Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
You're listening to Bill Handle on Demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
This is Handle on the Law marginal legal Advice, where
I tell you you have absolutely no case. If you're
injured and need a lawyer, go to handle on the
law dot com. And if you're a lawyer and want
to join our team because people desperately need your help,
go to handle on the Law dot com and click
on the join today tab at the top of the page.
The following is up be recorded program. Oh let me
(00:31):
tell you about what happened this past week, and this
has to do with the Menendez brothers. Remember the two
brothers that ended up killing their parents, and they were
I think nineteen and twenty one, and they have to well,
they got life in prison without possibility or parole, Lyle
(00:52):
and Eric Menendez. And there were two trials. The first
one was a hung jury because the trial lasted for
months months, over one hundred witnesses and a lot of
the trial happened to be involved with the abuse that
Eric underwent by his father, and he described in very
(01:13):
specific detail what his father did to him, just total
sexual abuse and humiliation, I mean brutal stuff. And his
brother knew all about it and couldn't do anything, And
there was evidence that was produced over and over again,
and the jury deadlocked. The jury couldn't come to a
(01:33):
conclusion because of all that evidence of abuse, particularly at
least that's what the experts say. So the judge gets
really pissed off. Judges do not like mistrials. They do
not like sitting on these very long, very complex trials.
And in the end the jury says, we can't decide,
(01:55):
so a retry and a couple things happened. The judge
doesn't allow a lot of this evidence regarding the sexual abuse.
And part of it was at that time, when we're
talking thirty five years ago, people didn't believe that boys
could get raped. There really wasn't sexual abuse against boys. Well,
(02:19):
obviously that's changed and we now know very differently, and
so it was basically dead. There was no question that
it was going to be a conviction. The judge effectively
set it up. Also, the judge rule that there were
only two ways the jury could go first degree murder
or they walk. Well, considering the evidence that they admitted
(02:43):
doing this, killing their parents and arguing we were frightened
for our lives. If manslaughter had been part of the
decision that a jury could make. Maybe they would have
gone for manslaughter. They admitted killing their parents and they
were lying in wait, I mean all the elements of
first degree murder except the emotional destruction of their psyche
(03:07):
because of the physical abuse, the emotional abuse, the hitting,
the sexual abuse. So they were convicted. They got life
imprisonment without possibility of parole. So here we are thirty
five years later, and a letter that a judge would
not introduce the judge was basically brought forward. This is
(03:30):
because there's been a Netflix documentary and a docu drama
and has brought this to the forefront. This letter and
this testimony from a friend of theirs were six months
before Eric talked about the abuse of his father and
he was frightened for his life. That changes everything, and
that could have really changed the course of the trial.
(03:53):
And so the DA in Los Angeles, George Gascon, who
is going to be tossed out because he's so way liberal,
he has decided to ask the judge to re sentence
the boys, in other words, effectively go back to manslaughter,
which means they're out because they have done thirty five years.
The problem is the judge has to say yes to that.
(04:14):
The parole board has to say yes to that, and
the governor has to agree to that, and any one
of those three can stop it cold. I'll tell you
what I think is going to happen. I think they're
going to be released as they should be, by the way,
because this kind of sexual abuse and this kind of
exploitation is so rampant. All right, let's do it. You
(04:40):
got some fun phone calls? Mike, Hello, Mike, welcome, Thank you, Bill.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Yes, I have a question. I have a tenant with
six dogs in the house.
Speaker 4 (04:52):
Why can I do to get that? Then? Dogs out
of the house?
Speaker 2 (04:55):
Okay, well, got it all right? Question do you have a.
Speaker 4 (05:01):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (05:02):
Does it say anything about dogs?
Speaker 4 (05:04):
The lease says that they can only have one dog?
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Oh, that's easy. They're on a breach of a lease.
So there's two ways you can go on this. You
can a victim on a couple of different ways. One,
they're breaching. They breach the lease, that's simple, and that
means that they have a right to cure, which means
they have a right to fix that lease. And fixing
that lease means they have to get rid of five dogs,
which they're not going to do Yeah, they're not going
(05:29):
to do that unless they're of that ilk where they
cook the dogs and the barbecue, and they probably aren't.
Very few people are. So the other basis for suing
them is there is a statutory basis. I don't know
what city allows six dogs in a facility? How big
is the apartment? That's what I will like, so know, Yeah,
(05:51):
it's easy to look up. It doesn't matter. You got
them on both. You got them on both. You have
them on the law that says you can't have more
than X number of dogs. I'm sure that six is
too many. And the other and the other one is
breach of the lease. So you're victim. You're gonna be fine.
