►
From YouTube: Interim Joint Committee on Judiciary (11-17-21)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Representative
fisher
president,
in
my
district
representative,
hebron
present
in
the
room
representative,
cole,
carney.
H
All
right,
mr
chairman,
this
is
alice
kerr
and
I'm
remote
in
the
district.
I
apologize.
I
A
All
those
any
discussion,
any
questions
sing
none
all
those
in
favor,
please
vote
for
saying,
aye
aye!
Thank
you.
Those
opposed
seeing
none
all.
G
A
Moving
right
along
we're
going
to
go
in
order
of
the
items
here
on
the
agenda,
I
believe
this
morning
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
call
up
our
first
group
from
louisville
metro
government.
We've
got
jennifer
green.
The
board
chair,
who
I
believe
is
with
us
this
morning,
come
on
up
and
I
believe
mr
harness
brand
new
office
of
the
inspector
general,
mr
harness,
is
attending
remotely.
A
I
see
him
there,
I'm
not
sure
who
ms
green,
if
you
or
mr
harness,
want
to
speak
first,
but
you
have
the
floor.
K
L
L
L
As
I
mentioned,
the
working
group
was
comprised
of
a
cross
section
of
the
city
of
louisville
lots
of
civic,
social,
religious
and
spiritual
interests,
political
interests
represented
in
that
group,
and
they
really
came
together.
It
was
a
group
led
by
my
personal
councilwoman,
councilwoman,
paula,
mccraney
and
ellen
hessen
in
the
mayor's
office,
to
debate
research
and
recommend
the
best
structure
for
how
we
want
to
do
civilian
review
oversight
within
the
city
of
louisville.
L
Let's
see,
the
working
group
was
comprised
of
approximately
30
through
33
individuals
and
that
working
group
recommended
what
they
described
as
a
hybrid
model
to
bring
to
life
civilian
oversight
within
the
city
of
louisville
and
really
what
I
think
that
means
is
the
the
the
civilian
review
board
in
louisville.
It
is
largely
an
advisory
board.
It
plays
an
advisory
role.
L
L
It's
sort
of
a
it's,
a
social
and
societal
signal
that
the
police
are
not
policing
themselves,
that
there's
a
second
pair
of
eyes
that
are
involved
in
reviewing
matters
of
police
misconduct
brought
forth
through
a
formal
complaint
process.
In
addition,
the
board's
role,
it's
one
of
oversight
of
the
office
of
inspector
general,
so
I'm
excited
that
mr
harness
is
with
us
now.
There's
a
lot
of
work
to
be
done.
L
He's
got
a
very
steep
ramp
up
in
his
first
90
days,
because
our
goal
is
to
put
into
effect
all
of
the
great
thinking
the
diverse
cross,
political
bipartisan
thinking
that
went
into
putting
this
board
into
effect,
all
with
a
view
of
giving
ordinary
everyday
citizens
just
kind
of
faith
that,
when
they
lodge
a
complaint
against
law
enforcement
that
there's
somebody
who's
outside
of
the
sort
of
core
infrastructure.
That's
taking
a
look
at
that.
L
L
I
won't
read
this
line
by
line
except
to
emphasize
that
the
entire
ward
is
very
familiar
with
the
scope,
remit,
limitations,
powers
and
duties
of
the
the
body
that
we
have
collectively
come
together
to
participate
in
and
we're
respectful
of
all
the
thinking
that
sort
of
formed
how
we
are
to
interact
both
with
you
know,
law
enforcement
and
with
the
mayor
and
metro
council-
and
we
have
every
intent
of
following
this
guidance
to
the
black
letter
of
the
ordinance.
L
This
next
slide
just
lists
out,
and
I
apologize
for
the
animation
I'm
just
gonna
keep
clicking
through
it
lists
out
the
inaugural
members
of
the
board.
There
are
11
of
us
for
those
who
are
not
familiar.
We
all
came
to
the
board
through
basically
three
different
routes.
L
Another
four
nominees
came
from
a
cross
section
of
working
groups
within
the
city
of
louisville,
which
includes
groups
like
aclu
of
kentucky
gli,
the
interdenominational
ministerial
court
coalition,
naacp
urban
league
waipal,
louisville
bar
association.
So
there's
four
individuals
on
the
board
who
came
out
of
that
nomination
pool
and
then
there's
another
four
that
came
through
direct
nomination
to
the
mayor
of
the
city
of
louisville.
That's
greg
fisher.
L
L
Our
first
meeting
was
april
of
2021,
and
I'm
told
this
was
right
after
the
end
of
your
last
legislative
session
between
april
and
now,
we've
gone
through
countless
trainings
and
that's
later
in
the
deck
in
person,
we've
spent
about
eight
to
ten
hours,
with
lmpd
doing
simulation
training
really
trying
to
understand
what
a
fresh
recruit
coming
into
the
force
with
experience.
Of
course,
you
can't
condense,
you
know
six
months
of
training
into
eight
hours,
but
I
think
we
walked
away
from
all
of
that.
L
Having
a
lot
of
respect
for
what
law
enforcement
does
and
all
the
training
and
credentialing
that
they
have
to
go
to
before
they're
even
allowed
on
the
street.
In
addition,
each
of
us
have
had
to
do
24
hours
in
total
of
ride-alongs,
and
this
really
was,
I
think,
transformative
to
a
lot
of
people.
In
addition
to
just
kind
of
seeing
what
a
typical
day
is,
which
I
think
many
members
of
law
enforcement
would
say,
there
is
no
such
thing
as
a
typical
day.
L
We
also
got
to
engage
in
dialogue,
and
I
think
you
know
demystifying
to
the
officers
who
had
heard
different
things
or
imagine
things
that
maybe
perhaps
allow
their
imagination
to
run
away
with
them.
To
just
see
that,
like
we're
people-
and
we
want
the
same
things
that
we
put
on
our
pants
one
leg
at
a
time
and
we're
all
here-
because
we
are-
you-
know-
committed
to
the
mission
of
strengthening
community
and
law
enforcement
relations
and
bringing
transparency
and
visibility
into
the
perspectives
of
a
cross-section
of
the
community,
including
law
enforcement.
L
So
those
conversations
were
incredibly
helpful
and
I
think
have
done
a
great
deal
to
hopefully
help
manage
the
change
within
the
force
in
terms
of
introducing
an
additional
layer
of
oversight
that
they
rightfully
probably
have
some
hesitations
about
to
say
the
least,
and
then
lastly,
you
know
I
mentioned
that
we
went
through
a
series
of
trainings
and
I'm
a
attorney
by
a
profession
and
training.
So
it
was
great
to
be
re-immersed
in
all
of
these
topics
and
hear
from
actual
practitioners,
as
opposed
to
just
professors
in
the
ivory
tower.
L
So
with
that,
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
mr
ed
harness
who's
on
zoom
with
us
today.
I
am
so
excited
that
ed
was
formally
approved
by
louisville
metro
council
last
thursday
november
11th.
He
comes
to
us
from
albuquerque
new
mexico,
where
he
was
the
executive
director
of
the
oversight
agency
there
prior
to
that
he
was
in
private
practice
for
over
a
decade,
and
he
also
is
a
prior
member
of
law
enforcement
and
the
armed
services,
and,
I
think,
was
a
member
of
the
milwaukee
police
department
earlier
in
his
career.
O
I'm
happy
to
be
with
you.
N
Be
assumed
this
at
this
point
next
time,
hopefully
we'll
be
in
person.
I
want
to
say
I'm
grateful
for
the
opportunity
here
very
excited
about
the
chance
to
be
with
the
louisville
metro
office
of
inspector
general,
and
I
can't
wait
to
get
to
work.
N
As
chair
green
pointed
out
my
background,
I
have
been
the
executive
director
of
the
albuquerque
civilian
police
oversight
agency
for
the
past
six
years,
albuquerque
has
been
operating
under
a
consent
decree
from
the
department
of
justice
for
the
past
seven
years
and
as
a
part
of
that,
our
agency
was
being
monitored
as
well
previously
in
one
of
the
slides,
it
was
pointed
out
that
there
are
no
no
organization
oversight,
organizations
that
are
uniform,
they're
all
quite
different.
N
I
have
experience
in
two
types
of
oversight:
organizations
a
hybrid
which
we
did
in
albuquerque
much
like
will
be
here
in
louisville,
doing
review
and
also
conducting
investigations.
N
I
understand
that
we're
going
to
broach
some
topics
today
regarding
oversight
and
the
powers
of
the
oversight
agency,
so
I'll
be
happy
to
answer
questions
as
best
I
can,
having
only
been
to
one
review
board
meeting
at
this
point,
I'll
be
looking
for
them
to
help
me
define
how
we
conduct
our
business.
A
C
I
wish
it
had
been
established
that
way
where
there
is
an
advisory
capacity
up
front
rather
than
being
in
a
review
panel,
and
you
know
the
concern
is
that,
even
though
you
say
that
that
what
comes
out
of
this
will
be
recommendations
without
doubt,
there
will
be
pressure
on
the
upper
administration
to
follow
the
recommendations,
and
so
I
think,
there's
a
little
bit
more
force,
perhaps
than
what.
What
is
you
know
what
I
heard
today.
C
It
may
be
a
recommendation,
but
there
are
obviously
implied
expectations
that
the
leadership
follow
these
recommendations,
maybe
not
so
much
from
the
board,
but
in
the
public's
eye
there
will
be,
and
in
my
mind
this
is
a
situation
that
should
have
been
addressed
by
louisville
metro
itself.
The
change
in
culture
has
got
to
come
from
within
the
agency
and
I
think,
setting
up
a
an
advisory
panel
that
is,
is
formally
there
and
always
there
to
advise
to
provide
input
from
the
community.
