SPEAKER_00 0:00

Welcome to Beat the Prosecution, presented by Northern Virginia criminal defense and DUI lawyer Jonathan Katz, where we are here to regularly present you information and ideas for beating your prosecution as best as possible. Nothing on any of our media sources, such as our podcast or website, is legal advice. John Katz only provides legal advice to current clients or for individuals who have paid for a consultation. And now for your host, John Katz.

SPEAKER_01 0:30

Hello, everybody. This is John Katz. I'm a Fairfax criminal lawyer and DWI defense lawyer here in Northern Virginia. This is the 13th lucky episode of Beat the Prosecution. And as always, except for one episode, we're here with our podcast master, Abigail Swigart. Abby, what are we discussing today?

SPEAKER_00 0:49

Well, we touched on it briefly, but we're going to go more in depth on sex offenses and specifically the defense of such allegations.

SPEAKER_01 0:58

That's right. So in episode 11, two episodes ago, we talked about some of the defenses there are to sex offense prosecutions, not all of them, and we did leave out uh rape. Uh now, the reason why this is such an important uh topic is that there is wide protection in the law, including from the U.S. Supreme Court, for consensual adult sexual activity. Uh unfortunately, plenty of people who think they're engaging in consensual activity are going to find out that uh maybe the person they engaged in such activity with lies about uh what happened, or maybe it wasn't consensual uh after all. But the U.S. Supreme Court did say in the case of I think it was Texas versus Johnson from several years ago, uh that pretty much anything between consenting adults goes uh as long as they're consenting, as long as it's not bigamy uh along those lines. Whereas before, did you know this, Abby, that until around uh 2000 or so, uh states were allowed to criminalize oral sex. States were allowed to criminalize um well, what they call sodomy, which involves anal sex, uh, and and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld that in the case of Bowers versus Hardwick. Uh the U.S. Supreme Court can blow hot and cold about how much of our celebrities uh they protect. Uh, but now moving along to the nitty-gritty, uh I want to uh start off with uh Abigail. Did we talk uh before about hips helping individual prostitutes survive?

SPEAKER_00 2:42

No, we have not.

SPEAKER_01 2:43

I believe very strongly in freedom of choice when it comes to sexual activity, just like I do with marijuana. And with marijuana, as I may have said before, just like uh even be uh with my supporting uh freedom with marijuana doesn't mean I'm gonna use it. I'm not interested in using it. Uh with sexual activity, this is a matter of freedom of choice. I'm not advocating what a person's uh sexual activity should or shouldn't be. This is about freedom of choice. It does have to be consensual, though, just like uh uh with assault charges. You can uh air punch the wall for all you want, but if you hit that wall and break it, uh then that's uh destruction of property if it's someone else's. And if you hit someone else, that's a crime of assault. So with uh helping individual prostitutes survive, it's a great organization in DC. I was uh on their board in the early 2000s, and they're all about harm reduction for sex workers. So sex workers can run anywhere from people who do phone sex uh right up until the actual uh full sexual services. And the key there was harm reduction. So if a sex worker didn't want to be a sex worker anymore and wanted help with uh knowing how to look for jobs and put to put together a resume, great. Uh and if the person wanted to be a sex worker but wanted to be safe with sex, reduce the risk of uh STDs, uh, for instance by having condoms and and lubrication available, uh hips would go out there and uh with a van, and uh and they were very well known. The sex workers would go after them and seek out condoms, snacks, and certainly if sex workers were dealing with uh being uh assaulted or otherwise physically abused by their customers, hips would do that as well. So you've got uh my experience with doing uh sex-related law work uh with hips and and also with my being a the founding uh president of the free speech coalition of DC, Maryland, Virginia, which is uh a major part, at least nationally, of the adult entertainment industry. So, at least with that, uh did we talk about the priest and the confessional, I think, uh two times ago?

SPEAKER_00 4:57

I don't think so.