They breach the lease, and.
Speaker 3 (06:10):
Not only that, they never pick up the dogs.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
That didn't matter. That's their problem. They live with that. Yeah,
that's that's great. Just uh and you're not gonna have
to pay relocation money if they breach the lease and
you tossed them out, so you know, get rid of
them and their dogs and enjoy yourself or let them
enjoy themselves. Uh eva hi eva hi, yes ma'am hi.
Speaker 5 (06:34):
So I'm on disability recovering from cancer and California Stay
deposits my paycheck to Money Network banks. So in March
two of my payments were stolen. One of them they
approved as a fraud. Somebody withdrawed it. The second one
sixty five hundred dollars I'm fighting to get back. They
(06:56):
keep saying that I withdrew it, and they would not
give me any proof on that. I've appealed. They denied
my appeal. I appealed the appeal. So I don't know
what to do with this.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
Yeah, I think you're gonna I think you're going to
uh and when you appeal that, you appealed it within
the bank, correct, Yes, Okay, so you haven't gone to
any authorities yet. It's all the.
Speaker 6 (07:21):
Did I did, right?
Speaker 5 (07:23):
I did file a police report.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
That's not that's not really no that that we're not
talking about the regulatory agencies. Uh So the banks are
controlled by state law and federal law. Usually law, the
FDIC controls the banks, and there is probably and I've
never had that problem. So all I'm telling you is
what I know, which isn't much, is that there probably
(07:48):
is a complaint form with the FDIC as to what
they're doing and you fd i C, Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation and other agencies that control, uh, the banking does
the FTC control I don't know, and then I know
state regulations go. So you want to just basically do
a little research. That is, look under regulations regulate tours
(08:12):
in banking, and then see whatever agencies have anything to
do with the banks, and then just ask for complaint
forms because that's all you gonna do to file a
lawsuit for sixty five hundred dollars. No lawyer is going
to take it, and you're going to spend way way
too much money and get out of that bank obviously.
Oh good good. So that's what you want to do.
(08:33):
Do a little bit of research, do what you can
and yeah, those are problems that I can't answer so much.
You know, it's so much easier when do you call
and you go, hey, you know, someone killed my dog.
Do I have a case? Yeah? Yeah, you probably have
a case. Somebody ran through my front window with their car.
(08:53):
Do I have a case? Yeah? Probably? Those are easy ones.
This stuff is drives me nuts. This it is handle
on the law or handle on the law. Marginal legal advice. Hey, Frank,
welcome to the show. What can I do for you?
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Thanks?
Speaker 7 (09:11):
Bill.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
I drive a major interstate here in Georgia and Florida.
It's Interstate seventy five, and there's a lot of farmland
on both sides of the highway, and I have no
skin in the game. I'm just curious some of the farmers.
It appears like they've erected or built these crudely built billboards,
and it's usually a political sign, or it might even
(09:35):
be a political joke. And I was just curious all
these years that if you own like a cornfield next
to a major interstate, are you free to just put
up any kind of sign you want, or are their
ordinances or or.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
Well probably probably ordinances. First of all, on your property,
you can put up whatever the hell sign you want. Now,
there may be ordinances and can't be limited to political
particularly political speech. Now are their ordinances, Sure, one of
them may be the size of a billboard because they're
(10:09):
going to argue maybe a distraction. Maybe the size is
too big because it gets in the way, maybe it's
gets in the way of safety. But on your own
property you can pretty well do what you want to do,
and you can put up political signs, so you just
live with it, you know. It's I mean, jokes are fine,
it just drives you crazy and when and they're usually
(10:32):
political as opposed to we sell berries here kind of thing.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
Well, those are really crude and alongside the highway. Like
I said, it's in both Georgia and Florida.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Yeah, and probably and probably they're illegal, but you know
who cares. You know, the authorities aren't going to deal
with it. You've got some poor guy who is selling
berries by the sidewalk and this is the way he
feeds his family and the cops have a lot of
other issues to deal with. But they're probably illegal, but
a sign probably is legal. Probably, Yes, that's what I thought.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
It just okay. It had a president I won't say
current are passed, and he had a rocket launcher on
his shoulder, and it had a cutesy political quote. Yeah that
was quite comical. But I always wondered, wow, is that legal?
Speaker 2 (11:23):
But yeah, it is.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
I get what you're saying.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
Yeah, no, it is. It's legal for the most part
unless there are restrictions that restrict all signs for and
it's hard to get around First Amendment, but it can
be done based on what I said, John, And before
we take a break, I want to talk to you
about LifeLock. That's one of the protection organizations that I
(11:46):
told you about, and this is the one that I use. Now.