C
I
think
that
would
have
been
a
much
more
productive
way
to
do
this
and
perhaps
not
been
so
difficult,
maybe
for
the
for
the
officers
to
accept
louisville
metro
has
a
good
police
department
and
they
have
problems,
and
I
think
everyone
will
agree
with
that.
I
think
most
of
the
officers
will
agree
with
that,
but
we
have
got
to
make
sure
that
that
that
they
have
the
ability
to
change
what's
going
on,
because
I
think
that's
where
the
true
change
will
take
place
is
within
the
ranks
of
the
officers
themselves.
C
And
so
I
I
like
the
attitude.
I
like
the
tone
that
you're
taking
and
to
me
that's
a
look.
It's
a
little
comforting.
What
I
heard
today
and
I
I
appreciate
that-
and
I
hope
that
I'm
wrong
and
if
I'm
wrong
I'll,
be
the
first
to
admit
it,
and
I
hope
that
good
things
come
out
of
this.
I
hope
that
louisville
metro
gains
the
trust
of
the
community
back.
I
hope
the
community
starts
to
support
the
police
department
again,
and
those
relationships
are
are
once
again
in
a
positive
direction.
C
So
I
do
appreciate
the
efforts,
but
I'm
still
very
skeptical,
of
this.
At
this
point
I
have
24
years
in
in
law
enforcement.
Many
of
those
years
were
spent
as
internal
affairs
investigator,
a
few
of
them
three
or
four.
So
I
do
understand
the
issues,
but
I
also
understand
that
working
in
a
police
department,
the
change
has
got
to
come
from
within
police
officers,
do
not
like
being
forced
to
do
things,
so
I
would.
C
I
would
hope
that
that
the
city
of
louisville
makes
the
officers
as
much
a
part
of
this
process
as
they
possibly
can
as
the
community
heals
from
from
the
events
of
the
last
year
and
a
half
one
question
that
I
have
for
you,
I'm
sorry
for
taking
so
much
time
with
with
the
board
itself.
L
And
I'll
take
that
one.
First
of
all,
thank
you,
senator
carroll,
for
your
comments.
I
I
appreciate
your
perspective.
I
have
been
working
very
hard
to
forge
a
relationship
with
chief's
shields.
I
have
interacted
with
I'm
blanking
on
the
woman's
name,
but
I
believe
it's
basically
her.
First
deputy.
L
I
have
routine
interaction
with
a
gentleman
by
the
name
of
lieutenant
william
vogt
within
the
lmp
agency,
but
I
think
your
point
is
there
probably
should
be
some
sort
of
informal
to
formal
connectivity
to
ensure
that
we
are
not.
We
don't
have
any
blind
spots
when
we're
thinking
about
discrete
matters,
and
I
will
take
your
recommendation
under
advice
and
and
we'll
circle
back
with
the
chief
to
see.
If
there's
somebody
within
her
organization
who
she'd
like
to
delegate
to
to
play
that
role
formally.
C
G
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
presentation
and
I
will
echo
the
the
comments
and
the
recommendation
by
senator
carroll
myself,
also
being
retired
law
enforcement
here
in
kentucky
from
the
state
police,
I'm
glad
to
see
that
it's
been
presented
as
an
advisory
role
as
well.
It
it's
one
of
those
things
that
I'm
also
fearful
for
outside
influence.
G
If
things
were
to
happen
on
you
all,
as
as
the
advisory
board
or
accountability
board
that
you
may
face,
I
hope
that
that,
as
they
look
at
certain
situations
that
they
will
gather
all
the
facts,
rather
than
deal
with
social
media
information
and,
quite
frankly,
even
media
information,
but
but
get
to
the
facts.
Oftentimes
we've
seen
regardless
if
it's,
if
it's
involving
law
enforcement
or
someone
in
our
community
when
facts
come
out
at
trial,
it'll
be
different
than
what
maybe
we
thought
beforehand.
G
I
I'm
just
really
concerned
also
this
serves
as
a
potential.
I
think
your
hearts
are
in
the
right
place.
I
really
do,
but
I
also
know
this
serves
as
the
potential
of
causing
some
individuals
that
may
go
into
law
enforcement
or
may
want
to
come
to
lmpd
to
think
twice
about
it
because
of,
unfortunately,
of
things
they've
seen
in
other
areas
with
these
type
of
boards
and
what
we're
seeing
already
is
we're
seeing
a
a
very
big
turn
of
people
no
longer
wanting
to
go
into
the
profession.
G
That's
going
to
discourage
young
men
and
women
that
may
want
to
pursue
a
career
in
law
enforcement.
Out
of
fear
that
by
doing
things
right
and
the
majority
of
the
police
officers
really
try
to
do
it's
like
every
other
profession.
Are
there
bad
apples
in
the
barrel?
Absolutely
there
is,
and
we
try
our
best.
That's
why?
We've
senator
carol-
and
I
have
both
carried
legislation-
to
try
to
rid
ourselves
of
bad
actors
in
our
law
enforcement
community
here
in
the
commonwealth.
G
But
what
happens
when
we
begin
to
see
the
good
people
no
longer
want
to
go
in
it?
There's
still
going
to
be
people,
that's
going
to
go
in
it
and
what
you're
going
to
see
is
you're
going
to
see
an
increase
because
we're
lowering
our
standards
to
get
people,
because
we've
got
to
feel
those
shoes.
We
lower
our
standards,
we're
going
to
get
people
in
there,
that's
going
to
be
problems
for
our
communities,
people
that
we
normally
would
not
have
taken,
and
I
think
this
thing
can
backfire
on
us.
G
If
we're
really
not
cautious
now
one
thing
I
would
add,
as
a
recommendation
as
well,
besides
liaison
with
lmpd,
I
would
really
think
very
hard
about
the
board
seeking
someone
that
has
law
enforcement
experience.
I'm
not
talking
about
somebody,
that's
green
and
they
don't
have
to
be
from
lmpd,
but
someone
that
has
a
background.
G
Sometimes,
when
they're
in
that
situation
and
they're
trying
to
survive,
they
want
to
live,
and
so
I
would
recommend
that
someone
that
has
some
experience
that
can
be
a
benefit
to
the
board
to
help
say:
okay,
here's
what
they
may
be
experiencing,
they
may
be
going
through,
that's
been
there.
It
would
be
like
me
putting
together
a
civilian
accountability
board
for
any
other
profession.
G
Let's
say
for
doctors
and
I'm
going
to
sit
in
there
with
no
experience
whatsoever
in
heart
surgery
and
all
of
a
sudden,
I'm
going
to
question
the
doctor's
decision.
When
things
go
wrong
on
that
table
of
the
decision
they
made
to
try
to
save
a
life,
you
know-
and
I
just
think
you
need
somebody
there-
that's
walked
in
the
shoes
that
can
help
guide
you
all
when
you're
brought
into
certain
situations
and
if
it's
a
good
officer,
here's
what
you'll
find
they'll
be
the
first
ones
to
tell
you
if
it
was
a
good
officer.
G
This
person
acted
wrong.
They
were
out
of
line
and
something
needs
to
be
done.
So
I
I
would
just
you
know
I
I'm
going
to
sit
back
and
I'm
going
to
watch
cautiously.
I
hope
that
that
that
louisville's,
civilian
review
and
accountability
board
becomes
the
the
standard
across
the
nation.
If
we're
going
to
have
these
things,
and
so
I
I
set
back-
and
I
wish
you
all
the
best
of
luck,
I
want
you
to
be
successful.
G
M
Thank
you
chairman,
and
thank
you
chairwoman,
greene
for
being
here
today.
This
has
been
a
very
interesting
subject.
I'm
going
to
try
to
make
an
analogy,
and
I'm
going
to
ask
for
your
all's
wherewithal
with
this,
because
I
don't
know
how
good
of
an
analogy
it
is.
M
But
you
know
I'm
I'm
a
healthcare
provider,
and
I
can
remember-
oh
probably
25,
30
years
ago,
when
we
were
doing
film
screen
mammography
and
most
people
in
the
country
were
trying
to
do
it
right,
but
some
places
were
doing
an
absolutely
abysmal
job
to
where
you
would
look
at
these
images
and
they
were
completely
non-diagnostic
and
people
were
dying,
because
these
were
screening
and
diagnostic
mammograms
on
women.
M
Looking
for
breast
cancer
and
the
people
who
were
doing
such
a
bad
job
were
hurting
people
and
what
happened
they
came
in
federally
and
they
to
the
freaking
degree,
told
us
what
temperature
your
processors
had
to
be
at
how
many
films
you
had
to
run
before
you
could
do
a
screening
mammogram
exactly
what
your
kvs
and
your
mas
and
those
of
us
who
were
in
the
business
at
the
time
were
like.
Oh,
my
god.
M
I
mean
these
people,
don't
even
read
mammograms
they're
coming
in
and
telling
us
to
the
degree
exactly
what
we're
supposed
to
do,
but
the
truth
is
they
were
right
and
the
quality
of
film
screen
mammography,
which
we
no
longer
use,
were
now
digital,
but
the
quality
of
film
screen
mammography
increased
drastically
across
the
united
states,
and
I
can
remember
being
the
professional
who
said
we
don't
need
these
people.
This
is
crazy.
This
is
this
is
invasive
in
my
work,
but
the
truth
is
we
needed
it.
M
We
needed
it
not
because
of
those
of
us
who
were
doing
a
good
job.
You
refer,
sir,
to
good
officers.
You
get
a
good
officer,
there's
an
implication
there
that
there's
a
bad
officer
that
you
could
have
chosen
and
that's
what
we
were
doing
with
film
screen.
There
were
people
who
were
doing
it
right
and
there
were
people
who
were
doing
it
so
wrong
that
we
needed
that
oversight,
the
profession
as
a
whole
required
it.