SPEAKER_01 4:58

You know, I I I want my clients who uh who are charged with sex crimes to know they can be fully open with me. They don't have to be embarrassed talking to me. I like to say that uh the priest and the confessional, the psychologist and the criminal defense law are among the people who hear some of the darkest secrets of their clients, where they won't say it to anyone else. You can tell me anything. I won't judge you. Doesn't mean I'll approve of it if you've committed a crime, but I won't judge you. I am only here to defend you. So with um with prostitution, there's three elements of prostitution over here in Virginia. Whether the person is the John, also known as the uh hobbyist, or the uh prostitute, also known as the provider. And those uh perhaps the provider and the hobbyist are more uh are more applied to people where they find each other online versus on the street, uh, but same idea. So those three elements are offering or giving money for the designated sexual activity and making a substantial step forward. So if this was five years ago, I would say that the substantial uh so the sexual activity would be penetrative sexual activity, uh paid for masturbatory services have been added on there. So one of the first things that I'm ready to do, uh, and and what is a substantial step forward? So it's very formulaic. I'll see these videos for these prostitution stings. The the uh what happens is there's there's an ad, they don't have bag page anymore, but something else online. There's an ad for services. The uh customer, the hobbyist uh contacts the would-be prostitute, uh talks, maybe talks about the services that are available, talks about how much money it'll cost, figures out where the prostitute is, and then uh the hobbyist shows up at the hotel. Usually it's a hotel or motel room. The uh the provider will then do a little small talk, maybe talk about some of the services that are available. Say I'm gonna go into the bathroom to uh uh you know get get more comfortable, you get more comfortable too, and almost inevitably the guy is now taking off his pants, and that's where uh as he's expecting to do something that would often happen after taking off the pants, instead the police arrive and totally frustrate the person. Uh and and this apparently uh goes along the lines of what what the real providers sometimes do, so the hobbyists won't always know it. So, what's the first thing that the person has to do when the uh cops storm into the room, Abby, and start asking questions to the hobbyist or would be hobbyist?

SPEAKER_00 7:37

Don't answer.

SPEAKER_01 7:39

Keep maintain your right to remain silent. What's our disclaimer, Abigail?

SPEAKER_00 7:44

Um for this podcast?

SPEAKER_01 7:46

Exactly.

SPEAKER_00 7:47

Is that anything on this podcast is not legal advice? John only gives legal advice to his current clients or to individuals that have paid for a consultation.

SPEAKER_01 7:58

So what I uh what I talk to my clients about when they hire me for being caught in a prostitution sting is uh, okay, did you give money or something of value to the provider? And uh invariably uh it's usually just put discreetly putting an envelope with money on on the table. And uh before I see any video, did you take your pants off? Did you did you did you touch the provider, or was it just talk first? And what was the talk about? So if the money is just put on the table, then one of my arguments is well, this was just paying for time, and anything that followed uh was just uh non non-commercial activity between uh consensually uh mutually consensual. It was mutually consensual activity among adults. And and this thing about the substantial step forward, I think there was one judge who once said that just the payment of money, this is a substantial step forward. No, it has to be a third element, it has to be some sort of substantial step other than handing money, for instance, taking off the pants. Well, did I tell you about my uh my Duke Ellington, John Lennon, and Paul McCartney win when it came to a hobbyist, it would be hobbyist who lost his prostitution case in district court, and then we appealed it to circuit court?

SPEAKER_00 9:17

No, we haven't talked about that one.

SPEAKER_01 9:19

So we appealed and I had a pretrial, pre-jury trial date motions hearing, and um to my delight, unlike at the trial date, where both the cop who arranged the sting and the former prostitute, she was actually a former prostitute who's making a good amount of money for this one sting, she was making over one or two thousand dollars. Uh the the would-be prostitute provider didn't show up and only the cop. So I cross-examined the cop at the motion scenery and I said, Well, do you agree with me that you never saw my client before one or two of your colleagues brought him over to your hotel room? Yes. Do you agree that you weren't in the hotel room with the provider? Yes. Do you agree with that you didn't hear anything in the adjoining hotel room? Yes. Do you agree with that there was no audio, remote, audio, or video hookup in the adjoining hotel room? Yes. So do you agree with me that you never saw my client's face or a picture of him before he was brought to your hotel room? Yes. Do you agree with that you never knew his name or phone number before that happened? Yes. So after I finished the questions of the cop and the prosecutor, I finished the question. I said to the judge, well, I I moved to uh I moved to suppress my client's arrest and all uh evidence from that. Uh and the judge said, why? I said, because the prosecutor has not today met the elements of the three-part elements for prostitution, for being a hot uh for being uh uh seeking out the services, soliciting the services, which is offering money or something of value. We don't have any evidence of that. Uh for penetrative sexual activity, this was before the masturbatory part of it, too. There was none of that. And substantial step forward, there was none of that, too. But the judge said, but didn't the cop testify there was a sting? I said, yeah, he testified there there was a sting, but he doesn't know what happened with my column with my client. My client may have just been the janitor of the engineer. And so then I said, Judge, it's like you have an easel. So you got the easel with the three legs, and one of the legs is Duke Ellington, the other one is John uh Elton John, the other one is Paul McCartney. You need all three legs for the easel to stand up. She said, Why can't we just have Duke Ellington alone? I said, the easel falls. Well, the judge didn't seem too happy uh if I was going to be right, but the judge knew that she had to follow her oath. She took a break and came back and she found in our favor. Do you think that was the end of it?

