: of any Pepsi product free. Visit your nearest Hussins for
• 25:34
  Speaker 4: dinam pick up board delivery. Order now at Hussinspizza dot com.
• 25:39
  Speaker 2: The latest in news talking sports.
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: When five awchs has brought to you about Jarrett Construction,
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: call three zero four to three for four ninety one
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: for more information. Time right on Bodget call on Cherity Chuction.
• 26:05
  Speaker 4: It's about twelve minutes now before the top of the hour.
• 26:07
  Speaker 4: Almost nine o'clock. You're listening to the Voice of Charleston
• 26:09
  Speaker 4: five ADWCHS. This is Asked the Lawyer. The Peyton Law
• 26:13
  Speaker 4: Firm is in studio this morning, and that means Tom
• 26:15
  Speaker 4: and Harvey are here this morning. We can take your
• 26:17
  Speaker 4: phone calls at three zero four, three four five fifty
• 26:19
  Speaker 4: eight fifty eight three four five fifty eight fifty eight.
• 26:21
  Speaker 4: Texts three zero four non, three five five zero zero
• 26:23
  Speaker 4: eight three zero four non three five five zero zero
• 26:26
  Speaker 4: eight is the text line number. Of course, you can
• 26:28
  Speaker 4: find out more information online. It's Payton Lawfirm dot com.
• 26:30
  Speaker 4: P y t you in Peyton Lawfirm dot com for
• 26:33
  Speaker 4: more information. The show is on Aask the Lawyer every Thursday.
• 26:36
  Speaker 4: Right here eight twenty one to five ad W c
• 26:38
  Speaker 4: HS the Voice for Charleston.
• 26:41
  Speaker 2: Well, we had another federal court ruling last week. On
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: the thirteenth, a judge in Florida, the United States District
• 26:51
  Speaker 2: Court for the Southern District of Florida, considered the case
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: that was filed caption President Donald J. Trump. At all
• 27:01
  Speaker 2: plaintiffs and they had all were the children and associated
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: businesses of President Trump versus the Internal Revenue Service and others.
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: The defendants being the Department of the Treasury. We mentioned
• 27:14
  Speaker 2: earlier about the president before the Supreme Court. Well, it
• 27:19
  Speaker 2: also brings to mind, in fact, you've got to watch
• 27:21
  Speaker 2: what you ask for because it may come back to bite.
• 27:24
  Speaker 2: People may remember that about three weeks ago, the United
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: States Supreme Court upheld President Trump's authority to fire one
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: of the Federal Trade Commissioners based upon an allegation of
• 27:38
  Speaker 2: the assertion the legal position of the administration that president
• 27:42
  Speaker 2: of United States had the right to fire had absolute
• 27:45
  Speaker 2: control over the executive branch, not the Federal Reserve Board,
• 27:48
  Speaker 2: but all members of the executive branch, and the judge
• 27:53
  Speaker 2: in Florida was confronted with a that this case had
• 27:56
  Speaker 2: been voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, that President Trump and
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: his lawyers, and immediately after the dismissal, which came in
• 28:07
  Speaker 2: the face of the judge asking the parties, well, tell
• 28:11
  Speaker 2: me why this is a case. Tell me why the
• 28:15
  Speaker 2: chief executive of the United States suing people over whom
• 28:19
  Speaker 2: he has absolute control is really a case in controversy
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: and not simply a case bought collusively for an improper purpose.
• 28:30
  Speaker 2: She asked that question, and the day before the response
• 28:34
  Speaker 2: was due from the United States. This settlement was announced,
• 28:38
  Speaker 2: which set up the one billion, seven hundred thousand dollars
• 28:42
  Speaker 2: claim to pay off essentially political cronies and absolute immunity
• 28:47
  Speaker 2: from liability to the Internal Revenue Service for any audits
• 28:52
  Speaker 2: conducted her taxes not paid prior to the date of
• 28:55
  Speaker 2: the settlement. Upon the dismissal, thirteen former federal judges is
• 29:00
  Speaker 2: who are appointed by Presidents Bush, Bush, Reagan, Clinton, and
• 29:06
  Speaker 2: Obama not Clinton, gathered together and fouled an amikus prey motion, saying,
• 29:14
  Speaker 2: wait a minute, judge, we think the court has been misused.