So
this
is,
I
don't
know.
M
I
hope
my
analogy
is:
is
you
all
are
understanding
it,
but
for
for
those
police
officers
in
the
room
and
those
police
officers
who
are
listening,
I
understand
the
feeling
I
was
there.
I
was
like
what
are
we
doing?
This
is
time.
This
is
money.
This
is
energy.
Those
of
us
who
are
doing
it
right
should
be
left
alone,
but
the
truth
is
there
were
too
many
of
us
doing
it
wrong.
M
So
I
applaud
what
you're
doing.
I
hope
this
analogy
makes
sense
and
maybe
gives
a
little
bit
of
peace
to
some
of
those
people
who
are
so
concerned,
because
we
made
it
through
that
whole
process.
It
improved
the
process,
it
actually
saved
lives.
It
made
a
difference.
It
was
necessary.
So
thank
you
for
what
you're
doing.
A
Representative
bratcher
and
if
I
can
encourage
folks,
for
the
sake
of
time,
to
get
right
to
the
heart
of
your
question
if
you've
got
a
question,
if
you've
got
a
comment-
and
I
appreciate
the
comments
that
have
been
provided
by
all
three
legislators
before
just
now,
but
we're
we
need
to.
If
there
are
questions,
we
need
to
get
the
questions
first,
if
we
have
time
for
commentary
or
or
comments
or
or
remarks
after
that,
we
can
representative
bratcher.
F
I
am
I'll
get
right
to
the
point
I'm
from
louisville.
Also
as
chairwoman
greene
is,
and
I
admire
her
work.
I
don't
think
we've
really
properly
met
before,
but
I
appreciate
her
hard
work
on
this
and
many
other
issues
in
louisville
and
I'll
keep
it.
I
just
have
two
questions
and
I'll
just
get
right
to
the
first
one
we've
heard
we've
heard
issues
about
this
board
is
called
the
civilian
review
and
accountability.
F
Now,
I'm
all
for
as
much
review
as
as
we
can
foster,
I
mean
everything
we
do
needs
to
be
reviewed
by
as
many
people
as
as
we
can
find,
but
the
accountability
part
number
one
I'd
like
you
to
talk
about.
What
do
you
mean
by
accountability?
I
mean
we
have
an
elaborate
court
system.
We
have
a
metro
council,
we
have
an
elected
mayor.
How
much
more
accountability
do
we
need
from
a
from
a
civilian
board?
F
I
wish
you
would
drop
that
word
and
just
call
the
board
a
review
because,
like
I
said,
I'm
all
for
review
and
number
two
chairwoman
green.
How
much
when
this
ordinance
or
law
was
created?
How
much
credence
was
given
to
where
the
people
on
the
board
live?
I
know
I
represent
fern
creek
high
view
parts
of
j
town.
I
don't
know
if
there's
anybody
in
my
area,
even
on
that
board,
was
any
regional
geographic
areas
considered
on
who
would
sit
on
this
board?
F
I
don't
know
and
that
I'll
be
learning
when
you
describe
that
one.
So
the
first
question
is:
what
do
you
mean
by
accountability
and
number
two
geographic
areas?
And
again
I
want
to
thank
you,
I
think
you're,
an
excellent
council
person
and
I
hate
to
see
you
leave,
but
I've
heard
that
you're
getting
ready
to
retire
after
this
term.
But
good
luck
to
you
and
please
answer
those
two
questions.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
L
L
And
I
fully
appreciate
your
questions.
Unfortunately,
I'm
I'm
not
in
a
position
to
answer
them
since
my
involvement
with
the
board,
it
was
subsequent
to
all
of
those
questions
being
fleshed
out
like
the
naming
of
the
board
and
selection
of
candidates.
So
I
will
I've
made
a
note
of
your
questions
and
I
will
follow
up
if
that's
okay,.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
have
some
of
the
same
questions
that
representative
brancher
has.
I
would
would
note
that
we
have
a
lot
of
civilian
review.
It's
the
city
council,
it's
grand
juries
and
it's
pediatrics.
We
have
those
as
well.
I
I
really
am
interested
in
the
geographic
makeup
of
the
of
the
board,
I'm
also
interested
in
the
in
the
in
the
partisan
or
ideological
makeup
of
the
board
as
well.
I
don't
know
how
you
can
identify
that
other
than
partisan
last
question.
I
The
question,
though,
mr
chairman,
is
this:
when
a
police
officer
is
charged
like
I
said,
civilian
review,
we
have
it
grand
juries
pedigrees
when
they're
charged,
they
have
the
right
to
defend
themselves,
we're
seeing
what's
going
on
in
cases
across
the
country
even
today,
but
how
important
it
is
to
actually
see
the
facts.
As
you
have
the
cross-examination
the
opportunity
to
be
heard
and
to
present
your
own
side,
how
it
kind
of
changes,
the
views
of
things,
will
an
officer
have
the
right
to
be
present,
not
requirement,
obviously
we're
not.
I
L
Okay,
well
my
apologies
and
thank
you,
representative
nemes.
I
am
an
ordinary.
I
have
a
law
degree,
but
I'm
just
an
ordinary
citizen
and
it's
been
a
very
long
time
since
I
thought
about
things
like
standards
of
review
and
you
know,
policies
and
procedures,
so
I
would
kindly
defer
to
and
rely
on
our
new
ig's
expertise
to
lead
us
and
guide
us
in
that
way.
But
I
think
your
point
is
you're
talking
about
due
process
right.
I
think
yeah.
L
I
don't
want
to
speak
prematurely
because
we
don't
have
any
processes
or
procedures
in
place,
but
philosophically
no,
I
I
don't
object
to
somebody
having
an
opportunity
to
defend
themselves.
Okay,.
I
I'm
interested
I'm
interested
to
see
how
any
review
or
any
investigation
into
an
individual's
conduct
without
having
that
I've,
given
that
person
an
opportunity
to
defend
him
or
herself
how
any
of
that
can
be
legit
at
all
anyway,
all
right,
I'd
look
forward
to
that
answer.
Maybe
in
writing.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
O
I
did
I
apologize.
I
switched
over
to
my
phone,
so
hopefully
this
will
be
more
stable.
L
No
worries
ed.
We
got
a
question
from
representative
nemes
about
it's
broadly
due
process,
meaning
if
a
complaint
is
lodged
against
the
member
of
a
law
of
law
enforcement,
should
they
and
do
they
have
a
right
to
be
present
to
defend
themselves,
including
by
engaging
counsel
to
represent
their
interests.
L
And
my
question
to
you
was:
can
you
tell
us
how
that
has
worked
in
albuquerque?
We
have
actually
not
reviewed
a
single
complaint
in
louisville,
so
I
don't
mean
to
be
coy,
but
I
just
have
no
experiential
basis
from
which
to
say
anything
rooted
in
facts
or
reality.
So
ed,
would
you
mind
addressing
that.
O
Ab
absolutely-
and
I
I
appreciate
the
question
from
and
I
apologize
for
my
internet
issues
today-
it's
windy
here
in
albuquerque
and
during
the
fifth
season,
the
windy
season.
Sometimes
the
internet
gets
a
little
bulky,
but
absolutely
the
officers
are
will
be
afforded
all
procedural
due
process
in
accordance
with
their
collective
bargaining
agreement
and
all
other
procedural
due
processes
as
being
a
a
metro,
louisville
employee
in
albuquerque.
O
Whenever
an
an
officer
is
interviewed,
they
have
a
representative
with
them.
Normally
it's
somebody
from
the
union,
but
they
also
can
choose
to
have
their
legal
counsel
with
them.
If
they
choose
to
do
so,
they
are
also
provided
a
copy
of
the
complaint,
so
they
can
know
exactly
what
those
allegations
are
and
then,
at
the
end
of
the
investigation,
they
are
provided
with
the
findings
as
to
what,
by
preponderance
of
the
evidence,
was
the
finding
of
the
investigation.
O
Absolutely
I'm
going
to
try
to
get
there
as
soon
as
I
can.
I
just
I
had
my
last
day
with
the
albuquerque
cpoa
on
monday
and
it
was
a
site
visit
with
monitors
and
doj,
and
so
I
thought
it
was
important
for
me
to
to
do
that.
So
I
could
smooth
the
transition
to
the
new
interim
director.
A
Well,
mr
harness,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
you
making
time
chair
green.
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
it
as
you
can
tell.
We've
got
some
thoughts
and
opinions
about
how
this
board
ought
to
function
or
whether
or
not
it
should
even
be
from
the
members
of
this
committee,
and
it's
come
up
as
a
result
of
discussions
about
subpoena
authority,
and
I
know
that
in
albuquerque.
I
I
believe-
and
I
believe
mr
harness
mentioned
this,
but
they
under
the
consent
decree.
They
have
that
authority
there
as
a
result
of
that.
A
But
it's
been
of
some
debate
here,
because
the
only
only
group,
the
only
institution
state
government
that
can
grant
that
power
is
the
one
that
these
folks
serve
on,
and
so
we
appreciate
your
time
appreciate
your
input.
I
suspect
the
issue
will
come
back
up
again.
I
do
want
to
ask
chair,
massey,
asked
this
or
wanted
me
to
ask
this.
A
So
if
I
botch
this
chairman,
you
feel
free
to
correct
me,
but
if
the
board
comes
up
with
or
produces
some
sort
of
annual
report
of
some
kind,
I
was
wondering
chair
if
you'd
be
willing
to
share
that
with
the
legislature.
If,
if
not
specifically
the
entire
general
assembly
or
the
lrc,
perhaps
just
the
judiciary
committee
and
its
membership,
you
can
direct
it
to
either
chair
massey
or
myself
we'd
be
interested
in
staying
in
the
loop.