SPEAKER_00 11:46

No.

SPEAKER_01 11:47

No, of course it wasn't the end of it. Because when she said, I suppressed the arrest, she said, Well, I moved to dismiss the case, said that is for a separate motion. So I followed the motion. I followed the found the case of Zimmerman versus uh versus uh Virginia from the Court of Appeals of Virginia, which wasn't airtight, but it did confirm that identity is a fruit of the arrest. So if you have a bad arrest, my my argument goes, therefore, if the only way for the cops to have identified my client would have been through the arrest, that's not sufficient. Of course, if I was the prosecutor, I'd say we can always still call the provider back uh to trial and have her testify that she had his contact information. But then again, the argument goes, well, but for the unlawful arrest, my client would have would have skedaddled and been gone. So I showed up on my motion to dismiss hearing date, and the prosecutor said to me, Do you have an order? I said, Here you go, and the order said dismiss. The case is dismissed, it is gone. So, what this tells you is I don't judge, I only look for how to beat the prosecution as best as possible. Well, that was mild, that's prostitution, that's uh activity, unless you between consenting adults, unless there's financial pressure otherwise. Now we're gonna go to rape and um an unlawful uh penetrative uh sexual activity. Um we didn't talk about that uh two times ago. Here's where you've got to be careful. Uh if you're going to engage in sexual activity with someone who you haven't had a long friendship with, someone you don't know well, someone you just like met an hour ago, uh be careful about whether you're going to be charged, whether uh truthfully or not, with this not being consensual sexual activity, penetrative sexual activity uh with either an object or part of the body with part of the body. And in Virginia, even the slightest penetration uh is can be rape. Uh so be careful, be careful, and be careful. Um okay, I don't want to change this of the G into an R-rated show, so all I'll say is you gotta do what you gotta do, not to uh be engaged in any activity that isn't any isn't clearly consensual sexual activity, going down to a cold shower and anything related to that. Uh now what that's called with uh when there's not actual intercourse is and and part of the body that's penetrating the body that's called object sexual penetration, and the um this this can be very harsh, harsh sentencing here if convicted. So defenses. Defenses for rape and object sexual penetration is it was consensual, misidentification, or it didn't happen at all, and the person is just making it up. Now, of course, uh people who say that they're victims of rape or sexual assault often are going to be examined, and there's going to be some sort of often trauma found to their body, which might go against that there was no penetration at all, and of course, if ejaculate is found and it matches up to the uh defendant, then he's really left with the argument of consent. Now we've got alcohol with uh with the charges of rape and other sexual assault. Do yourself a favor, engage in zero tolerance. Do not have any sexual activity with someone who's influenced by alcohol at all. There's a great scene in the Austin Powers movie, or maybe the follow-up, where the woman who he just would love to have romantic activity with, she is uh she's offering it to him, and he says, I can't. Well, he uses the British accent, which I won't do right now. And she said, Why not? He said, You've been drinking. Let's wait until you've not been drinking. Okay? So watch out, watch out, watch out. Now, of course, there are plenty of people who engage in sexual activity with people who have been drinking, and often the person who's the uh the criminal defendant in the sex crime case has been drinking. And so there the question is you've got to get as many witnesses available to show that this person was acting very intentionally, not knocked out, not unconscious, was able to walk, talk, string together full sentences, even if slurry. Because consent is still consent, where you're looking at the totality of the circumstance. If the person has had three beers or four beers over the course of three hours, uh there's strong arguments that that uh was not alcohol that took away consent. Be careful. Okay, the next one that we I want to talk about is it's not enough for uh a person to look over 18 if you're an adult, or to even present you with an identification that says they're over 18. This is what's called strict liability in Virginia. If a person has otherwise consensual sexual activity with someone who's 15 years or older and you're an adult, the defendant is an adult, uh, that is a class one misdemeanor that is jailable up to a year. So, what are your defenses there? Well, seeing that it's a strict liability crime and you can't get away with their under a year, uh under 18 and you're an adult, would be it didn't happen. Or misidentification. Of