Speaker 1: Dude, do do what was that? That is a heraldic announcement? Yes,
Speaker 1: before we get going. Uh. I know people on social
Speaker 1: media already know this stuff, but I wanted to announce
Speaker 1: on the podcast that Chuck here has adopted a baby. Girl.
Speaker 1: Chuck has a baby, A beautiful baby. Yeah she is.
Speaker 1: She's cuteie. She she was ten days late, so she
Speaker 1: came out not looking like one of those little alien
Speaker 1: creatures fully formed. Yes, what's her name, Chuck? Her name
Speaker 1: is Ruby Rose Bryant Man. She's so cute and she
Speaker 1: was born on your birthday. Yeah, isn't that crazy? One
Speaker 1: of the better days of the year. Duly take but
Speaker 1: isn't that remarkable? I think it is remarkable out of
Speaker 1: all the days. And I was literally I was just like, well,
Speaker 1: let me scroll through the celebrity birthday it's just you know,
Speaker 1: for giggles to see what you know, who shares your birthday?
Speaker 1: About three course the way down it's all your face.
Speaker 1: And I had forgotten it was your birthday because I
Speaker 1: was just in another planet. And I like, immediately I
Speaker 1: was like, dimly, you got to see this. You'll never
Speaker 1: guess whose birthday she shares. So I think that's really neat. Um.
Speaker 1: So anyway, uh, thank you everybody for the support. Stop
Speaker 1: stop chuck, yes on behalf of every stuff you should know.
Speaker 1: A listener out there, congratulations to you and Emily. Do
Speaker 1: you feel like you can speak for them, Yes, of course,
Speaker 1: because there might be like one guy out there he's like,
Speaker 1: I don't care, he can stop listening right now. But
Speaker 1: I do have some people to thank. Um. This happened
Speaker 1: in Tulsa, Oklahoma, and um, we stayed in this little
Speaker 1: area called East Village. It was literally like a block
Speaker 1: in this loft and airbnb loft and above pizza place
Speaker 1: and across the street from a bar. And I'll bet
Speaker 1: you have some people to think. Yeah, these people like
Speaker 1: took us in as family. It was like literally every day,
Speaker 1: you know, for ten days late. We're out there two
Speaker 1: days early, so for like two weeks they were like,
Speaker 1: what's going on? You know, where's this baby? So I
Speaker 1: want to thank I've just been which you would love
Speaker 1: to do. This cocktail bar right up your alley. It
Speaker 1: sounds like you said cocktail bar. Yeah, And not only
Speaker 1: do they make like fresh you know, fresh ingredients, but
Speaker 1: they don't have like a thing of cucumber sliced stuff.
Speaker 1: They cucumber as needed and you know the jalapeno you
Speaker 1: would have. They were doing it right there. So Jamie
Speaker 1: and Nate and Nicole and Ian the chef at I've
Speaker 1: just been. It was the stuff you should know. Man.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah. He came out and he was like, is
Speaker 1: it who I think it is? How fortuitous? How fortuitous?
Speaker 1: And then uh, East Village Bohemian Pizzeria. We stayed above
Speaker 1: this place and they were great. Did the smell drive
Speaker 1: you nuts all the time? But we ate a lot
Speaker 1: of people. Uh So Pat there and my boy Max,
Speaker 1: Max and I really hit it off. We're like genuine
Speaker 1: life pals now. Uh and he at the end I
Speaker 1: go to leave and I just give him a letter
Speaker 1: saying thank you and here's my contact info. And then like, ps,
Speaker 1: by the way, I have a podcast. He's an ornithologist,
Speaker 1: he has his master's, but he's not doing that right
Speaker 1: now out you know, he's running this pizza point and
Speaker 1: just a really smart guy. Was like, I think you
Speaker 1: might like this podcast. I do. He comes up and
Speaker 1: tells me afterwards, this is like our parting words. He
Speaker 1: was like, dude, your chuck. It's like really I had
Speaker 1: a weird like thing. He said, I knew that you
Speaker 1: seem familiar, but I didn't want to say anything, like
Speaker 1: even watched the TV show. Oh wow. So Max was like,
Speaker 1: that's probably why I didn't want to say anything. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he didn't want to bring it up. So huge thanks
Speaker 1: to those guys. And then um our caseworker Jessica Um
Speaker 1: also a stuff you should know fan. That is amazing
Speaker 1: because at the end of our first call, like a
Speaker 1: month ago, she went, all right, we've got business done.
Speaker 1: I have something I have to admit. It's like I'm
Speaker 1: a huge man man. So it was weird. It was
Speaker 1: like the stuff you should Know nation sort of caring
Speaker 1: for me. Yeah, and all of the people like you.
Speaker 1: You put a picture of Ruby rose up. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: like broke the internet. It was it was people love
Speaker 1: the new Bores. Well yeah, but people love Chuck's newborn.
Speaker 1: But you know it could have been a puppy and
Speaker 1: probably gotten. Don't think I don't do that was very sweet. Yeah,
Speaker 1: so that meant a lot to me. But Jessica and
Speaker 1: her two sons, Hugh and Henry, I know they are
Speaker 1: listeners to They are awesome boys. And she really took
Speaker 1: care of us, So I'm glad it worked out. Like man,
Speaker 1: three weeks in Tulsa, it was a weird and stressful
Speaker 1: and but it sounds wonderful. Yeah, good start though. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean we were in there. Emily helped deliver this baby,
Speaker 1: and I was in the man zone right behind. I
Speaker 1: am so proud of you guys. Yeah, I'm so happy
Speaker 1: for you guys. I also want to say Jerry is
Speaker 1: not allowed to talk. Jerry feels the exact same way. She's, well,
Speaker 1: we could take the duck table today maybe, Jerry, how
Speaker 1: do you feel? Yes, yeah, she agreed. She just spelled
Speaker 1: out on the speaking spelled him anyway. This is not
Speaker 1: gonna become the New Baby Show. Um, she will probably
Speaker 1: disappear from uh your lives, but just know that we're
Speaker 1: all doing great and thank you for the support. Good
Speaker 1: all right, yep, nice job, Chuck, thanks man, congratulies, Thank you, sir.
Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff you should Know from House Stuff Works
Speaker 1: dot com. Hey, and welcome to the podcast. I'm Josh Clark.
Speaker 1: There's Charles W. Chuck Bryant, and Jerry, which means it's
Speaker 1: time for listener mail. Oh wait, wow about that. I'm
Speaker 1: brain to start. That's why we leave that in there.