There.
A
Thank
you,
chairwoman.
I
appreciate
it.
Thank
you
all
so
much
all
right.
Our
next
presentation,
our
friend
representative,
patrick
flannery,
with
house
district
96
and
he
is
joined
by
two
of
our
committee's
friends,
stacy
tapke,
county
attorney
from
kenton
county
and
the
current
president
of
the
county,
attorney's
association
and
our
friend
alan
george,
with
the
car,
with
the
kentucky
county,
attorneys
association
and
the
woodford
county
attorney
himself.
Also
no
stranger
to
this
committee.
Glad
to
have
all
three
of
you
we're
here
to
talk
about
duis
right.
We
are
representative.
You
have.
P
The
floor,
sir.
Thank
you.
Members
of
the
committee,
mr
chairman,
I'm
joined
today
by
stacey
tapke
to
my
left,
the
kenton
county
attorney,
and
to
my
right,
alan
george,
the
woodford
county
attorney,
I'm
working
on
a
bill
that
I
do
plan
on
pre-filing,
where
we
have
a
working
draft
and
I
hope
to
have
that
pre-filed
in
the
next
few
weeks,
to
sort
through
some
of
the
language.
P
So
why
do
we
need
dui
legislation?
A
few
months
ago,
the
kentucky
supreme
court
had
the
mccarthy
decision.
The
mccarthy
decision
dealt
with
a
refusal
of
a
blood
test
and
it
was
based
upon
the
birchfield
verse
versus
north
dakota
decision
from
the
u.s
supreme
court.
I
believe
in
2016.,
so
this
is
in
response
to
a
supreme
court
decision
and
that's
why
we
need
it.
P
How
do
we
plan
on
going
about
this
and
and
why
it's
important,
currently
under
this,
under
this
case
law,
a
refusal
is,
is
prevents
any
evidence
from
being
submitted
to
to
a
jury.
P
So
what
we're
planning
on
doing
the
concept
is
to
currently
statutory
law
does
not
allow
a
search
warrant
on
a
dui
case
unless
there
is
a
death
or
physical
injury,
we're
going
to
strike
that,
and
we
believe
this
will
be
the
best
way
to
tackle
the
problem
a
lot
of
times
when
people
think
of
duis,
they
think
of
alcohol
related
to
uis,
really
drug
drug
driving
is
probably
on
pace,
if
not
more
problematic
than
than
alcohol-related
duis,
and
when
you,
when
you
try
to
test
someone,
you've
got
primarily
three
ways:
you've
got
a
breathalyzer
or
a
toxilizer
that
can
be
performed.
P
You
have
a
urine
test
and
a
blood
test.
Well,
under
this
case
law,
it
it's
going
to
cause
and
is
causing
serious
problems
with
primarily
with
drug
driving,
because
those
refusals
are
are
thrown
out
on
the
blood
test.
Blood
is
what
a
blood
test
is,
what
is
needed
for
drug
driving,
so
it
is
important.
P
D
D
Obviously
I'm
old,
so
I
won't
be
doing
a
powerpoint
presentation
just
speaking
briefly,
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
the
kentucky
county
attorneys
association
as
we
seek
to
have.
You
amend
our
dui
laws
to
allow
law
enforcement
officers
to
obtain
a
search
warrant
when
the
offender
refuses
a
request
for
a
blood
test.
This
is
not
a
novel
concept,
but
one
which
is
now
a
matter
of
grave
concern.
D
Thanks
to
the
general
assembly,
kentucky
has
passed
impactful
dui
legislation,
including
the
lowering
of
the
alcohol
per
se,
limit
to
.08
the
2010
dui
drugs
per
se
law
and,
most
recently,
the
ignition
interlock
law.
While
that's
the
good
news
for
dui
prosecution,
I'm
here
today
to
talk
about
the
bad
news,
the
kentucky
supreme
court's
mccarthy,
opinion
rendered
april
29th
and
its
already
devastating
impact
on
dui
drugs
prosecution
in
kentucky.
D
The
mccarthy
case
holds
that
going
forward.
Prosecutors
are
now
on
notice
that
a
dui
rsd
has
a
constitutional
right
to
refuse
a
blood
test,
and
his
or
her
decision
to
refuse
to
submit
to
a
blood
test
cannot
be
testified
to
by
the
arresting
officer,
so
the
refusal
can
no
longer
be
introduced
as
evidence,
nor
can
it
even
be
commented
on
by
a
prosecutor.
D
I'd
ask
you
to
remember
how
clara
peller
asked
in
the
famous
1984
wendy's
commercial
campaign
wears
the
beef
well
jurors
in
blood
test
refusal
cases
are
now
wondering
where's
the
test
our
fellow
prosecutors
are
already
seeing
jurors
render
not
guilty
verdicts
in
in
such
cases.
When
a
prosecutor
recently
asked
the
juror
on
a
panel
that
had
returned
a
not
guilty
verdict,
what
could
have
been
done
differently
in
prosecuting
the
case?
The
juror
simply
responded,
no
test,
no
conviction.
D
A
dui
charge
is
the
only
criminal
offense
in
our
penal
code,
for
which
a
search
warrant
cannot
be
obtained
upon
the
requisite
showing
of
probable
cause.
We
have
to
show
probable
cause
plus
death
or
injury.
Why
are
dui
offenders
given
this
protection,
which
goes
above
and
beyond
the
protections,
even
someone
charged
with
the
capital?
Offense
of
murder
is
afforded
this
restricted.
D
Limiting
language
is,
needless
and
frankly,
inexplicable.
According
to
the
most
recent
mothers
against
drunk
driving
report,
34
states
already
allow
for
search
warrants
without
any
conditions
in
the
event
of
a
blood
test
refusal,
including
all
seven
of
our
bordering
states.
We
hope
that
kentucky
will
join
the
ranks
of
other
states
by
allowing
a
search
warrant
in
all
dui
cases,
not
just
in
those
cases
involving
death
or
physical
injury,
which,
by
the
way,
those
are
the
rarest
of
cases.
D
Most
dui's,
thankfully,
are
garden
variety
with
the
stop
resulting
from
speeding
or
bad
driving
or
something
as
innocuous
as
expired
registration.
But
right
now
we
cannot
get
a
search
warrant
for
a
blood
draw
in
those
cases,
and
this
is
why
that's
important.
We
want
to
be
able
to
successfully
prosecute
these
cases
where
we
currently
cannot
get
a
search
warrant
in
the
hope
of
preventing
the
type
of
later
tragic
dui,
where
we
can
get
a
search
warrant
by
then
it's
too
late.
The
human
damage
has
been
done.
D
We
want
to
be
proactive
and
preventive
in
our
dui
prosecution,
prosecution
and
not
just
reactive
to
a
fatality
which
perhaps
could
have
been
avoided.
Here's
the
other
thing
about
getting
a
blood
test
as
prosecutors.
We
are
sworn
and
we
must
and
do
vow
to
seek
justice,
not
necessarily
convictions.
The
blood
test
results
could
actually
exonerate
a
defendant
and
if
so,
we
are
bound
to
cease
that
dui
prosecution,
while
the
search
warrant
component
is
the
main
thrust
of
this
legislation
and
our
primary
concern.
D
We
need
this
change
now
in
this
session
and
hopefully
with
an
emergency
clause
in
2020
43
of
the
16
749
dui
rs
made
in
kentucky
involved
only
drugs
and
another
11
percent
involved,
a
combination
of
drugs
and
alcohol,
so
drugs
were
a
factor,
at
least
in
part.
In
54
of
kentucky's
impaired
driving
cases,
there
were
173
deaths
in
the
commonwealth,
resulting
from
dui
collisions
in
2020
and
80
of
those
fatalities
resulted
from
a
dui
drugs
related
case.
D
Those
are
powerful,
sobering
numbers
and,
speaking
of
powerful
and
sober,
I
was
made
aware
of
by
jefferson
county
attorney,
michael
connell
who's.
Here
with
us.
Today's
office
of
a
situation
they're
dealing
with
in
jefferson,
county
42,
42
year
old
woman,
was
arrested
on
november
7th
for
obviously
impaired
driving.
The
pbt
showed
no
alcohol
in
her
system,
so
they
went
for
a
blood
draw.
D
She
refused.
She
was
given
a
court
date
three
days
later
november,
10th
that
morning,
that
very
morning
of
november
10
before
she
was
to
appear
in
jefferson
district
court,
she
was
driving
allegedly
impaired
the
wrong
way
on
a
highway
in
oldham
county,
crashed
head-on
and
killed
a
16
year-old
girl.
A
young
woman
on
her
way
to
school
that
young
woman's
sister
was
in
the
car
with
her.
She
is
in
critical
condition
as
of
this
past
weekend,
they're
awaiting
the
toxicology
reports.
D
We
truly
believe
if
this
one
simple
fix
is
made
to
delete
the
requirement
that
there
must
be
death
or
physical
injury
to
get
a
search
warrant.
Most
offenders
will
end
up
taking
the
blood
test
because
they
will
be
told
if
they
refuse
a
search
warrant
will
be
obtained,
so
they
can
do
it
the
easy
way
or
the
hard
way,
either
by
consent
or
search
warrant.
Though
they
will.
We
will
then
be
able
to
determine
what,
if
anything
they
have
in
their
system.
D
We
already
have
the
fourth
highest
rate
of
refusal
in
the
country,
and
this
is
one
category
where
we
don't
aspire
to
be
number
one,
but
we're
heading
in
that
direction.
Without
this
change,
every
prosecutor
here
today
can
and
would
attest.
We
have
already
seen
a
dramatic
and
alarming
uptick
in
blood
test
refusals,
since
the
mccarthy
opinion
came
down
and
and
that
it's
because
this
is
how
it
works
under
our
implied
consent
law.