course, uh I cannot advocate uh getting up on the witness stand and telling an untruth. I'm just talking about available defenses to look at. Child pornography, also a strict liability crime. I defined child pornography two shows ago. It's a bright line. If you have an 18-year-old, 19-year-old, someone uh uh older than that in pigtails wearing a uh a schoolgirl uniform from uh for what elementary school people would wear, for instance, in parochial school. As long as they're over 18 and there's no elements of someone under 18, that is not a crime. And that's the case of Ashcroft versus Free Speech Coalition. Aha, Abby! The second time I've mentioned the Free Speech Coalition. That was a great thing that group did in 2002, the Free Speech Coalition. I forget who was arguing on their behalf, I think it is a Laura, I know, and a great law at that, convinced the U.S. Supreme Court, uh, a majority of them, uh, to say that you cannot criminalize as child pornography having images of adults, even if they're pretending to be under 18. But it cuts both ways, right? Because if the person uh looks over 18 and they're under 18, we talked about Tracy Lourdes two shows ago. Still a big problem. I'm bouncing around a little more a little bit because I wanted to get these defenses in. Now let's go to bondage domination sadomasochism, BDSM. It floats some people's boats, so let's go ahead and go right into it. In fact, I have uh been consulted before by a BDSM club that just wanted to have some sort of party over at a hotel. And uh, you know, I talked about zoning issues that deal with it, and just uh going ahead and getting the the hotel's consent. Once again, well, here's a big problem with that. Then this this is essentially like an orgy, and how on earth are you going to know that the people well no we have BDSM groups or clubs and orgies, and then you have the individual activity. So we'll start with the group. Just be careful there again. How do you know the people are of age, and and it's so it's so casual that you're encountering them? How do you know that the person's not gonna turn around and uh and claim that you sexually abuse them, uh rape them, and and if there's all these people around there, how do you know they're not gonna miss ID? Okay, so one-on-one, let's say there's bondage domination, sadomasochist activity between two people. Believe it or not, there are people who uh find uh pleasure or enjoyment in being punched by other people, cut by other people, whipped by other people. Tied up is a little more uh understandable because that's not necessarily uh assault of kind of behavior. Then they'll have these code words where stop doesn't mean stop. I think we talked, maybe we may have talked about coders before. Didn't I talk about bagel before? Well, maybe not in this context. So uh, you know, if bagel is the word for stop, I don't know if what the word person is gonna do, maybe the person doesn't order bagels in a bagel place. So be real careful there. But then again, my view is if uh if you have two consenting adults engaged in BDSM and somehow word gets out about that, they've been involved with it, and there's a prosecution, consent is a big defense there if it exists. Okay, soliciting minors for sex. We talked about that two shows ago, where I tried to um make people uh not have an interest in that by imagining it could be very true that that person you think you're speaking to online who you thought was uh 14-year-old Candy is actually some big fat, hairy, smelly cop named Harry. Because he's a he's Harry who's who's all hairy. Um, with that one, you don't have a defense to find out that it actually was some 49-year-old named Harry. You just have to have believed that uh this person was underage. So watch your mouth, keep your mouth closed whenever you are a criminal suspect or criminal arrestee. Now, uh one area that I have worked with for defenses is fantasy versus solicitation. So it's one thing if the adult says to the would-be uh 14 year old named Candy, uh I would like to uh do this or that activity with you versus, hey Candy, will you do that? Now it's not airtight, but those are among the defenses. Uh well the other one is I didn't know I didn't know she uh uh she was claiming. To be under 16. So once again, there's strict liability if Candy is actually under 15, arguably. But if you have big fat hairy Harry claiming he's under uh under 15, and you didn't catch that, and and uh and and you find out that it was just like slipped in during a phone call and you could barely hear it, that is a defense too. But what are we getting to again, Abby? Here it's just airing on the s side of caution.

SPEAKER_00 22:26

Caution, especially talking online. I think we talked about in the last the podcast two times ago. It's just if you know you're engaging in talking with someone online, just have that picture of that smelly cop in your head so you might not go down the wrong road. Because you never know who's on the other line of the chat message or text message.