Speaker 1: Do you want to yeah, or maybe I should just
Speaker 1: read listener mail. We can go home. Okay, it's a
Speaker 1: build your own episode. Yeah, it's a mad Lives, just
Speaker 1: fill it in. I'm profiling, Yeah, styling and profiling. I'm
Speaker 1: pretty excited. Are you styling and profile? Well this is
Speaker 1: a great that's a different thing this yeah, okay, I
Speaker 1: think that has to do with um, like photography. No, thanks,
Speaker 1: styling and profile and just means you're living large. Yeah,
Speaker 1: you're fashionable and oh gotcha. Yeah, no, this is different
Speaker 1: and this is a grabst article, which is the mark
Speaker 1: of quality as we all know it is. It's refreshing
Speaker 1: to see and it is Um, we should just say
Speaker 1: right off the bat, profiling is a super divisive topic.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, um, there are many ways to look at it,
Speaker 1: and all they make sense sometimes on both sides. It's
Speaker 1: a tough one. Yeah, so that's my cadiat. It's divisive.
Speaker 1: So um. One thing that Grabster immediately points out is like,
Speaker 1: not all profiling is profiling, like you think of Sure,
Speaker 1: we're going to talk about all the different ways, right,
Speaker 1: There's plenty of accepted forms of profiling. And the first one,
Speaker 1: um is the standard all points bulletin or be on
Speaker 1: the lookout, right, that's the kind that no one has
Speaker 1: a problem with. No one does because that you you
Speaker 1: know what that is. That's uh silver Toyota to come
Speaker 1: on with spy today and white male in his mid
Speaker 1: forties with spiky hair and uh sort of chubby with
Speaker 1: a big gross gray black beard has committed a crime
Speaker 1: and he's wearing cargo shorts and flip flops. Oh, I
Speaker 1: see you're describing yourself profiler, but you put in their
Speaker 1: white male. And the reason that's what I am, the
Speaker 1: reason why people don't have a problem with this is
Speaker 1: twofold one. A crime has already been committed. Yeah, okay,
Speaker 1: I committed a crime. So the police work is finding
Speaker 1: a perpetrator that has already committed a crime. And secondly,
Speaker 1: that profile is based on eyewitness accounts descriptions of the person.
Speaker 1: That's right, So that profile is being used to to
Speaker 1: track down a specific person. Has nothing to do with
Speaker 1: anybody else. Who's white, has nothing to do with anybody else,
Speaker 1: who drives a silver Tacoma, has nothing to do with
Speaker 1: any of that jazz. It's just this guy is suspected
Speaker 1: of having committed this crime, and he looks like this.
Speaker 1: Yeah you hear you see it on the news every night. Yes,
Speaker 1: you know it's not just cops that use this. The
Speaker 1: news will say the suspect is, you know, wearing a handsome,
Speaker 1: checkered Oxford button down, whispy hair, and white, straight teeth. Exactly,
Speaker 1: so they're describing you. Oh you think my teeth are nice?
Speaker 1: I didn't say that. I said they were white and straight.
Speaker 1: That's nice if that's what you're into. This is coming
Speaker 1: from a guy who just found out he's about to
Speaker 1: have to lose his front tooth all over again. Start over. Yeah, man,
Speaker 1: that sucks. Which I know there are some fans out
Speaker 1: there that are laughing. Aaron Cooper, that toothless Chuck is
Speaker 1: coming back in the house for It's it's really just him. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's the only one whould be jerky enough to laugh
Speaker 1: at that. That kind of misfortune, you know, I know,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry to bring that up. I'm just still reeling
Speaker 1: from that discovery. It stinks. You think you get an
Speaker 1: implant and it's for life, Yeah, especially when they sell
Speaker 1: you a lifetime implant. Yea, yeah, exactly, alright. So, uh,
Speaker 1: like you said, including descriptions and skin color is not
Speaker 1: controversial in this case. No, it's in. Everybody from the
Speaker 1: FEDS to the local police are okay with that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: they're all in on it, and and not just completely
Speaker 1: like everybody's like, yeah, this is fine, this makes sense. Sure,
Speaker 1: not a thing that's right. The next one is psychological profiling.
Speaker 1: And this is when you don't have a lot of
Speaker 1: physical evidence or you don't have an eyewitness, and you're
Speaker 1: trying to fill in the blanks and make some good
Speaker 1: guesses billy blanks based on I remember that guy. Uh,
Speaker 1: some good guesses based on like the crime scene or
Speaker 1: just the circumstances of the crime. Yes, again, a crime
Speaker 1: has already taken place, and you're trying to figure out
Speaker 1: who solved it, and you're taking salt who committed it.
Speaker 1: You're trying to figure out who's gonna solve it, all right,
Speaker 1: all right, which you figure out the same moment when
Speaker 1: as you do when you figure out who committed it.
Speaker 1: It's interesting in mind bending, Right twice you've jumped to
Speaker 1: the end of something. It's so weird. I don't know
Speaker 1: what that means. I think you know what it means. Uh,
Speaker 1: sometimes they are vague. But wait, I hadn't finished my thought. Okay,
Speaker 1: I didn't mess it up that bad. Let me go
Speaker 1: back and finish. Um. The point is it's drawn from
Speaker 1: available evidence. Yeah, clues, clues that you're bringing together to
Speaker 1: try to draw them up an idea of who did
Speaker 1: this right exactly? Okay, So sometimes it can be vague,
Speaker 1: but if you watch TV and movies, um, it is
Speaker 1: probably not how it really goes down, but it's super
Speaker 1: specific when you see it in fiction, right, you know,
Speaker 1: like I think this, uh as a man who was
Speaker 1: beating as a child and he probably lives alone or
Speaker 1: Sherlock Holmes was really good at that kind of thing.
Speaker 1: So a good point of Sherlock Holmes. Yeah, that's good stuff. Uh.
Speaker 1: Did you know he was a morphine and cocaine addict? Yeah,
Speaker 1: well I guess you need both in like the original stories? Really? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Oh like in the books. Wow, not the real guy, right,
Speaker 1: as I think, Yeah, are you sure you're not just
Speaker 1: thinking of Robert Downey Jr. I mean I've read the
Speaker 1: Originals and he like does he shoots morphine in it?
Speaker 1: And and Watson is not very happy with the whole thing.