• 29:19
  Speaker 2: We think that a fraud was committed on the court.
• 29:21
  Speaker 2: These people are going around to talking about this as
• 29:23
  Speaker 2: a settlement when really it was just a transfer of
• 29:27
  Speaker 2: money in the bestowing of a favor on the boss. Well,
• 29:32
  Speaker 2: that's my interpretation of the petition. It was certainly much
• 29:37
  Speaker 2: more artfully tended. Well, the judge put all that under
• 29:42
  Speaker 2: consideration and sight of the slaughter case, saying, well, first
• 29:48
  Speaker 2: of all, this case was filed. It was pending for
• 29:51
  Speaker 2: one hundred and nine days. The Internal Revenue Service gave
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: the Department of Justice a twenty five point memorandum on
• 29:59
  Speaker 2: why they were there's no case here, including the fact
• 30:01
  Speaker 2: that it was filed after the statute of limitations had run,
• 30:04
  Speaker 2: which is an absolute defense, and any number of others.
• 30:08
  Speaker 2: But the Department of Justice, run by a man named
• 30:12
  Speaker 2: Todd Blanche who was worked directly for the president, didn't
• 30:16
  Speaker 2: file an answer, didn't file any pleadings, didn't assert any defenses,
• 30:20
  Speaker 2: and then announced that the case had been settled, as
• 30:24
  Speaker 2: if there were a case in controversy that was actually
• 30:28
  Speaker 2: adverse and settled. Well, the judge said no, and she
• 30:32
  Speaker 2: said that she did not have the authority to set
• 30:36
  Speaker 2: aside the settlement private part These parties can do whatever
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: they want to do, but they cannot do it and
• 30:42
  Speaker 2: tell people this is the settlement of a lawsuit. And
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: so she ordered that no more reference be made to
• 30:49
  Speaker 2: the settlement of a lawsuit and went further. There's a
• 30:53
  Speaker 2: rule called Rule eleven of the Rules of Civil Procedure
• 30:57
  Speaker 2: which says that lawyers who participated in litigation for an
• 31:02
  Speaker 2: improper purpose can be sanctioned. Now that requires a finding
• 31:07
  Speaker 2: by the court that an improper purpose was pursued. Now,
• 31:11
  Speaker 2: if you'll remember, no answer fouled, no defenses asserted Judge says,
• 31:17
  Speaker 2: tell me why this is really a lawsuit. Day before
• 31:20
  Speaker 2: case is dismissed, a quote so called settlements arrived upon.
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: The judge said, well, Rule eleven is appropriate because listen,
• 31:32
  Speaker 2: as the plaintiff that's talking about the President of the
• 31:34
  Speaker 2: United States. Persistence in pursuing factually and legally frivolous claims
• 31:41
  Speaker 2: as circumstantial evidence for an improper purpose is an improper
• 31:46
  Speaker 2: purpose under rule eleven. Here the record before the court
• 31:52
  Speaker 2: supports such an inference. Now, think about that, as aptly
• 31:57
  Speaker 2: summarized by the non party movements, would be the federal
• 32:00
  Speaker 2: judges who filed on a meekus brief planifs acted in
• 32:06
  Speaker 2: bad faith and for an improper purpose by collusively filing
• 32:10
  Speaker 2: a lawsuit with claim subject to multiple despositive defenses solely
• 32:16
  Speaker 2: to provide cover for a collusive settlement. Think of that,
• 32:21
  Speaker 2: my gracious, and then reference the referred to the two lawyers,
• 32:27
  Speaker 2: the plaintiff's lawyer and the acting attorney generally of the
• 32:30
  Speaker 2: United States, to their respective barises. We have called.