SPEAKER_01 22:45

Exactly. And the you know, the thing is this this whole topic that we have today and and two episodes ago is just so relevant because there is just so much sexual freedom going on here, and with the freedom comes the responsibility. How about even freak dancing at the at the nightclubs? I mean, uh it's it's just amazing to me how common that is among people where the two dancers just rubbing their uh their private parts close against each other. Well, what if you find out that that person you're rubbing your private parts against is under 15? Just watch out, watch out, and watch out again. Revenge porn. Okay, so even if a person, uh what do they call it, sexting, sex you their image. Well, let's talk about that. Uh be very careful. Uh, just because a 16-year-old unsolicited has sexed you a full picture of them nude, that doesn't make it no longer child pornography. It's child pornography, nevertheless. So, what are you gonna do then? Uh, well, consult with a lawyer. That's that's just not an easy one. Uh don't uh don't open the door for that. Now, let's say an adult gives you uh emails you some naked pictures of themselves. That does not mean that it's okay for you to just uh spread that to the world under Virginia law. That is, let's get the section number unlawful dissemination of sale or sale of images of another, uh, and that's section 18.2 hyphen 386.2 of Virginia Law, 18.286.2 of the law that says that you may not disseminate or share pictures of someone else who is totally nude in a state of undress so as to expose the genitals, pubic care buttocks, or female breast where such person knows or has reason to know that he's not licensed or authorized to disseminate it, and where this is with the intent to coerce, harass, intimidate, maliciously disseminate or sell. Some of that is getting vague and overbroad. Be careful of those vague and overbroad laws. Now let's talk about upskirting, down blousing, peeping tom photography, and peeping tom. Yes, there are jokes about it, sick jokes, I think, about peeping tom. You know, you're passing by someone's home, you see that the uh window shades up, uh a person's in their in their undergarments, whether or not they want to be seen or not, stay away, stay away, and again, stay away. And certainly don't take uh don't take pictures of it. So here we have for peeping tom photography, we have section 18.2, hyphen 386.1 of the Virginia Code, which says it is unlawful to create video or film images or photographic images of a person when they're totally nude, clad in undergarments, or in a state of undress so as to expose the genitals, pubic area, buttocks, female breast in a restroom, dressing room, locker room, hotel room, motel room, tanning bed, tanning booth, bedroom or other location. And then it also talks about putting a lens uh to show the intimate parts of another person, which could be their breasts, could be their uh even their cloth breasts or their uh underwear clad uh crotch area. Have I had clients who have been charged with peeping Tom photography? Oh yes, and the technology makes it so cheap and enticing for people. For instance, to put a uh a camera into a briefcase and try to slip it between the legs of someone standing in front of the person in line at the store. Don't do it. Then they're the people who take their cameras out and uh put it under the uh, because in these changing rooms in so many of these, in bathrooms, so many places, they don't have the wall going up and down. They try to uh try to check it out there. Here, here's here's something to make it unenticing to do that. If the person's under 16, it changes from a misdemeanor which carries up to a year in jail to a class 6 felony to make you a convicted felon and to be uh jailable up to five years in prison. Did I tell you about my um my peeping tom photography jury trial that I won?

SPEAKER_00 27:26

No, but I think I've heard about it vaguely, but I think the listeners would like to hear.