Some reports are calling you this some mother of all
data breaches. A couple of months ago, two point seven
billion records were stolen by cyber hackers from a company
known as National Public Data. And this is a company
that collects information background checks to employers and other people,
other companies checking up on you. We don't have much
(12:08):
defense against that. So many records are stolen online. We
are so vulnerable. So let me suggest LifeLock. What does
LifeLock do. What it does is the texts and alerts
you to potential identity threats that you may not maybe
I wouldn't recognize, and it happens so quickly. LifeLock monitors
for that, and then they call you and say, hey,
(12:30):
you've got a problem here. Your identity is being compromised.
And if there's a problem, they work to fix it
or you get your money back. And that's a dedicated
a dedicated one of their techs, their technicians and will
help you with your identity theft. Easy to help protect
yourself with LifeLock. Join save up to forty percent off
(12:52):
your first year with handle as your promo code eight
hundred LifeLock eight hundred LifeLock LifeLock dot Com code. Handle.
This is Handle on the Law. You're listening to Bill
Handle on Demand from KFI AM six forty and welcome
back to Handle on the Law. Helena, Hello, Elena.
Speaker 6 (13:17):
Hey, thanks for taking my call.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
Bill Sure.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
So.
Speaker 6 (13:22):
In twenty twenty two, I purchased a condo in an
Hoa through a ten thirty one exchange and the HOA
signed off on the sale with no issues, and a
couple of weeks after estro closed, I was I received
a letter that stated that I needed to replace or
paint the window frames because they were the wrong color. Okay,
(13:46):
sent a letter and I asked them to see if
they had assessed any fines to the previous owner who
had passed away. This was sold to a trust, and
they sent me back the same letter stating that i'd
have to replace the.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Fresh I ask you, they already, so they've already signed
off on it when you bought. They said, okay, and
they didn't tell you the windows were the wrong cover.
They did a color they did it after you closed. Correct,
that's correct, all right, So you can do one of
two things. Say no, thank you painted? I mean, what
is it going to cost you to paint the window frames?
Speaker 5 (14:21):
Well, I don't.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
I just don't know how the paint's gonna hold up
on there.
Speaker 6 (14:27):
And the other thing is, well, hold on, wait, wait.
Speaker 2 (14:30):
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait a minute. What are the
window frames made of wood? They're vinyl and they're the
wrong color. So you can't paint vinyl, I don't think,
because they have to replace those window frames. Okay, you
get to find out how much that costs, and that
probably is not inexpensive.
Speaker 6 (14:47):
Yeah, about twenty thousand. And the other thing is this
is an investment property.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
Why never have purchased it?
Speaker 6 (14:55):
I already paid thirty thousand over asking, knowing that the
HVAC is gonna need replacement.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
Yeah, okay, you already know that you paid money. I mean,
that is all that is off the table. The other
the only issue is wrong color and you were never
informed and when the h o A, if the HOA
has to sign off and agree to the purchase for
whatever reason, and they didn't tell you, and they did
(15:23):
it two weeks afterwards. You just say no, thank you. Now,
let's get practical for a moment. They're going to tell
you to do it. You're gonna say no. They're going
to hit you with a violation. You're going to say no.
They're going to hit you with assessments. You're going to
say no. They're going to take you to court. Probably
you're going to say no. You're probably going to win. Uh,
there's probably a prevailing attorney's clause fees with the HOA agreement.
(15:45):
I mean that's I think you've got a good case.
But the problem is is that you still have to
live there, and you're dealing with an HOA that's gonna
hate you.
Speaker 6 (15:56):
So I don't live there. It's a rental all right.
Speaker 2 (15:59):
Then you say, but you still own it, so that
doesn't matter. We're talking about an ongle issue with the HOA.
Speaker 6 (16:05):
Well, the raptor wants to buy it, then sell it
and well, but according to the HOA, now if I
sell it, I have to replace the windows.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Are you making money on it?
Speaker 6 (16:18):
Am? I? Am I making money on it?
Speaker 7 (16:21):
Well?
Speaker 2 (16:21):
Are you making a profit? You sell it? Now? If
you sell it now? Are you making a profit?
Speaker 6 (16:28):
Probably?
Speaker 2 (16:31):
What does that mean? So if you don't know what
to buy it. You haven't you haven't come up with
a price yet.
Speaker 6 (16:37):
I haven't come up with a price, but I don't
want to sell it right now because it's in a
ten to thirty one exchange and it's mya.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
Then you don't sell it. So it's academic. You know.