D
We
have
in
all
likelihood
a
losing
dui
case
and
all
we're
asking
for
is
a
fair
case.
In
my
opinion,
enough
is
enough
for
these
dui
drug
offenders.
How
many
more
people
are
to
be
hurt?
How
many
more
lives
are
to
be
lost
because
of
them?
We're
simply
asking
that
you
help
us
in
our
efforts
to
have
a
fair
shot
in
curtailing
drug
driving,
and
we
would
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have
about.
The
proposed
legislation.
K
I
would
just
add
this
for
the
kentucky
county
attorneys
association.
This
is
definitely
a
high
priority.
Alan
george
very
effectively
explain
to
you
why
so
thank
you
for
your
consideration
of
any
legislation.
Thank
you
for
looking
looking
out
for
this
important
issue.
A
Well,
I
appreciate
the
presentation.
I
fully
support
the
bill.
I
I
remain
stupefied
why
an
investigative
tool
that
the
search
warrant
is
in
literally
every
other
kind
of
case.
We
would
say
you
know
what
you
can
use
this
in
any
case
in
the
world,
except
except
this
case
over
here.
Unless
these
factors
are
present,
you
can
use
a
search
warrant
any
other
time,
except
for
that-
and
I
think
that's
dumb
and
it
does
tie
your
hands
and
it
makes
you
in
the
case.
You
decided.
A
I
wasn't
aware
of
that
case,
but
the
case
you
just
made
reference
to
is
exactly
the
kind
of
case
that
this
could
have
stopped.
You
could
have
gotten
the
the
sample
two
or
three
days
prior
of
someone.
Who's
clearly
got
an
issue
with
substance
use
that
needs
help,
but
importantly
also
needs
to
be
off
the
road
and
out
from
behind
the
wheel
of
a
car
all
right.
So
I
I
fully
support
it.
I
appreciate
the
the
association
bringing
it
and
representing
flannery
bringing
forward
the
bill.
A
We
do
have
a
couple
of
questions
and
we'll
get
right
to
it.
Senator
carroll.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
I'll,
be
brief.
Representative
flannery
started
looking
at
this
the
day
I
heard
about
the
decision,
so
I'd
like
to
talk
to
you
about
helping
out
in
the
senate
with
the
bill,
I
received
an
email
and
I'm
sure
everyone
else
did
too
from
a
prosecutor.
C
My
understanding
is
this
case
is
going
to
be
appealed
to
the
united
states
supreme
court,
hopefully
or
to
through
the
federal
courts,
and
there
was
some
concern
about
not
doing
too
much
in
a
in
a
bill
here
within
the
state.
Do
you
all
agree
with
that.
K
We,
if
I
may
address,
I
received
a
forward
of
the
the
concerns
that
were
addressed.
It
is
my
understanding
that
this
will
be
appealed.
In
fact,
it
already
has
been
appealed
to
the
united
states
supreme
court.
We
were
very
aware
of
that
and
we
have
proposed
language
that
would
address
the
issues
concerned
by
that
prosecutor
and
would
definitely
address
the
current
need
and
also
not
get
in
the
way
of
any
legislative
or
I'm
sorry.
Any
appeal
to
the
united
states
supreme
court.
D
If
I
may
respond
also
in
part,
the
mccarthy
opinion,
though,
is
not
stayed
so
that
is
the
law
in
kentucky
right
now.
Obviously,
we
held
out
hope
at
the
kentucky
supreme
court
level
didn't
get
it.
I
I
don't
know
that
we'll
get
it
at
the
united
states
supreme
court
level,
but
we
are
bound
to
follow
the
mccarthy
holding
unless
and
until
the
united
states
supreme
court.
H
B
K
Understanding
is
that
they
are
taking
it
to
the
united
states
supreme
court,
but
I
don't
believe
that
anything
has
been
decided
there
and,
as
you
well
know,
who
knows
what
they'll
do.
K
They
may
not
take
it
at
all,
and
so
we
have
been
working
on
legislation
that
would
address
all
the
issues
that
we
can
address
at
this
point
in
time.
Thank.
C
K
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you
all.
I
read
that
decision.
As
a
good
friend
there,
the
county
attorney
from
down
the
road
I
started
practicing
78
and
I've
defended
many
of
these
dui
claims.
It's
my
understanding
from
the
law
that
was
it
wisconsin
minnesota
case
that
came
down
in
2018,
the
united
states
supreme
court
said
before
you
can
have
a
piercing
of
the
body
to
take
blood.
E
There
must
be
a
search
warrant
and
that's
where
that
case
came
from
then
then
the
kentucky
supreme
court
took
up
the
issue
in
a
case
and
I'm
that
might
be
the
case.
Referring
I'm
sorry,
I
don't
remember
the
names,
but
I
did
research
this
here
a
few
weeks
ago
and
got
the
law
summary
and
read
it
and
says
just
what
you
said
that
you
cannot
use
the
refusal,
then
also
with
a
good
representative
I'd
like
to
get
involved
in
working
with
this.
E
You
need
to
get
some
statistics,
so
we
can
do
some
remedy
of
these
people
and
I
use
that
word
openly
for
the
whole
state
that
get
charged
and
get
arrested
and
taken
to
jail
and
the
blood
comes
back
zero
after
they've
spent
five
to
seven
days
in
jail
and
lost
their
jobs,
and
I've
seen
plenty
of
them.
There's
one
officer
in
one
county:
that's
got
about
40,
some,
that's
all
zeros!
I
had
a
nephew
that
the
officer
said
he
was
had
something
in
his
nose
and
come
back.
He'd
been
eating.
E
Donuts
at
dirkway,
so
the
other
issue,
though
in
this
case
is
we
have
an
administrative
process
that
says,
if
you
refuse,
you
lose
your
license
for
six
months
automatically
and
that
that
has
got
some
interference
with
the
constitutional
decision.
I
am
of
the
opinion
that
came
down
from
the
supreme
court,
so
I
don't
believe
this
issue
is
going
to
go
any
further
than
where
it
is
because
supreme
court
says
it's
a
constitutional.
E
Your
fourth
amendment
right
to
not
have
that
piercing
the
way
I
read
that
case,
and
so
I
look
forward
to
working
with
you
representative,
to
try
to
get
the
problems
worked
out
and
we
need
to
get
this
statistical
information
also
to
see
how
we
can
slow
down
to
not
punish
people
that
are-
and
I
don't
want
to
go
on
no
more
than
what
I've
said.
I
could
get
you
plenty
of
them,
but
try
to
take
it
all
up
at
one
time,
so
we
can
have
some
remedy
to
make
this
thing
more
balanced.
E
I
like
no
better
than
anybody
else
to
punish
people
that
are
doing
something
wrong
that
she
shouldn't
be
doing.
I
do
take
a
little
exception,
though,
that
a
good
lawyer
would
say
if
you
got
something
in
your
system,
you
better
not
take
it,
but
if
you
don't
have
in
your
system,
you
better
take
that
blood
test.
E
E
Well,
I'm
hoping
we
can,
I
can
add
some
expediency
to
the
return
on
in
special
instances
instead
of
waiting
six
months
and
all
that
that's
the
I've
seen
it
also.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
thank
you
for
your
presentation.
My
question
regards
the
legislation
passed
in
other
states
that
allow
a
search
warrant
in
the
case
of
refusal.
Do
you
know,
have
those
laws
been
tested
yet
in
the
courts.
D
I
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
do
want
to
know
when
we
say
the
kentucky
supreme
court
did
something.
It
was
a
five
to
two
opinion:
justice
van
meter
and
justice
conley
dissented.
It's
rare
that
we
have
defense
in
the
kentucky
supreme
court.
So
I
wanted
to
call
those
two.
Those
two
justices
out
for,
I
think
doing
good
work.
The
the
case
that
was
referenced
is
from
north
dakota.
It's
burst
field
versus
north
dakota,
I'm
going
to
read
just
two
sentences
from
that
opinion.
I
This
is
the
united
states
supreme
court
opinion
that
our
kentucky
supreme
court
got
wrong
says
our
prior
opinion
is
talking
about
the
u.s
supreme
court.
Our
prior
opinions
have
referred
approvingly
to
the
general
concept
of
implied
consent
laws
that
impose
civil
penalties
on
evidentiary
consequences
on
motorists
who
refuse
to
comply.
I
I
My
question
is
this:
it
could
take
a
long
time
for
the
us
supreme
court
to
determine
whether
they
take
whether
they
grant
cert
and
if
they
do,
there's
the
briefing
process,
which
is
months
for
both
sides
and
and
so
it
could
be
a
year
year
and
a
half.
It
seems
to
me
from
your
testimony
that
we're
under
a
a
situation
of
emergency-
and
I
don't
understand
why
we're
only
doing
the
search
warrant
thing.
I
think
we
also
need
to
go
on
implied
consent.
I
Remember
driving
is
not
a
right
when
you
get
your
license,
you
and
you
consent
to
some
things,
and
one
of
those
things
has
always
been
that
you'll
take
the
blood
test
and
if
you
don't
take
the
blood
test,
then
the
prosecution
can
inform
the
jury
of
you
not
taking
the
blood
test.
You
still
have
the
right
to
say
no,
you.
The
prosecution,
can
then
inform
the
jury
on
the
right
on
the
truth
of
the
matter.
So
I
don't
understand
why
we're
waiting.
I
I
understand
the
subpoena
issue
or
the
the
search
warrant
issue
that
we're
trying
to
resolve
here.
But
why
are
we
also
waiting
on
the
other
question,
which
is
that
the
prosecutor
should
be
able
to
inform
the
jury
of
the
truth
of
the
matter
that
you
violated
the
consent
that
you've
implied
you've
impliedly
given
when
you
got
the
license
and
such
that
the
prosecutor
can
inform
the
jury
that
you
said
no
to
the
test?