Speaker 1: Yeah he's straight edge. No he's not straight edge, but
Speaker 1: he doesn't he's not a junkie, you know. But he
Speaker 1: didn't care. He was like Watson washed my toes. I
Speaker 1: can alright, moving on to predictive profiling. Well, yeah, this
Speaker 1: is where it starts to get a little messy. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I can get a little controversial. Even psychological profiling is
Speaker 1: a little controversial. I have to say, chuck, like, it's
Speaker 1: not a proven, tried and true thing. It's as much
Speaker 1: a guessing game is anything else. Um, But it's not
Speaker 1: nearly still as controversial as predictive profiling, because now you're
Speaker 1: trying to say, these people will probably commit a crime,
Speaker 1: right not not not? Civil rights are it issue? Big time?
Speaker 1: Big time? Um. Police officers do great work. Ideally they're
Speaker 1: not just reacting to committed crimes, but they are um
Speaker 1: driving around the neighborhood looking for a suspicious person that
Speaker 1: might be about to commit a crime, to prevent crime,
Speaker 1: to prevent a crime, which is stuff to do. You know,
Speaker 1: it's right place, right time in most cases. And you
Speaker 1: use the word ideally right ideally okay, yes, Um, So
Speaker 1: even when this happens, this Supreme Court is roundly um
Speaker 1: sided with police officers. UM as profiling for justification. So
Speaker 1: it's legally speaking, Okay, it's on the books. It's on
Speaker 1: the books. So so give an example of the kind
Speaker 1: of profiling that's okay to be used. UM, the one
Speaker 1: of the articles. Great. UM, let's say you're in uh,
Speaker 1: South Florida and you're you're traveling up and you're in
Speaker 1: a it's four a m. And you're in a rented
Speaker 1: black suv with tinted windows, and you have the spare
Speaker 1: tire in the back seat removed. UM, I'm sorry, it's
Speaker 1: removed from the trunks area. It's in the backseat, just
Speaker 1: sitting in the back seat. Might be might be a
Speaker 1: drug trafficker, right, And the cop is basing this on
Speaker 1: something like, um, a profile, Yeah, but a profile based
Speaker 1: on previous experiences with other drug dealers in the same area.
Speaker 1: Because that's a really big one right there. Like UM.
Speaker 1: One of the things for using profiles successfully is it
Speaker 1: has it's it has it has to be over a
Speaker 1: certain period of time and associated with a certain place.
Speaker 1: So you use Miami and say Miami in right, if
Speaker 1: you saw that person and you would say, well, this
Speaker 1: is probably a cocaine trafficker based on all the other
Speaker 1: dealings with cocaine traffickers who who used the same transportation
Speaker 1: m O. Yeah, and we should point out the tires
Speaker 1: removed because you can then hide the drugs where the
Speaker 1: spare tire went, and then that's why the tires in
Speaker 1: the back seat. Yes, so these are red flags. But
Speaker 1: if you're like in um Wyoming in two thousand fifteen
Speaker 1: and you read an article about how that held true
Speaker 1: in Miami, that is not necessarily a justifiable transference of
Speaker 1: profiling because it exists in a different time, in a
Speaker 1: different place. That's so, like you said, this can be
Speaker 1: a this can be high level policy, UM, it can
Speaker 1: be unofficial policy. It can be just merely experienced as
Speaker 1: a police officer. That's something you've can countered from time
Speaker 1: to time and basically to determine if this profile justifies
Speaker 1: a search warrantless search, that is, in other words, you
Speaker 1: haven't gone to the judge and as applied for a
Speaker 1: warrant and had them review it and all that stuff
Speaker 1: or rubber stamp it, which we'll get to. UM, it's
Speaker 1: got a stand up in court, right, and so you
Speaker 1: gotta be careful as a cop. You do. Um, you
Speaker 1: have to have what's called an articulable suspicion, which was
Speaker 1: established by a nineteen case or Supreme Court ruling Terry
Speaker 1: versus Ohio. And the Supreme Court said, and this is
Speaker 1: actually from a Matt ti ab Um article. It's really
Speaker 1: really worth reading. It's called Why Baltimore Blew Up. It
Speaker 1: was in Rolling Stone like a month or two ago.
Speaker 1: It's a very good article. Um. But he talks about
Speaker 1: this Terry case led to what it called Terry stops.
Speaker 1: Whereas if a cop has a suspicion that they can
Speaker 1: put into words, meaning it's not just a hunch, right, um,
Speaker 1: that somebody is is either just committed a crime or
Speaker 1: going to commit a crime, that that is probable cause
Speaker 1: and it's bounds for as search. Yeah, and here's a
Speaker 1: had a great example here, like let's say the cop
Speaker 1: and court would say this the suspect of pure nervous
Speaker 1: made several contradictory statements. In the back seat, I saw
Speaker 1: a shoebox full of old film canisters, which drug carriers
Speaker 1: commonly use. The car smelled like air freshener spray, which
Speaker 1: is used to cover up the smell of drugs, and
Speaker 1: I spotted them driving slowly up and down a block
Speaker 1: that I know is frequented by drug dealers. That's called
Speaker 1: good police work in court. Right, that's called like a
Speaker 1: prosecutor's dream cop. Yeah. Um, and if you if you
Speaker 1: go back and you notice all of that stuff, all
Speaker 1: of these things are based on. So a block that
Speaker 1: he knows to be frequented by drug dealers, thirty five
Speaker 1: millimeter canisters. Maybe he read a Police Benevolent Association newsletter
Speaker 1: article about that. Um, all of this stuff together, um
Speaker 1: becomes what's called cumulative similarities. And supposedly a Florida Highway
Speaker 1: patrolman named Bob Vogel is the first guy to put
Speaker 1: this down on paper. He was very controversial, which is,
Speaker 1: you take all of these different things and put them together,
Speaker 1: and you can form a profile, and you can use
Speaker 1: that to pull somebody over and then you know, eventually
Speaker 1: search their car if you're a Florida Highway patrolman. Right, So, um,
Speaker 1: you've got you've got all of these. Uh. You have
Speaker 1: the terry stops, which are used for broken windows policing
Speaker 1: and just for pulling people over, but they require an
Speaker 1: articulable suspicion. But they can be based on where called
Speaker 1: cumulative similarities, which is a profile either like that your
Speaker 1: police department is saying be on the lookout for people
Speaker 1: driving with their spare tire in the backseat, um at
Speaker 1: this time of night. So far, this has all been
Speaker 1: upheld by the Supreme Court. That's right. But there's a
Speaker 1: very very fine line um that is frequently crossed, and
Speaker 1: we will talk about how that runs a foul of
Speaker 1: the Constitution right after this. All right, Josh, before we
Speaker 1: took a break, you mentioned something called the Constitution, and
Speaker 1: there are a couple of amendments that come into play
Speaker 1: when you're talking about search and seizure, probable cause, profile ancure,
Speaker 1: and they are the fourth and fourteenth Amendments. The fourth
Speaker 1: reads and whole the right of the people to be
Speaker 1: secure in their persons. The JFK I went into him
Speaker 1: Winston Churchill. Sure, it's both houses papers and effects against
Speaker 1: unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no
Speaker 1: warrant shall issue, but upon probable costs, supported by oath
Speaker 1: of affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched
Speaker 1: and the persons of things to be seized. So there's
Speaker 1: some big words in there. That's right, big, big like
Speaker 1: money words like Uh, it's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures,
Speaker 1: which means, as far as the Supreme Court's concerned, some
Speaker 1: cops just can't say I'm gonna push you up against
Speaker 1: the wall and pat you down for no reason whatsoever. Yeah,
Speaker 1: Or I'm gonna pull you over for no reason, and
Speaker 1: I'm gonna search your car on the side of the
Speaker 1: road for no reason. Um, does not happen, right of course?