SPEAKER_01 27:30

Yes, this was a fun one to win, and I think my client was on the side of being a ding a ling rather than trying to uh show anything he shouldn't have. So uh my client had the master lease to a uh a lease on a on a group home, and uh one of the two or three other residents, she made an arrangement to pay less for her uh rent or no rent at all for doing the housekeeping. So uh my client was working at home one day and he saw that she was lying down on the couch in the living room and when she was far behind on doing her chores, so like he thought it was a very self-respecting thing for him to do, to take pictures of her while she's lying on the couch. But as it turned out, she was wearing very short shorts and there was pubic hair sticking out of the shorts. And I forget what caused her to be snooping into his computer, but she's she snooped into his computer, was using it, and found it, and turned it over to the cops, and we had a trial for peeping Tom photography after my client went to trial, I think, by himself without another Laura in the district court level, and he came to me after he lost there, and we wanted the jury trial. And my whole argument there, we even put on my client's testimony, was he didn't notice any pubic hair sticking out. He just saw that this person was lying down on the job. And I also argued to the jury that uh she was not in a place that where she would have a reasonable expectation of privacy there. She was the one who chose to dress as she did, she was the one who decided to have cut-off shorts that had her pubic hair sticking out. We do not expect people to expect to have privacy in a living room at a group home if that's the way that they decide to dress. We won that trial. Indecent exposure. Let's talk about that a little more. Two shows ago I said that I wasn't sure what the state of law still was. If it had changed about legalizing breastfeeding in public, I was silly. Of course it does. Now, does that mean that when you're uh breastfeeding in public you should just let it all hang out uh beyond doing the breastfeeding? No, because that then can be looked at as a mixed use to have your baby uh breastfeeding as a subterfuge to just uh aerate uh aerate the woman's breasts or to to try to attract men. So, you know, just do still do that with with discretion. Uh I believe very much in the right to uh for a woman to expose her breasts in public as much as uh men, but unfortunately uh courts are not defining that definite like that in Virginia. There are courts in other parts of the state, sorry, of the country that allow women to bear their breasts as freely as men are. Uh Virginia just is not caught up with uh modern times for that. So the definition of indecent exposure is this is section 18.2, hyphen 387 of the Virginia law, which is every person who intentionally, there has to be an intentionally, makes an obscene display or exposure of his person or the private parts thereof in any public place or any place where others are present or procures another to expose himself shall be guilty of a class one misdemeanor. But no person shall be deemed in violation of this for breastfeeding a child in any public place or any place where others are present. Okay, obscenity. So what is obscenity? Because it has to be an obscene display. Notice the indecent exposure law doesn't say whether it can be an ex an obscene display when you're showing your bare leg. I don't think any courts are going to buy that, but it does not state that it has to be, uh that it can be genitals, that it can be breasts, that it can be a buttocks. The word obscene where it appears in this article means uh when considered on its whole that the material or image has is its dominant theme or purpose and appeal to the prurient interest in sex, is a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement, ex excretory yuck, excretory functions or products thereof, or sadomasochistic abuse, and which goes substantially beyond customary limits of candor and description or representation of such matters, and which taken as a whole does not have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. That is essentially a variation of the theme of Miller versus California from the U.S. Supreme Court, which I underlined two shows ago, is crazily vague and overbroad, but the U.S. Supreme Court is okay to. So, what is a public place in Virginia for indecent exposure? Well, what I'm about to tell you may shock you. Let's say you have a friend over, and uh you're drinking some beers or even drinking some uh malted milks, and uh and you decide to drop your pants and uh take your underwear off too to shock them. Well, tell you what, that's a public place for the law because the Virginia courts say public place means anywhere where you don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy. So if you invite uh your neighbor over to your home for drinks or some ice cream and you take off your pants, that is now a public place. We've covered a lot, Abby.

SPEAKER_00 32:45

Yes, and it might not be the most, you know, appeasing topic, but it's useful for people to know if they find themselves in this type of situation, especially after the fact if they are being prosecuted, what kind of defense is?

SPEAKER_01 32:59

And I'm gonna turn this to the positive, which is consensual sexual activity among consenting adults. Okay, I've said it's consensual twice. Uh that's just fine. Make sure that you're you're not doing it out on the street where people can see you and then be charged with a decent exposure. But you know, be careful, be careful, be careful. So if you're someone who lives on the edge, uh don't uh for for these purposes, overcover risk, make sure that you're respecting not only other people, but yourself. And therefore you can have a good time by following that roadmap. Abby, where can people reach us, or is there anything else I should be covering here?

SPEAKER_00 33:37

Um, I just had one last question of why these defenses of sex crimes is so important in the criminal defense world. Some people might, you know, want to shy away from it, but why would you feel as a lawyer it's important?

SPEAKER_01 33:50

Unless you're gonna be a monk, uh if you're sexually active, you better know these defenses and about these laws and overcover risk by number one, not engaging in any uh risky activity in the first place that might get you prosecuted and convicted. And if you are a prosecutor or convicted, make sure that your Laura is not going to judge you and your Laura is gonna do what?

SPEAKER_00 34:14

Beat the prosecution.

SPEAKER_01 34:17

Thanks everyone for listening. This has been John Katz, the Northern Virginia Fairfax, Northern Virginia Criminal Defense, and DUI Defense Laura. See you in the next episode.

SPEAKER_00 34:27

Thank you for listening to this week's episode from Beat the Prosecution. This is a regular podcast giving people a leg up against police investigations and prosecutions. Nothing discussed on our media sources, such as our podcast or website, is legal advice. John Katz only provides legal advice to current clients or to individuals who have paid for a consultation. We welcome you contacting us via email at info at beatheprosecution.com by calling our office at 703 383 1100 or texting us at 571 406 7268. If you're tuning in to our podcast via Apple Podcast, feel free to leave us some stars, any reviews, comments, or questions under this episode.