Why
are
we
waiting.
P
I'll
make
attempt
to
address
that.
That
is
an
issue
that
that
has
been
discussed
in
our
informal
meetings
with
the
county,
attorneys,
association
and
and
prosecutors.
So
I
understand
where
you're
coming
from
on
that
and
be
glad
to
talk
to
you
about
that.
This
is
not
a
finished
product.
The
bill,
I'm
planning
on
pre-filing
a
bill,
but
there
are
some
issues
that
that
I
want
to
get
comfortable
with
before
before
it's
pre-filed.
A
A
Q
Well,
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
to
be
here
and
to
tell
about
the
important
work
of
supporting
heroes.
My
name
is
eric
johnson,
I'm
the
executive
director
of
supporting
heroes
and
I've
served
in
that
capacity.
Since
the
organization
began
operations
in
2004,
I'm
also
a
retired
first
responder
with
27
years
of
service
9
in
ems
and
18
in
law
enforcement.
Q
Q
Q
Q
When
I
submitted
the
information
for
this
presentation.
This
past
friday,
there
had
been
70
line
of
duty
deaths
in
our
three
states
over
the
previous
365
days
again,
70
compared
to
the
pre-pandemic
average
of
17
and
a
half
30
of
those
were
in
kentucky
25
of
the
30
were
from
covid
there's
also
something
else.
I
want
to
say
before
getting
into
the
specifics
of
supporting
heroes,
and
please
believe
that
what
I'm
about
to
say
is
not
in
any
way
meant
as
criticism
of
government.
Q
It
is
simply
a
statement
of
fact
and
will
set
the
stage
for
the
information
I'm
about
to
give
when
I
first
became
a
first
responder
in
1977,
I
believed,
like
so
many
others
who
serve
that.
If
someone
fell
in
the
line
of
duty,
be
it
a
law,
enforcement
officer
firefighter
or
ems
worker,
the
government
would
step
in
and
do
great
things
to
support
the
family,
and
I
believe
most
citizens
think
that
as
well.
Q
Q
Q
Supporting
heroes
is
built
on
two
foundational
principles:
number
one.
Those
who
routinely
go
into
harm's
way
for
others
should
have
comfort
in
knowing
that
if
they
should
fall
in
the
line
of
duty,
their
families
will
be
well
cared
for
and
number
two
no
life
is
more
important
or
less
important
than
another.
Q
It
doesn't
matter
if
someone
is
paid
to
serve,
or
does
so
as
a
volunteer,
whether
they
are
from
the
largest
department
or
one
of
the
smallest,
whether
they
serve
in
the
biggest
city
or
the
smallest
community,
whether
or
not
they're
a
member
of
a
union,
an
association
or
any
organization.
None
of
those
things
should
matter.
Q
When
someone
gives
his
or
her
life
in
the
line
of
duty,
it
is
the
ultimate
sacrifice
that
individual
should
receive
the
highest
honors
and
his
or
her
family
should
be
well
cared
for.
Quite
simply,
that
is
our
mission
to
honor
the
service
and
sacrifice
of
public
safety
heroes
who
give
their
lives
in
the
line
of
duty
by
caring
for
the
loved
ones
left
behind.
Q
So
what
do
we
do?
First
consider
that,
in
addition
to
the
grief
shock
and
even
anger
that
we
expect
to
be
felt
by
a
spouse
after
a
first
responder
has
fallen
more
often
than
not,
they
also
experience
immediate
financial
stress
after
the
main
or
only
breadwinner
of
the
family
is
suddenly
and
tragically
taken
away.
Q
They
wonder
how
am
I
going
to
keep
our
home?
How
am
I
going
to
feed
our
kids
and
it's
not
uncommon
for
these
questions
and
the
accompanying
financial
stress
to
be
followed
by
significant
feelings
of
guilt,
as
many
survivors
berate
themselves
for
quote
thinking
about
money
at
a
time
like
this
end
quote,
our
commitment
is
to
have
representatives
enroute
to
a
line
of
duty
death
as
soon
as
possible,
following
notification
prepared
to
remain
in
that
community
until
after
the
funeral,
which
is
typically
a
week
or
more
as
soon
as
appropriate.
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
While
it
was
never
envisioned
that
we
would
have
a
role
in
filing
for
benefits,
we
have
grown
to
specialize
in
public
safety
officers,
benefits
the
line
of
duty,
death
and
disability
benefits
of
the
federal
government.
We
now
file
80
to
90
percent
or
possibly
more
of
all.
Psob
death
benefit
claims
from
our
three
states,
and
we
have
for
several
years
in
recent
years,
we've
also
assisted
with
filing
for
state
benefits,
but
not
at
the
same
rate
as
the
federal
we
maintain
a
specially
trained
memorial
team.
Q
Q
We
bring
people
together
who
understand,
as
only
those
walking
a
similar
path
can
also.
Each
year
national
memorial
services
are
held
to
honor
the
men
and
women
from
each
of
the
three
service
fields
who
fall
in
the
line
of
duty
who
fell
the
previous
year
national
police
week
in
washington,
d.c
national
ems
weekend
of
honor,
also
in
d.c
and
national
fallen
firefighters
memorial
weekend
in
emmitsburg,
maryland,
tragically
before
supporting
heroes.
Many
survivors
missed
when
the
nation
honored
their
hero
because
they
could
not
afford
to
attend
since
2006.
Q
Supporting
heroes
has
funded
travel
and
lodging
for
immediate
family
members
to
attend
the
national
memorial
services
when
their
loved
one
is
honored.
Kentucky
cops
assist
with
some
of
the
expenses
for
kentucky
police
families,
and
occasionally,
unions
or
other
organizations
provide
some
direct
assistance.
Q
But
our
commitment
is
to
cover
everything
else:
supporting
heroes,
funded
119
thousand
dollars
for
the
national
memorial
services
in
2019,
and
while
we
don't
yet
have
final
numbers
for
2020
for
this
year,
well,
over
twenty
two
hundred
thousand
dollars
were
spent,
which
this
year
services
honored
first
responders,
who
fell
in
2019
and
2020.
Since
the
2020
services,
which
were
cancelled.
Q
We
want
to
demonstrate
in
a
substantive
way
that
honor
for
their
hero
did
not
end
at
the
grave,
but
that
it
endures
as
we
support
them
during
their
journey
and
that
it
will
endure
into
perpetuity
at
the
national
memorial
even
after
they
have
returned
home
for
families.
There
are
times
when
a
hero's
absence
is
most
palpable
year
after
year,
birthdays,
thanksgiving
and
christmas.
Q
Q
Q
After
they
talked
for
a
few
moments,
I
heard
the
chaplain
say
ma'am,
I
don't
know,
but
there
are
some
people
here
who
I
think
can
help.
He
then
covered
the
phone
and
said
she
wants
to
know
how
she
can
get
here.
I
replied
that
we
would
take
care
of
it.
I
told
him
to
get
her
and
her
husband's
information
for
tsa
determine
the
nearest
airport,
and
we
would
make
the
arrangements
we
then
set
about
booking
the
next
and
best
flight
out
of
minot
north
dakota
to
get
to
louisville
kentucky
as
soon
as
possible.
Q
After
making
the
arrangements
and
paying
for
the
flights,
we
directed
her
and
her
husband
to
a
location
away
from
the
airport
where
they
could
park
their
camper
and
meet
local
law
enforcement
for
transportation
at
the
airport.
The
officers
accompanied
mr
and
mrs
dear
wester,
through
security
and
remained
with
them
until
they
boarded
the
flight
when
they
landed
in
minneapolis.
Q
There
were
uniformed
police
honor
guards
waiting
as
they
deplaned
the
officers,
escorted
them
to
the
delta
sky
club,
where
an
area
had
been
set
up
just
for
them
and
where
they
were
treated
with
honor
respect
and
compassion,
while
they
waited
for
their
next
flight,
when
it
was
time
the
honor
guards,
escorted
them
to
the
gate.
The
deer
westers
then
flew
to
atlanta
for
their
connection
to
louisville.
Q
When
they
arrived
in
louisville,
passengers
were
asked
to
remain
seated
as
they
exited
the
plane.
They
are
escorted
through
the
door
and
down
the
stairs
from
the
jet
bridge
to
the
tarmac
and
to
an
awaiting
police
car.
Their
bags
were
pulled
from
the
belly
of
the
plane
and
they
immediately
left
for
officer
ellis's
home.
Q
When
they
arrived
there,
a
rental
car
was
waiting
ready
for
their
use.
There
were
also
hotel
keys,
one
room
for
them
and
one
each
for
officer
ellis
sisters
who
were
traveling
from
ohio
with
their
families.
These
things
were
done
as
a
means
of
honoring
officer
ellis
by
caring
for
the
loved
ones
he
left
behind.
Q
Q
Although
we
would
like
to
see
kentucky's
80
thousand
dollar
line
of
duty
death
benefit
increased.
More
importantly,
we
would
like
to
discuss
ways.
It
could
be
better
standardized
streamlined
and,
when
approved,
dispersed
in
a
manner
that
would
better
help
those
who
were
financially
impacted
by
the
hero's
sacrifice.
Q
We
see
what
we
believe
are
unintended
consequences
of
the
current
law,
for
example,
specifically
in
regard
to
standardization.
Kentucky
law
currently
provides
for
each
service
field,
police,
fire,
ems
and
corrections
to
establish
its
own
definition
of
line
of
duty
death
in
its
own
set
of
criteria
for
approval
and
procedures
for
review.
Q
One
of
the
unintended
consequences
is
that
there
are
unequal
standards.