Speaker 1: Not sure? So, Um, that's the Fourth Amendment, right, And uh,
Speaker 1: there's another big term in there. It's called probable cause,
Speaker 1: like you have to have And if a lot of
Speaker 1: people say that that versus Ohio ruling is just too
Speaker 1: broad in articulable suspicion, like what is that you know? Um?
Speaker 1: But even still there's there's so there has to be
Speaker 1: some sort of probable cause. And a lot of the times,
Speaker 1: as we'll see, it's just from uh, some something out
Speaker 1: in plain side or something like that. But there's a
Speaker 1: big struggle over what constitutes probable cause. But the point
Speaker 1: is the Fourth Amendment says you have to have probable
Speaker 1: cause or else it's an unreasonable search. That's right. And uh,
Speaker 1: a police officer in most cases has to go get
Speaker 1: a warrant for like the search of a home or something. Um,
Speaker 1: And there's a whole issue of rubber stamping warrants these
Speaker 1: days of course that like the judge may not even
Speaker 1: really review that. It's just a formality. Or for anybody
Speaker 1: who's watched enough Law and Order episodes, all you have
Speaker 1: to do is go, I smell pot. Do you smell pot?
Speaker 1: Wink wink, and then kick the door in. Yeah, exactly,
Speaker 1: because that's you can't prove that the cop didn't think
Speaker 1: you smell pot exactly. You know, was the threat of perjury,
Speaker 1: of perjuring himself on the stand. But I imagine at
Speaker 1: least as far as like Briscoe and Green are concerned,
Speaker 1: they're hoping that they're gonna find such gang buster overwhelming
Speaker 1: evidence that everybody's gonna forget about the fake smell of pot. Um. So,
Speaker 1: there was actually a case which relates to probable calls
Speaker 1: called the US v. Sokolow that made it all the
Speaker 1: way to the Scotus And um, did you read about
Speaker 1: that case? I did? It's um it was well that
Speaker 1: was when the ruling was right. Yeah, so what happened
Speaker 1: was the d A arrested a guy at the Honolulu
Speaker 1: airport found over a thousand grams of cocaine and his
Speaker 1: carry on. It was a key, he had a kilo
Speaker 1: and he paid uh. They the agents knew all this
Speaker 1: going into it. This is why they arrested him. He
Speaker 1: paid bucks for round trip tickets with a roll of
Speaker 1: twenty dollar bills. He traveled under a name that did
Speaker 1: not match the name under which is telephone was listed. Um.
Speaker 1: He was originally going to Miami, and in this because
Speaker 1: lad flag at the time, he only stayed Miami for
Speaker 1: two days, even though a round trip flight from Honolulu
Speaker 1: takes twenty hours, so a very quick trip, and the
Speaker 1: others he was almost flying as long as he was there.
Speaker 1: In Miami, he met up with a man named Tony Montana.
Speaker 1: Apparently he appeared nervous and he did not check his baggage,
Speaker 1: and the district court denied motion to suppress the evidence,
Speaker 1: said it was justifiable. The Court of Appeals disagreed and
Speaker 1: overturned that, and then eventually it went to the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court and they said no, it's okay because they had
Speaker 1: what was quote a totality of evidence. So Here's the
Speaker 1: thing though, the thing that makes that so groundbreaking and nowadays,
Speaker 1: I mean we were raised under so clow right, it
Speaker 1: seems like this is just the norm. But it was
Speaker 1: a ground break in case of the time, because nothing
Speaker 1: none of that. It's not against the law to pay
Speaker 1: your plane ticket with cash, It's not against the law
Speaker 1: to not check your bags at the time. It wasn't
Speaker 1: against the law to travel under an assumed name. Yeah,
Speaker 1: and I don't think at the time it was against
Speaker 1: a law to go to Miami just for two days, right, exactly,
Speaker 1: None of this is against the law. And so if
Speaker 1: you if if you just followed the strict interpretation a
Speaker 1: law up to that point there was they couldn't bust
Speaker 1: this guy, even though when they busted him they found
Speaker 1: a kilo of coke, like they knew they would in
Speaker 1: his bag. Um, there wasn't enough there. In the Supreme
Speaker 1: Court said, you know what, we we think that when
Speaker 1: you put all that stuff together, there is enough there.
Speaker 1: Now what constitutes that totality? Is it two pieces of evidence?
Speaker 1: Is that one thing? Um? You know, how much does
Speaker 1: it take to profile? But what they were saying in
Speaker 1: so Colo was, yes, the the stuff that you've seen
Speaker 1: from other proven criminals applied to somebody else who you
Speaker 1: don't yet fully know as a criminal, is enough for
Speaker 1: you to bust them and see if you're right. Yeah. Again,
Speaker 1: it's not like the groundbreaking He didn't go straight to jail.
Speaker 1: They looked in his bag, yes, but it's do you
Speaker 1: have the right to look in the bag? That is
Speaker 1: what it comes down to. Yeah, and they were saying
Speaker 1: that there. The Supreme Court interpretation is this stands up
Speaker 1: to the Fourth Amendment. Yeah, and I met the guy
Speaker 1: went to Miami for two days, gets your civil rights goodbye?