• 32:34
  Speaker 4: We do have a call interesting inside there about Harvey.
• 32:36
  Speaker 4: We do have a caller that's come on, I'll call it.
• 32:38
  Speaker 4: What's your first name? You're on the air with the
• 32:39
  Speaker 4: paton off from Yes, this is Bob here, go ahead, Bob.
• 32:44
  Speaker 5: Yes, this is probably a difficult question to ask. I'll
• 32:47
  Speaker 5: try to frame it as best I can. Does the
• 32:51
  Speaker 5: Constitution itself protect folks that are here illegally the same
• 33:00
  Speaker 5: as it protects American citizens? In other words, do all
• 33:03
  Speaker 5: the lights and privileges apply to someone that's illegally in
• 33:08
  Speaker 5: this country? And if it does, my backup question is,
• 33:13
  Speaker 5: then what's the benefit of being an actual citizen of
• 33:17
  Speaker 5: a country if anybody that just is in the country
• 33:20
  Speaker 5: has the same privileges as you do? And I'll shut
• 33:23
  Speaker 5: up and listen.
• 33:24
  Speaker 2: Well. The Bill of Rights, of course, was written into
• 33:28
  Speaker 2: the Constitution as a guide our guard rails against action
• 33:33
  Speaker 2: by the federal government. That changed in eighteen sixty eight
• 33:39
  Speaker 2: when we essentially rewrote the method of government with the thirteenth, fourteenth,
• 33:45
  Speaker 2: and fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution. The first line of
• 33:49
  Speaker 2: the fourteenth Amendment is that all persons born or naturalized
• 33:58
  Speaker 2: within the United States of America there are citizens thereof Now,
• 34:02
  Speaker 2: then it goes on to say, and no person person
• 34:06
  Speaker 2: not citizen, no person can be deprived of life, liberty, property,
• 34:10
  Speaker 2: without due process. The law which made the it makes
• 34:13
  Speaker 2: the Bill of Rights applicable to the States. It was
• 34:15
  Speaker 2: already applicable of the federal government. So it's personhood, not
• 34:18
  Speaker 2: citizenship that determines the applicability of the rights accorded to
• 34:27
  Speaker 2: that are held naturally by people who are in America.
• 34:31
  Speaker 2: You can't take a person and illegally search them. You
• 34:35
  Speaker 2: can't take a person and subject them to cruel and
• 34:39
  Speaker 2: unusual punishment torture, hanging, flaying. You can't seize the property
• 34:46
  Speaker 2: lawfully obtained by a person who's not here without due
• 34:50
  Speaker 2: process and compensation, whether they're a citizen or not citizenship.
• 34:55
  Speaker 5: What benefit? What's the benefit of being a citizen?
• 34:58
  Speaker 4: Then?
• 34:58
  Speaker 2: Well, internationally, whether you're you're subject to wherever you travel
• 35:02
  Speaker 2: in the world, to the protection of the government the
• 35:04
  Speaker 2: United States. We have embassies and consulates around around the world.
• 35:08
  Speaker 2: You can you can vote right, you can vote to
• 35:11
  Speaker 2: choose representative which posts who are in the United States
• 35:15
  Speaker 2: unlawfully cannot do uh. You you know, a freedom of
• 35:20
  Speaker 2: movement all across the country. You aren't subject to Samari
• 35:25
  Speaker 2: summary deportation. You can't become a man without a country.
• 35:28
  Speaker 2: You can't become Philip Noland, you know, curse to float
• 35:32
  Speaker 2: on a ship around the world. So there is significant
• 35:35
  Speaker 2: benefits to citizenship of the United States, primary one being
• 35:39
  Speaker 2: you're a citizen of the greatest country in the world.