Circumstances
that
might
be
considered
line
of
duty
and
eligible
for
the
state
benefit
in
one
service
field
would
not
necessarily
be
considered
line
of
duty
and
eligible
for
the
benefit
in
another.
We
are
confident
that
this
is
not
what
is
intended
again.
We
ask
for
the
opportunity
to
discuss
these
things
and
more
with
the
goal
of
making
kentucky's
support
for
the
families
of
fallen
first
responders,
the
best
it
can
be
and
a
model
for
the
country
again.
A
A
Want
to
as
a
graduate
of
siu
law
school,
I
don't
blame.
You
go
right
over
and
go
right
to
mizzou.
I
appreciate
the
presentation
and
I
appreciate
what
you
do.
There's
there's
no
risk
and
no
harm
of
overdoing
our
response
for
first
responders
and
the
family
of
first
responders,
particularly
when
they've
been
lost
in
line
of
duty.
A
C
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
eric
it's
good
to
see
you
my
friend,
I
have
known
eric
and
been
familiar
with
this
organization,
probably
about
30
years
now,
and
I
have
seen
the
the
work
that
they
do
firsthand
through
some
some
deaths
throughout
the
state.
C
While
I
was
a
police
officer
and
this
organization
is
the
real
deal
and
it's
not
its
mission
is
its
mission
and
they
he
means
what
he
says,
and
it
is
just
invaluable
to
the
families
that
are
going
through
the
death
of
a
beloved
one,
and
I
think
this
this
organization
is
worthy
of
all
of
our
support
and
eric.
As
far
as
what's
needed
to
to
help
with
these
benefits,
it
will
probably
be
beneficial
to
us,
if
perhaps
you
all
could
put
a
one
pager
together
and
kind
of
summarize.
C
The
changes
that
you,
you
feel
would
be
beneficial
to
our
families
who
who
are
survived
so
or
who
are
surviving
the
death
of
a
loved
one,
and
that
might
help
us
to
formulate
some
legislation
that
might
streamline
some
processes
and
allow
you
all
and
to
to
provide
better
services
and
allow
our
surviving
families
to
be
better
served.
So
that's
one
recommendation
I
would
make
if
you
could
just
more
formalize
that
in
writing,
so
we
could
perhaps
generate
some
legislation.
A
All
right,
our
final
presentation
is
from
our
men,
our
friend
and
member
representative
kim
moser,
on
an
update
to
casey's
law,
which
has
been
on
the
books
for
a
number
of
years
here
in
kentucky
glad
to
have
representative
moser
with
us.
We
also
have
blake
christopher
with
the
office
of
the
attorney
general
deputy
ag
christopher.
A
Our
deputy
general
counsel.
Excuse
me
we're
glad
to
have
you
good
morning
good
to
see
you
again
sweatington
and
I
believe
we've
got
a
video
presentation.
We're
gonna
get
that
going
here
representative.
You
have
the
floor.
R
Thank
you
so
much
good
morning
or
good
afternoon.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
be
with
you
today
and
to
talk
about
a
bit
of
a
clean
up
to
casey's
law
and,
as
you
said,
it's
been
in
effect
for
many
years.
The
matthew,
casey
weddington
act
for
substance
abuse
intervention
became
law
in
2004..
R
The
law
was
a
response
to
the
tragic
death
of
matthew,
casey
weddington,
who
died
of
a
heroin
overdose
at
23.,
casey's,
mother,
charlotte,
is
here
with
us
today.
I
am
so
grateful
for
her
advocacy
through
the
years.
She's
done
amazing
work.
This
law
is
saving
lives
and
this
is
casey's
legacy
and
we
want
to
strengthen
it.
Since
2004,
there
have
been
nearly
6
000
cases
of
kentucky
citizens
using
casey's
law.
Many
of
them
have
resulted
in
life-saving
court-ordered
treatment.
R
We
believe
in
casey's
law,
and
we
want
even
more
victims
of
substance
use
disorder
to
get
the
treatment
that
they
need
the
same
kind
of
treatment
that
so
many
families
are
desperate
for.
We
do
have
some
changes
that
we
want
to
discuss
and
we
have
a
short
video.
A
While
he's
getting
that
ready,
I
want
to
extend
the
committees
thanks
to
ms
weddington,
I'm
glad
you're
here
I
didn't
know
you're
going
to
be
with
us.
We
would
put
you
on
the
agenda,
but
I'm
I'm
glad
that
you're
here
and
I'm
thankful
for
your
hard
work
and
tireless
work
over
a
number
of
years,
not
just
to
create
the
law
in
the
first
place,
but
to
see
that
changes
are
made
and
improvements
are
made
so
that
more
people
can
be
helped
and
more
and
more
interventions
can
be
done
to
spare
alive.
S
My
experience
might
have
been
unique
because
I
was
at
the
facility
with
charlotte
wettington,
with
casey's
mom,
and
every
day
I
saw
this
woman
who
wanted
her
son
back,
and
I
started
looking
at
my
mom,
like
that
and
over
months
and
over
days,
that
anger
and
that
resentment,
dissipated,
and
you
know
things
got
better.
The
one
thing
I
always
hear
the
the
addict
doesn't
get
it
until
he
wants
to
get
it
well.
You
know
yeah,
of
course,
you're
right,
but
maybe
the
addict
doesn't
know
he
wants
it.
S
So
if
we're
looking
at
this
from
that
angle,
maybe
the
addict
doesn't
know
he
won't.
He
needs
help.
Well,
of
course
he
doesn't
because
the
only
thing
he
thinks
he
needs
is
one
more.
You
know
they
probably
do
need
to
be
pulled
out
of
the
community.
You
know
without
convicting
him
of
a
felony
without
sending
him
away.
I
did
I
needed
to
be
uplifted
and
put
somewhere
safe,
where
you
know
in
a
controlled
environment
where
you
know
direction
and
guidance
and
love
was
given
to
me.
S
Casey's
law
changed
my
life
by
introducing
me
into
a
community
of
advocates
and
networks
that
solely
revolved
around
getting
addicts
and
alcoholics
help
by
how
it's
it's
changed.
My
work
up
until
I
was
casey.
I
never
worked
a
day
in
my
life,
not
legally.
S
I
was
one
of
those
street
hustlers.
If
it
wasn't
strapped
down,
I
was
taking
it.
I
was
reselling
it
I
was
picking
up
and
I
was
getting
into
the
you
know
the
streets.
I
was
selling
drugs
to
get
buy
more
drugs.
To
I
mean
I
was
going
on
a
nowhere
fast
when
casey's
law
was
filed
against
me
and
introduced
introduced
me
to
recovery.
It
reunited
me
with
my
family,
I'm
back
in
the
college.
I'm
going
in
for
social
working.
S
I've
picked
a
career
that
is,
you
know,
targeted
at
helping
individuals
get
out
of
their
circumstances
and
and
it
might
have
taken
seven
years
since
the
initial
filing,
but
I'm
finally,
at
a
in
a
position
where
I'm
I
am
a
good
father.
I
am
a
good
son,
I'm
a
good
student
and
I'm
a
asset
to
my
community.
S
Of
course,
I
felt
my
rights
were
violated,
I,
but
that
that
that
feeling
isn't
unique
to
casey's
law.
I
felt
my
rights
were
infringed
upon
by
every
time
the
police
have
come
and
picked
me
up.
I
felt
like
my
rights
were
infringed
upon
every
time
my
parents
took
my
keys,
so
I
wouldn't
drive
high
or
drunk
around
the
community
when
I'm
out
actively
using
the
only
right
I
care
about
is
the
right
to
put
substances
into
my
body,
and
I
will
violate
yours
to
do
it
so
casey's
law
yeah.
S
Luckily,
my
my
rights
are
allowed
to
be
infringed
upon
if
I'm
acting
out
in
a
way
that
it
could
kill
somebody-
and
that
includes
me-
you
took
away
the
only
thing
I
wanted
to
do
in
my
life.
Luckily,
you
gave
me
something
to
do
in
the
meantime,
which
is
recover
or
go
back
to
jail.
I
had
a
choice
I
just
I
didn't
want
to.
I
didn't
jail.
Didn't
look
good
honestly
at
that
point
in
time
getting
high
was
kind
of
getting
stressful
yeah
I
mean,
and
I
don't
know
how
to
live
saber.
T
I
did
have
some
skepticism
at
that
point
in
time
about
whether
or
not
court
mandated
involuntary
treatment
for
substance
abuse
was
in
fact
effective
or
you
know,
could
it
be
effective,
but,
as
time
has
went
on,
as
I
have
seen
more
and
more
examples
of
success,
my
opinion
about
that
has
has
changed
in
a
pretty
significant
way
and
and
in
one
way
that,
if
you
think
about
it,
if
I
think
the
success
rates
are
probably
pretty
comparable
or
maybe
just
a
little
better
than
people
that
voluntarily
go
into
treatment,
because
one
of
the
things
that
an
addict
needs
is
accountability
and
you
can't,
if
you
just
voluntarily
go
into
treatment,
you
can
walk
away
from
that
at
any
time,
and
you
don't
have
particularly
anyone
that
you
have
to
account
to
together
than
yourself
and,
quite
frankly,
those
persons
are
not
thinking
straight
anyways.
T
That's
something
that
the
court
can
provide
for
them.
They
can
provide
the
accountability,
they
can
provide
the
follow-up
and-
and
that's
what
we
try
to
do
when
when
a
casey's
law
petition
is
in
fact
filed
anyone
that
may
be
warily
eyeing
the
prospect
of
increasing
their
use
of
casey's
law
in
their
jurisdiction,
or
even
perhaps
starting
to
use
casey's
law
and
in
your
jurisdiction
for
the
first
time.
I
would
encourage
you
to
do
so,
because
I
believe
that
it
does
work.