Speaker 1: Uh So with the fourteenth Amendment UM it states in
Speaker 1: part that no State shall make or enforce any law
Speaker 1: which will abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of
Speaker 1: the U. S H. I think everybody wants the Kennedy
Speaker 1: voice against U. I think any time you read amendments
Speaker 1: from the Bill of Rights, you have to do it
Speaker 1: like that. Nah shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty,
Speaker 1: or property without due process of law, nor deny to
Speaker 1: any person within its jurisdiction equal protection of the laws.
Speaker 1: So this one applies. You might say, well, we've got
Speaker 1: the fourth we don't need. The fourteenth fourteen says, look, man,
Speaker 1: you can't just bust somebody without this, again, due process
Speaker 1: of law. And we have a due process of law.
Speaker 1: And what the Supreme Court did with cases like Soklo
Speaker 1: and with cases like Terry versus Ohio, UM, is they
Speaker 1: said profiling is part of the due process of law.
Speaker 1: That's right. So one thing that they have gone back
Speaker 1: to again and again and again and again is that
Speaker 1: if race is factored in and almost any circumstances, there
Speaker 1: are circumstances that is where racial profiling is allowed in
Speaker 1: police work. But for the most part, if you're basing
Speaker 1: your suspicions of criminal wrongdoing on race largely or in part,
Speaker 1: then that is not That runs a foul of the
Speaker 1: fourth and the fourteenth amendments, and you're not allowed to
Speaker 1: do that. Yeah. The grabs Her points out that cops,
Speaker 1: unless you are have an a p b out on
Speaker 1: a Hispanic mail or a black male, then you are
Speaker 1: supposed to be color blind as a cop. Exactly you're
Speaker 1: supposed to be. So you know, um, the Eric Garner
Speaker 1: case to Michael Brown case, um, all of these cases
Speaker 1: where you know black mails were basically stopped from either
Speaker 1: doing a petty offense or just stop based on suspicion
Speaker 1: because they were black in their neighborhood. UM. It prompted
Speaker 1: the executive branch to release a new set of guidance,
Speaker 1: like an updated set of guidelines for racial profiling, and
Speaker 1: they were they basically spelled out examples. UM I posted
Speaker 1: to it on the podcast page for this episode, but
Speaker 1: they spelled out examples for when that when it's appropriate,
Speaker 1: and they said if it's an all points bulletin for
Speaker 1: any police yes, um, if you're traffic or if you're
Speaker 1: patrolling and looking for criminals and you're basing it on race,
Speaker 1: absolutely not allowed. But they said they gave an example
Speaker 1: where like, um, if for example, you are looking for
Speaker 1: somebody who carried out a hit on a gang leader,
Speaker 1: and you know there's this rival gang and this rival
Speaker 1: gang is probably the ones who carried out this hit,
Speaker 1: and every member of this rival gang is Hispanic, that
Speaker 1: you could use that as part of the profile and
Speaker 1: searching for your suspect. It just makes sense in that case, right,
Speaker 1: because I don't look for the little old white lady
Speaker 1: right exactly because it's that specific. But you wouldn't cast
Speaker 1: a dragnet over all Hispanics. It would be Hispanic men
Speaker 1: related to this gang. You see what I'm saying. I
Speaker 1: think the lesson here is get the little old white
Speaker 1: lady to do the hit. It's been done before, and
Speaker 1: you're golden. It has been done before, which is one
Speaker 1: of the one of the problems with racial profiling is
Speaker 1: it's distracting. Yeah, you know, we'll get to that. But
Speaker 1: that's definitely true. Um. And you know when you watch cops,
Speaker 1: it's not always like it's sometimes that I will see
Speaker 1: on the TV show they will pull over. They'll stop
Speaker 1: a white kid, like suburban white kid that's in a
Speaker 1: bad neighborhood, because they'll be like, well, he's he didn't
Speaker 1: belong here. He's probably buying drugs because this is a
Speaker 1: street where people buy drugs. There's a crackhouse down there.
Speaker 1: And this guy is from the county. Uh, you know,
Speaker 1: the white suburban county out in the suburbs. Let's pull
Speaker 1: him over. That's racial profile. That's the same same thing
Speaker 1: but different. Well it's the same thing, yeah, but you
Speaker 1: know what I mean. Um, all right, so let's talk
Speaker 1: about probable cause analysis. This is good. There's, um, during
Speaker 1: a traffic stop, there's there's several things a cop can do,
Speaker 1: and each one requires different kinds of cause in order
Speaker 1: for it to be legal. Um. Yeah. Again, they aren't
Speaker 1: supposed to just pull you over for no reason. They're
Speaker 1: not supposed to. You're supposed to fit some sort of
Speaker 1: either you broke a traffic law or you fit a
Speaker 1: profile that that has been agreed upon. Is okay. Yeah,
Speaker 1: But a cop can pull over for and again we're
Speaker 1: not knocking police officers hard work, and mostly they do
Speaker 1: great work. But a cop can pull someone over for
Speaker 1: anything and say, like when you made that turn, you
Speaker 1: swung a little too wide, or you hit that yellow line,
Speaker 1: and um, so I'm suspicious that you're drunk, like you know.
Speaker 1: Like that, you can almost invent a reason to pull
Speaker 1: someone over and under any circumstances. So let's just start
Speaker 1: with that. When you pull over a car, UM, Supposedly,
Speaker 1: to pull someone over legally, you need to have witnessed
Speaker 1: a violation. UM. Or you can run the plates and
Speaker 1: see if their cars stolen or if there's a warrant
Speaker 1: out for the owner. That's a big thing you see
Speaker 1: on cops all the time. Um. And the cop can
Speaker 1: make a stop as long as they can describe specific
Speaker 1: factors that fit the profile. Right car, car full of
Speaker 1: black kids. Not okay to just pull that car over,
Speaker 1: not for that reason. But if they say, like I
Speaker 1: saw um smoke coming out the windows. Um, they were
Speaker 1: driving erratically and it smelled like pot smoke from the road,
Speaker 1: then that is a reason number two when you go
Speaker 1: to a question the suspect. That's moving things up a notch. Uh.