• 35:41
  Speaker 2: You take a passport, you can go anywhere pretty much,
• 35:44
  Speaker 2: and your your you and your assets are subject to
• 35:47
  Speaker 2: protection by the world's best military.
• 35:50
  Speaker 5: And you.
• 35:52
  Speaker 2: Have access to a government of laws which those who
• 35:56
  Speaker 2: are here unlawfully without proper entry don't have access to
• 36:03
  Speaker 2: the courts, other than in certain cases where they may
• 36:06
  Speaker 2: be the subject of a deportation proceeding or a criminal proceeding.
• 36:10
  Speaker 2: So I mean there's more to it than simply being
• 36:15
  Speaker 2: free from I mean more to being a citizen of
• 36:20
  Speaker 2: a country that's governed by laws of a democratic representative
• 36:23
  Speaker 2: republic in which you can participate, than everything that's included
• 36:28
  Speaker 2: in the Bill of Rights.
• 36:30
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I think the way I kind of look at
• 36:31
  Speaker 3: it is the con the constitutional rights that all persons
• 36:37
  Speaker 3: have is like the floor. I mean, that's there's certain
• 36:42
  Speaker 3: inalienable rights that just pot every person. Now, then you're
• 36:47
  Speaker 3: going to have, I mean, a myriad of laws that
• 36:51
  Speaker 3: apply only to citizens that gives privileges and benefits and
• 36:55
  Speaker 3: rights that far exceed the right to be free from
• 37:02
  Speaker 3: unreasonable search and seizure and cruel and in humane treatment
• 37:05
  Speaker 3: and that kind of thing. So it's kind of hard.
• 37:09
  Speaker 3: I mean, Dad gave some good examples, but you know,
• 37:12
  Speaker 3: there's myriad of them that we can't really rattle off
• 37:17
  Speaker 3: off the But that's why I kind of think of
• 37:19
  Speaker 3: it in that way, and that there's some minimal rights
• 37:22
  Speaker 3: that all persons have. Then there's a lot of privileges
• 37:24
  Speaker 3: and benefits you get from the the other laws in
• 37:28
  Speaker 3: the in America that applied to two citizens.
• 37:31
  Speaker 4: That makes a lot of sense to me. There's a
• 37:32
  Speaker 4: baseline we expect to treat everyone, and then as citizens
• 37:35
  Speaker 4: you have increased increased rates within the within the country.
• 37:39
  Speaker 4: That makes sense. A Payton Law Firm for you one
• 37:42
  Speaker 4: line Payton Lawfirm dot com seven five five fifty five
• 37:45
  Speaker 4: fifty six threes are a four seven five five fifty
• 37:47
  Speaker 4: five fifty six three zero four seven five five fifty
• 37:50
  Speaker 4: five fifty six every Thursday right here on five ad WHS. Tom,
• 37:53
  Speaker 4: thank you so much for your time today. Really appreciate it,
• 37:55
  Speaker 4: enjoy it. We'll see you back here next week. And Harvey,
• 37:57
  Speaker 4: thank you again. Good to see you in here. It's
• 37:58
  Speaker 4: nice to be here. Yeah, we'll see you back here
• 38:01
  Speaker 4: one or both of you next week. Thanks so much
• 38:03
  Speaker 4: for tuning in today. Dave Allen's up next on The
• 38:05
  Speaker 4: Dave Allens Show on five eighty Love followed by talk Lin.
• 38:08
  Speaker 4: Dave Alan will be back with Amanda Baron this afternoon
• 38:10
  Speaker 4: on midday at twelve o six, and then I'll be
• 38:12
  Speaker 4: back at three o six with Dave weekly on the
• 38:14
  Speaker 4: network of Dave's on Hotline. Have a great day, everyone,
• 38:16
  Speaker 4: listening to your Voice of Charleston Bob eighty w C AHS.
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: Five, AWC HSA ninety six point five's on Charleston one
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: oh four point five Cross Lane on WVRC Media Station.
• 38:31
  Speaker 4: We're proud to live here too.