T
T
R
All
right
well,
thank
you
for
indulging
us.
I
I
felt
like
it
was
important
for
you
all
to
to
see
the
actual
impact
on
individuals
and
and
kind
of
their
line
of
thinking,
so
I'll,
allow
blake
to
introduce
himself
and
talk
about
some
of
the
changes
that
we
think
will
strengthen
casey's
law
and
clarify
any
questions
for
judges
who
seek
to
use
it.
J
You
representative
moser,
and
thank
you
to
the
committee
for
inviting
us
today
in
for
your
your
time
today.
I
look
forward
to
your
questions,
but
before
we
do
that,
just
wanted
to
run
through
a
little
bit
of
our
thinking
in
in
what
is
motivating
these
changes
and
why
we
think
they
are
necessary
to
ensuring
the
preservation
and
the
enforcement
of
casey's
law
throughout
the
commonwealth.
J
So
I
want
to
point
out
that
you
know
we
all
in
the
attorney
general's
office
believe
very
dearly
in
casey's
law
and
we
believe
very
dearly
in
defending
the
laws
passed
by
the
general
assembly.
But
there
have
been
challenges
to
the
enforcement
of
this
law.
There
have
been
repeated
constitutional
challenges
in
courts
around
the
commonwealth
and,
as
a
result,
there
are
several
counties
in
kentucky
where
you
you
can't
get
a
casey's
law
petition
heard
and
because
confidentiality
concerns
won't
go
into
which
counties
exactly
those
are.
J
Well,
it's
because
they
have
concerns
about
the
constitutionality
of
the
law
and
the
ag's
office
is
currently
defending
casey's
law
in
the
court
of
kentucky
court
of
appeals
in
a
confidential
appeal
right
now.
So
all
this
begs
the
question.
Well,
you
know
what
are
our
thoughts
on
addressing
this
issue,
and
why
are
we
here?
I
think,
we're
here
for
for
for
two
changes
that
we
think
will
help
address
these
concerns
and
ensuring
that
victims,
no
matter
where
they
live
victims
of
the
substance
use
disorder,
can
get
the
help
they
need.
J
So
those
changes
are
these
and
I'm
happy
to
take
questions
on
them
in
a
moment.
The
first
is
to
create
a
beyond
reasonable
doubt
standard
that
a
petition
must
meet
before
someone
can
be
committed
to
court-ordered
treatment.
The
second
is
to
allow
someone
up
for
commitment
to
cross-examine
the
healthcare
professionals
who
examined
and
submitted
written
testimony
about
him
or
her.
J
If
you
will
the
first
hearing,
the
judge
examines
the
documents
that
are
filed
in
the
record,
usually
the
petition
and
questions
the
petitioner,
usually
a
family
member,
about
the
need
for
the
son
or
daughter
or
sister
or
brother
to
receive
court
order
treatment
in
the
second
hearing,
the
judge
determines
whether
to
order
the
court
ordered
treatment.
J
J
In
fact,
there
are
many
judges
who
are
already
using
a
beyond
reasonable
doubt
standard
and
I'm
happy
to
talk
about
that
already
or
at
later
I
should
say
so.
We'll
move
to
the
second
change.
Casey's
law
requires,
as
I'm
sure
all
of
you
know,
two
qualified
healthcare
professionals
to
submit
written
testimony.
J
J
So,
to
conclude,
we
think
our
changes
will
help
ensure
that
casey's
law
can
be
enforced,
that
it
can
be
preserved
and
that
victims
of
substance
abuse
abuse
disorder
can
get
the
help
they
need,
no
matter
where
they
live
in
the
commonwealth
and
with
that
I'll
happy
to
take
any
questions
or
follow.
Representative
moser's
lead.
R
Okay,
thank
you
so
much
blake
and
I
don't
know
charlotte
if
you
wanted
to
add
anything
or
say
a
few
words
well.
H
Determine
my
content:
casey's
law
has
been
in
effect
for
17
years
and
in
that
17
years
there
have
been
hundreds
of
individuals
whose
lives
have
been
dramatically
changed
and
who
are
now
living
in
recovery
in
part
because
of
casey's
law.
I
never
give
casey's
law
credit
for
the
total
recovery,
because
if
you
are
familiar
with
addiction
and
recovery,
you
know
that
it
is
a
lifelong
journey
and
it
takes
a
lot
of
work
to
recover.
H
H
H
I
know
that
having
lived
with
casey
that
he
had
gotten
to
the
point
that
he
could
not
make
a
rational
decision
for
himself,
because
his
brain
had
been
damaged
to
the
point
that
the
systems
in
his
brain
were
not
communicating
with
each
other.
H
H
H
I
I
my
opinion
is
that
we
would
be
seeing
more
obituaries
in
the
paper
that
were
a
result
of
addiction,
because
this
is
an
issue
that
affects
I
don't.
I
have
never
talked
to
anybody,
I
don't
think
or
9
out
of
10
people
that
I've
talked
to
that
have
not
had
a
story
to
tell
me
when
I
have
told
them
theirs,
because
it
does
affect
so
many
people
and
we
are
losing
more
and
more
people
all
the
time
if
we
ever
needed
casey's
law.
H
H
And
so
I
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
be
here.
I
I
I
would
be
glad
you
know
to
answer
any
questions
that
I
might
answer
about,
how
it's
impacted
our
our
communities,
but
thank
you.
Thank
you.
A
We've
got
one
so
far
from
senator
berg
and
before
I
let
her
ask
her
question.
I
want
to
point
out
and
sort
of
follow
up
with
your
remarks.
Mr,
I
think
just
this
morning
on
my
way
up,
I
got
a
notification
on
my
phone
from
both
the
washington
post
and
I
pulled
up
the
post,
so
I
don't
know
looks
like
okay,
the
wall
street
journal,
but
new
data
came
out
just
today.
A
One
of
the
highest
numbers,
or
maybe
the
highest
number
on
record
just
it
continues
to
be.
You
said
if
there
was
ever
a
time
that
we
needed
something
like
casey's
law
around
it's
now
and
you're
right
and
that
it
triggered
my
memory
of
that
notification
that
I
got
on
my
way.
Up
this
morning,
all
opioids
was
75
000
synthetic
opioids
was
64
000.
A
All
drug
deaths
combined
was
over
a
hundred
thousand.
So
a
very
timely
presentation,
and
again
I
appreciate
your
advocacy
senator
burke.
Thank
you.
M
Thank
you,
chairman,
westerfield,
and
and
again
I
have
a
comment,
not
a
question.
First
of
all,
I'm
extremely
sorry
for
your
loss,
but
I
just
wanted
wanted
to
say
you
know.
You
said
that
you
think
hundreds
of
people
have
been
impacted
by
this
law
in
the
state
of
kentucky,
and
I
can
promise
you
that
is
a
drastic
underestimation
of
the
number
of
people
that
this
law
has
impacted
in
a
positive
way.
I
mean
I
myself
have
two
family
members
that
went
into
treatment
under
the
fear
of
casey's
law.
A
C
I
appreciate
the
work
and
I
you
know
I,
throughout
my
life
I've
seen
this
a
lot
and
even
within
our
family,
and
he
would
not
object
to
me
saying
this.
C
I
know
a
brother-in-law
that
I
hated
for
him
to
be
in
my
house
and
felt
like
I
had
to
during
the
holidays,
and
I
I
despised
him
for
what
he
did
to
his
parents
and
to
my
wife
and
never
thought
he
would
get
clean
today,
he's
one
of
my
best
friends,
and
so
sometimes
it
does
take
forcing
the
hands
and
in
today's
world
the
problems,
not
I
mean
we're
focusing
so
much
on
treatment
and
that's
of
no
value
if
we
can't
get
the
people
into
treatment.
R
A
A
Thank
you,
mr
fice
chairman.
I
appreciate
that
I
look
forward
to
january.
I'm
sure
everybody
else
does
as
well
members.
If
you
have
questions
or
staff
can
be
of
a
resource
to
you
over
these
last
several
weeks.
I
know
roberta
and
her
team.
We
actually
have
roberta.
Do
you
want
to
say
the
names
of
our
new
folks,
because
I
don't
think
I've
introduced
our
new
new
folks.
They
are.
A
So
members,
those
present
and
remote,
those
are
our
two
brand
new
analysts
here
have
no
idea
what
we
just
suckered
them
into
man
right
before
a
long
session
too.
That's
just
cruel
and
unusual
talk
to
the
guy
right
behind
you
there.
He
can
give
you
a
little
insight
into
what
kind
of
club
just
catastrophic
mistake.
You've
just
made
we're
glad
to
have
you
we
like
to
pick,
but
this
is
the
best
committee
in
the
building.
A
Do
you
hear
that
john
snyder
best
committee
in
the
building,
with
the
best
staff
in
the
building,
and
does
I
think,
the
most
important
work
or
some
of
the
most
important?
I
guess
the
budget
is
pretty
important:
health
and
welfare-
that's
pretty
important,
but
I'm
pretty
partial
to
the
work
that
the
judiciary
committee
gets
to
do
and
I'm
thankful
to
have
you
on
board
anything
else.
Members
and
announcements.
Mr
vice
chairman,
anything.
C
B
Thank
you.
I
just
want
to
take
a
second
to
really
brag
on
our
staff
and
echo
the
comments
of
the
chairman
man,
roberta
kaiser.
If
I
had
a
best
friend
up
here,
she
would
be
it.
She
really
just
takes
such
great
care
of
us,
and
I
greatly
appreciate
that
we
would
not
have
the
interim
be
possible
and
session
be
possible
without
our
great
staff.
So
thank
you
to
each
of
you
all.
We
appreciate
you
especially
this
month
of
thanksgiving.