Speaker 1: You don't have to get a ticket when you get
Speaker 1: pulled over. You might just get questioned if you seem suspicious. Um,
Speaker 1: and they can you know, they'll shine that light in
Speaker 1: the car and they'll look at everything that they can
Speaker 1: see without actually searching the car. Yeah, and that well
Speaker 1: within their right what's called plane view exactly. So if
Speaker 1: you have like a bag of pots sitting out on
Speaker 1: the front seat with you and the cops sees it,
Speaker 1: that just opened your entire car and your person up
Speaker 1: to a search. Yes, and you that means you are
Speaker 1: super high because now now there's probable cause. But if
Speaker 1: you have long hair and you have an open half
Speaker 1: gallon of ice cream next to you, still not enough
Speaker 1: my racist suspicions, But that still should not be enough
Speaker 1: to give him probable cause to search your car. Well,
Speaker 1: I got profiled in Texas. Me and my best friend
Speaker 1: Brett many years ago after college did a big out
Speaker 1: west trip for two months, and the cops said he
Speaker 1: didn't put He said he pulled us over because I
Speaker 1: didn't have my seat belt on. Um. Why he really
Speaker 1: pulled us over us because we were too scruffy looking
Speaker 1: guys with tattoos and beards in a Volkswagen van. Um.
Speaker 1: And he searched the van. He asked if he could,
Speaker 1: and we said he could, and he searched the van
Speaker 1: for like an hour on the side of the road.
Speaker 1: Long story short, chucked in five years, five hard ones. No,
Speaker 1: we didn't get taught with anything, and we got away,
Speaker 1: and he basically was mad at us that he wasted
Speaker 1: his time and the last thing he said was to
Speaker 1: get out of Texas. So and I said, I'm trying
Speaker 1: to sir. But the point is that that cop asked
Speaker 1: you if he could search your car, right he did,
Speaker 1: and that if you give consent then you are waving
Speaker 1: your Fourth Amendment rights. But you don't have to give consent.
Speaker 1: Not many people know this, and there's some states that
Speaker 1: make the cop tell you you are allowed to refuse
Speaker 1: the search of your car, um, but not all states do.
Speaker 1: I've never heard it either, um. Instead, the cop just says,
Speaker 1: can I search your car in the most intimidating voice possible,
Speaker 1: and most people will just fold like a house of cards, um,
Speaker 1: because they're scared of the cop or whatever. Even if
Speaker 1: they do have something in there, they're not gonna be like, Nope,
Speaker 1: you're not allowed to search the car. So the point
Speaker 1: where the cop asks if he can search the car
Speaker 1: is usually in the absence of something that nothing in
Speaker 1: plain sight, but also that cops suspicious suspicions are raised,
Speaker 1: but he just can't quite prove it. So I'll ask
Speaker 1: you if you can search your car. If you say no,
Speaker 1: the cop can say, well, I'm I'm going to detain
Speaker 1: you temporarily. Right Basically, I can go, I will wait
Speaker 1: it out, I can get a war it I'm gonna
Speaker 1: search that car, right, Okay. If he wants to get
Speaker 1: a warrant, that's different. Like what he's doing now is
Speaker 1: trying to do everything he can to search your car
Speaker 1: without having to go to the trouble of getting a
Speaker 1: warrant without probable cause, like seeing a bag of pot
Speaker 1: in the front seat. Right time was that they could
Speaker 1: detain you for up to like ninety minutes while they
Speaker 1: called the canine unit out. And the canine unit has
Speaker 1: been shown to if it the canine unit sniffs around
Speaker 1: your car, that's not an unreasonable search. And if the
Speaker 1: canine smells something or indicates that there are drugs present,
Speaker 1: then that does provide probable cause for a full search
Speaker 1: under the Fourth Amendment. Right they change that, yeah, Um.
Speaker 1: In April this past April, the Supreme Court had decision
Speaker 1: that said, now you really can't make people wait around
Speaker 1: while the drug dog comes out. They're like, we're not
Speaker 1: a post to that, but the point of a traffic
Speaker 1: stop is to promote and encourage traffic safety, not to
Speaker 1: cast a drug drag. That for drug couriers. Um, and
Speaker 1: you you cannot detain people without a reasonable suspicion to
Speaker 1: wait for the drug dog to come out. If they
Speaker 1: tell you can't, they you're not allowed to search their car.
Speaker 1: That's good. I wonder if it had anything to do
Speaker 1: with um. If you look up online, there are ways
Speaker 1: that cops can make a drug dog signal basically by
Speaker 1: how they're handling the dog. And there's a lot of suspicion,
Speaker 1: and they'll play him side by side, like you see
Speaker 1: this cops doing it, right, And if you see this cop,
Speaker 1: watch this little thing he does. Then the dog barks.
Speaker 1: And basically there was a lot of speculation that bad
Speaker 1: cops would use the dog tail. Well not that, but yeah,
Speaker 1: essentially making the dog signal a false alert just to
Speaker 1: give them reason. Well, the dog barked, So now I
Speaker 1: can I can search your car or and maybe it
Speaker 1: all started because I meant to bring this up a
Speaker 1: second ago. Suspicion can be now they seem nervous, right like,
Speaker 1: everyone's nervous when a cop pulls him a sure, even
Speaker 1: if you haven't done anything. It's just nerve wracking. It's
Speaker 1: like white coat blood pressure. I like a lot of
Speaker 1: people's blood pressure is high at the doctor because they're
Speaker 1: nervous about, you know, being at the doctor. There's someone
Speaker 1: standing at my window with a gun, right Like, it's
Speaker 1: nerve wracking. Yeah. So the Supreme Court said, no, you guys,
Speaker 1: you have to have a reasonable suspicion to detain somebody
Speaker 1: on the side of the road that they've committed another crime.
Speaker 1: It can't just be I'm pulling you over. You have
Speaker 1: to wait for ninety minutes while the drug dog comes
Speaker 1: out so I can bust you or try to bust
Speaker 1: you or whatever. That was. That was a big deal
Speaker 1: that they came up with that. Yeah, we didn't in Texas.
Speaker 1: We didn't have the drug dog come out, but we
Speaker 1: were I felt like we were on the side of
Speaker 1: the road for an hour while he dug through that
Speaker 1: entire van. Um just you could tell he was he
Speaker 1: really wanted to find something. Yeah, all right, let's open
Speaker 1: the cannib worms, my friend. Racial profiling, it's a big,
Speaker 1: big deal in this country. It's a problem, and and
Speaker 1: um let's talk about it. Okay, that's good. Uh. So
Speaker 1: that is basically it's a form of predicted profiling, uh
Speaker 1: where one of, if not the only factor, is skin color.
Speaker 1: Right that like, um oh, let's say that, um, Mexican
Speaker 1: people are way more um prone to sell meth. So
Speaker 1: let's go hang out at that Hispanic neighborhood. Right, But
Speaker 1: there's a couple of things wrong with that, um, and
Speaker 1: that is racial profiling. Some people actually defend it, saying, well,
Speaker 1: if you look at prison statistics, Hispanics are far more
Speaker 1: likely to be imprisoned for drug crimes than say, white people,
Speaker 1: So that makes sense, right, right, Okay, the other saying
Speaker 1: right right, I'm playing along here. The other side of
Speaker 1: the coin is that you can use those same statistics
Speaker 1: to point to the idea that Hispanics and blacks are
Speaker 1: disproportionately targeted for drug busts than other people, right, and
Speaker 1: so the same This is an Ed points out. This
Speaker 1: is one of the problems with this debate is both
Speaker 1: sides used the same statistics differently to prove their point. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Another thing he points out is that people that say
Speaker 1: some people will say that it is institutionalized racism and
Speaker 1: its harassment of minority straight up. People who defend against
Speaker 1: it say, cops harassed criminals, and if those criminals happen
Speaker 1: to be minorities t s. That's not our fault. And
Speaker 1: I think that's just the reality of the world we
Speaker 1: live in. Even further, there's people who say, yes, racial
Speaker 1: profiling is the thing, and it's an effective tool of
Speaker 1: law enforcement. Sorry, welcome to reality. Um. Those people usually
Speaker 1: have their arguments demolished pretty quickly, including by professionals. I
Speaker 1: read this um, this interview, or well an article about
Speaker 1: the former chief chief of police of Palo Alto around
Speaker 1: San Francisco area, and um, he also grew up as
Speaker 1: an Oakland cop, and he was talking about that kind
Speaker 1: of racial profiling that you were where they would just
Speaker 1: sit out and like, um, high crime neighborhoods and pull
Speaker 1: over anybody white. And they were doing like that for
Speaker 1: the same reasons, and he was saying it almost never worked.
Speaker 1: He said that, um, they also would have like long
Speaker 1: dragnets on stretches of highway and they would target Hispanic
Speaker 1: people in like low riders, and he said, almost never worked.
Speaker 1: And he said that it's ineffective. Right, it's also lazy policing,
Speaker 1: because he said the better alternative is to forget who
Speaker 1: who's what color, but just watch for somebody leaning in
Speaker 1: a car that's just pulled over under the curb, or
Speaker 1: somebody making furtive moment movements. Right, look for behavior that
Speaker 1: is actually linked to crime. Not there's a white person
Speaker 1: in a black high crime neighborhood, so therefore their there,
Speaker 1: um they're buying drugs, or even even worse than that,
Speaker 1: there's a black person who lives in a high crime neighborhood,
Speaker 1: they must be a drug dealer. Let me go stop
Speaker 1: and frisk them, um that that is just lazy policing.
Speaker 1: It's it's shorthand policing. Whereas if you look for actual
Speaker 1: criminal behaviors you're going to have, you're gonna be far
Speaker 1: more successful in busting the bad guys. But even worse
Speaker 1: than it being like lazy policing and ineffective in a
Speaker 1: lot of ways. This guy pointed out like, and I've
Speaker 1: seen this in many different places. If you want to
Speaker 1: encourage mistrust and animosity toward the police, scoop up every
Speaker 1: member in the community and take him to jail just
Speaker 1: on the off chance that you might find something that sticks.
Speaker 1: If you want to set a town off or any
Speaker 1: population off, do that for a few years and see
Speaker 1: what happens. And that's what we've been seeing time and
Speaker 1: time again. It's systematic. Yes, it's systematic targeting and then
Speaker 1: a systematic reactions. Uh. And I've mentioned cops a lot.
Speaker 1: If you're out there saying, well, yeah, but on cops
Speaker 1: every time they pull over that's a shady black guy
Speaker 1: in the neighborhood he has something on him and gets arrested.
Speaker 1: Or that white kid in the bad neighborhood he's there
Speaker 1: to buy drugs, it's a TV show that's edited. Right.
Speaker 1: They don't show you the twenty five stops where there
Speaker 1: is no crime because it would not be a fun
Speaker 1: TV show exactly, all right. So I think people use
Speaker 1: that as like dummies use that as proof sometimes, like
Speaker 1: watch Cops Man every single time, right, Like yeah, exactly right,
Speaker 1: Like all all matthe Users are scrawny and white. So
Speaker 1: if you see a scrawny white guy, Matthewuser, that's right.
Speaker 1: Or marathon runner, right, you know. Uh So obviously there
Speaker 1: can be uh rogue cops, racist cops that are doing
Speaker 1: their thing on a on a singular level or with
Speaker 1: their partner. But it becomes a real real problem. That's
Speaker 1: a problem. It becomes a super real problem when it
Speaker 1: is part of the system. Uh. In which was the
Speaker 1: case with the New Jersey State Troopers in the late nineties,
Speaker 1: they did a ten year study and found out that
Speaker 1: eighty percent of all traffic stops were minorities over a
Speaker 1: ten year period, and they found that there was a
Speaker 1: quote macho elitist culture within the state trooper ranks end
Speaker 1: quote and um. Basically, even though they officially said racial
Speaker 1: profiling isn't right, there was a system in place where
Speaker 1: veterans would really coach and teach the younger cops, like
Speaker 1: this is how we're doing it, and they were basically outed. Um.
Speaker 1: The authorities assigned federal monitors to those troopers, and evidently
Speaker 1: by two thousand six they had um a report suggested
Speaker 1: they had eliminated that profiling completely. Yeah, which is good
Speaker 1: if that's the case. You know, and I'm sure it is.
Speaker 1: New Jersey state troopers are intimidating. You ever seen those guys.
Speaker 1: They're the ones that look like the military uniforms, which
Speaker 1: is a whole other issue altogether. Well, I mean not
Speaker 1: like M sixty, like like the dress, blues, boots and
Speaker 1: all that. Um. It turns out twenty two states have
Speaker 1: lawns that band racial profiling of motorists, which is great
Speaker 1: until you think that that also means that states don't.
Speaker 1: It's kind of weird if you ask me. Um and uh.
Speaker 1: I found a study also from Illinois that found that
Speaker 1: in Illinois, black and Hispanic drivers were two times likelier
Speaker 1: to be stopped and searched, but white drivers were two
Speaker 1: times likelier to have contraband on them. Weird, not only weird,
Speaker 1: it's it's startling. How like it's it's not effective like there,
Speaker 1: it's not leading to stopping crime, yeah, which is sort
Speaker 1: of the point. Well. And then another very controversial a
Speaker 1: bout of racial prof aisling that this country went through
Speaker 1: came after September eleven, of course, and in the aftermath
Speaker 1: of that, you would remember every every month or two
Speaker 1: you'd hear about someone who sometimes seeks who aren't even Arab,
Speaker 1: would get kicked off of like a plane or something
Speaker 1: like that because they made the pilot nervous just being there. Yeah,
Speaker 1: or T s A would would like pat down. Um.
Speaker 1: Just proportionately more Arab people than white people. Um. And
Speaker 1: now supposedly they based it on your behavior rather than
Speaker 1: your race, so they're not rachel profiling any longer, supposedly,
Speaker 1: and it is. I have to say, I haven't heard
Speaker 1: of one of those cases in a while, but it
Speaker 1: seemed like for a while we're hearing about it all
Speaker 1: the time. Yeah, I think there was a heightened sense
Speaker 1: of everything back then. Of course, right after. But so
Speaker 1: this guy who used to manage the Ben Gurion Airport
Speaker 1: in Um Israel, Rafael Ron, he pointed out that that
Speaker 1: was the exact opposite of what you want to do yeah,
Speaker 1: he said, the worst tech in the history of this
Speaker 1: airport was carried out by Japanese in the early seventies.
Speaker 1: And he said, if we're focusing on an ethnic group,
Speaker 1: then we're we're potentially missing someone that's about to do
Speaker 1: something bad, right, which is exactly what happened in nine
Speaker 1: two at that airport. Three members of the Japanese Red
Speaker 1: Army walked in with machine guns and violin cases and
Speaker 1: just opened them up and started opening fire on the
Speaker 1: crowd and killed I think, um twenty six people. And
Speaker 1: they were hired by the PLO. Pl O knew that
Speaker 1: they could never walk into the the Israeli airport, but
Speaker 1: the Japanese people would unnoticed. And so this guy is
Speaker 1: saying the same thing like if you're really on the
Speaker 1: lookout for your enemy, like again, watch for behavior, like
Speaker 1: do actual police work. Don't just use this lazy shorthand stuff,
Speaker 1: because it's gonna it's going to take off this entire
Speaker 1: population and it's gonna cause in you to miss the
Speaker 1: real crime. Well, yeah, you've got like it sounds like
Speaker 1: a movie. Them the cops are at the airport and
Speaker 1: they detained this, uh, this air of guy who's like
Speaker 1: late for a business meeting. And then in the in
Speaker 1: the same shot, the white dude who was a Timothy McVey,
Speaker 1: just walks right behind them with the with the bomb
Speaker 1: on his body. You realize you just described the subplot
Speaker 1: to Airplane Too, did Yeah, remember Sonny Bono had the bomb.
Speaker 1: It's a little mild mannered, weasily dude. Yeah, that's right.
Speaker 1: And I think he walks through while they're jacking up
Speaker 1: some like I think plo dudes. Maybe that was subconscious. Wow,
Speaker 1: so that's a profiling tip of the iceberg. I would
Speaker 1: call that. Oh, sure, there's we could do a series
Speaker 1: of shows on this, I'm sure. Uh. And if you
Speaker 1: want to know more about profiling in the meantime, uh,
Speaker 1: type that word into the search bar of your favorite
Speaker 1: search engine and I'm sure we'll bring up all manner
Speaker 1: of terrible stuff. You can also type in the search
Speaker 1: bart how stuff works dot com and it will bring
Speaker 1: up this article by the Crabs or And since I
Speaker 1: said grabs or time for a listener mail, I'm gonna
Speaker 1: call this wee f us, which is short for water
Speaker 1: enema from a water slide or from a slide. And
Speaker 1: this is from Tiffany last name withheld, She says. Uh.
Speaker 1: As a kid, I remember being a chubby eleven year
Speaker 1: old girl excited for her first trip to Disney World
Speaker 1: in the water park then known as Typhoon Lagoon, had
Speaker 1: a brand new neon green with black polka up bathing suit.
Speaker 1: It was all excited and UH to go down the Cowabunga,
Speaker 1: a two fourteen foot tall water slide on a steep
Speaker 1: sixty degree angle. They tell you to keep your ankles crossed.
Speaker 1: But as a little chubby eleven year old girl, my
Speaker 1: brain comprehended, but my little legs did not have the
Speaker 1: strength for all two d and fourteen feet. Thank you
Speaker 1: see where this is headed. After plumbing the bottom, immediately
Speaker 1: knew something was not right. I clenched my thighs as
Speaker 1: tightly as I could, pulling out the massive water slide wedgie.
Speaker 1: Not two steps from exiting the slide, though, a different
Speaker 1: type of waterfall began to trick al down my legs.
Speaker 1: No matter how tightly I clinched, I couldn't stop it.
Speaker 1: I waddled up to a gorgeous Australian teenager employee and explain,
Speaker 1: I need a restroom right away. Uh, with a smug smile.
Speaker 1: He pointed all the way to the other side of
Speaker 1: the lagoon, which was a long walk. Just as I
Speaker 1: entered the bathroom with all the force of the water
Speaker 1: that had entered my body, it exited, and I single
Speaker 1: handedly shut down a small portion of Disney that day.
Speaker 1: As embarrassing as this was, I was more upset than
Speaker 1: my new bathing suit was ruined. My parents were furious
Speaker 1: because they had to show out fifty dollars for a
Speaker 1: new one Toronto. I hope I didn't gross you out
Speaker 1: too bad. I think of it as a cautionary lesson
Speaker 1: for your listeners. Thanks for all your hard work. Um,
Speaker 1: I hope to see you guys sometime in Detroit. And
Speaker 1: hey October, Tiffany last name with eld. We're just gonna
Speaker 1: call you Tiffany poopy pants. We're coming to Detroit in October, yes,
Speaker 1: ostensibly ostensibly, and also we want to stay Detroit in
Speaker 1: advance of us coming. We're sorry for all the jokes
Speaker 1: we made about you. It'll all come home to roost.
Speaker 1: See you in October. If you want to tell us
Speaker 1: a gross story that happened when you were a kid, like, yeah,
Speaker 1: don't just tell us something else and tweet to us
Speaker 1: at s y s K podcast, join us on Facebook
Speaker 1: dot com, slash stuff you Should Know, send us an
Speaker 1: email to Stuff Podcast at how stuff Works dot com,
Speaker 1: and join us out at home on the web Stuff
Speaker 1: you Should Know dot com. For more on this and
Speaker 1: thousands of other topics, is that how stuff Works dot com.