You're saying the owner wants you know, the renter wants
to buy it. No, because you're not selling it. So
that argument doesn't work. So now the only issue is
the HOA says, change your windows. You say no, thank you.
The HOA says you have to. They have a right
to say your color has to be the same as
everybody else's. Oh, by the way, is it the same
(17:05):
as everybody else's or is it way out of you know,
way out of the normal colors of the rest of
the building.
Speaker 6 (17:12):
It's within it within their rules. It says they have
to be a neutral color.
Speaker 3 (17:16):
They're white.
Speaker 2 (17:19):
How about the other colors around the building.
Speaker 6 (17:22):
So right, there's one window next to us, and it's
a condo that is actually like a gold almond color.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
All right, So you're within you're basically within the parameter.
So another reason you're saying is no because you're discriminating
against me. This is neutral. So that one.
Speaker 6 (17:37):
Not only that they never assessed the owner who put
them in ten years ago when they did the remodel.
They never right, So you've got.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
A bunch of things. So there's probably an arbitration clause there, Elena,
and you file for arbitration and you make those arguments
and see what an arbitrator.
Speaker 3 (17:52):
Has to say.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
Ok, that's all you can do and read. I'm sure
there's an arbitration clause in your CCNRS. I get it. Oh, oh,
here's why been there for a while? Hey, Margie, welcome?
Speaker 3 (18:06):
Yes, yeah, Margie.
Speaker 8 (18:08):
Yes, hi, I'm calling you reference to someone rented some
a space for an RB on my property and they
just basically abandoned it.
Speaker 3 (18:20):
What can I do?
Speaker 2 (18:21):
Right? Oh? What can you do? You do you have
any address for them? Can you hunt them down at all?
Speaker 4 (18:28):
Not?
Speaker 8 (18:28):
I'm not having any looks yet.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Okay, So here's what you do. They've abandoned the property,
and your duty is to find them, first of all,
and you have to make reasonable attempts to find them.
You don't have to go crazy. It's not like you
have to spend thousands of dollars with a PI the
looking for them, or you hire someone that is a
specialist in this. You don't have to. You just try
(18:52):
to find you know, what address, you write to, any
previous address, you write to neighbors saying you know where
they are, and then you can publish, you know, you know,
any little newspaper looking for just so you can. Okay,
So he tried, that's part of it. Okay, So that's
looking for Okay. So that so you now have tried
(19:14):
looking for them. So now at what point have they
abandon it and you can do whatever the hell you
want with it. And the problem is.
Speaker 3 (19:23):
He rent for the space that he has that he abandoned.
Speaker 2 (19:27):
Okay, is this a rental park?
Speaker 8 (19:31):
No, no, no, it's just my I have a few
acres and he's okay.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
And you rented you rented part of that acreage to
this guy who has an RV and he just left
right right. Okay. So here's the problem you're going to
have as far as getting uh, the title to it
is going to be a real real problem because abandoning
it and you have to get rid of it, you're
(19:55):
not going to physically pick it up. You're gonna have
some tow yard pick it up and tow yard. So
I want to know who owns it, and so you
get you have to get titled to it. And this
is where you work with the DMV and you say, uh,
this has been abandoned on my property. I want to
tow it out of here. I want to get title
(20:16):
to this so a tow yard will be able to
take it. And then you just get you sell it
for scrap or you could sell it if it's in
good shape, you just sell anybody to buy it. And
you do the same thing with the DMV.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
No shape, okay, then then it's scrap.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
Okay, then it's a piece of c then all right,
then all it is is scrap metal. And but you
have to get titled to it. So contact the DMV
and say money for no if they're gone, no, I mean,
where are you gonna go if you can't reach him?
What are you gonna do? Spend money?
Speaker 8 (20:49):
If I if I find him, can I still get
him on the back rent?
Speaker 2 (20:53):
Or yeah, yeah you can. But if you find him,
then you can't toe it off because it's his and
so that's a whole different issue. So you're not going
to find him, not based on what you say, someone
who abandons an r V is not going to be
out there and be found. This is handle on the law.
(21:13):
We'll come back handle on the law. Marginal legal ad advice. Geo, Hi, Geo.
Speaker 4 (21:22):
Good morning, Yes, sir, Yes, I am calling concerning my
pasty childhood over a sexual abuse that.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Occur from who sexually abused you.
Speaker 7 (21:38):
Sadly priests?
Speaker 2 (21:39):
Priests. Well I've never heard that story before, all right,
so you yeah, I know, unfortunately it happened to a
whole lot of people. Okay, So what what is your question?
Speaker 4 (21:55):
My question is the number one is since it's unfold
not in California, but in another country.
Speaker 2 (22:00):
Where Ethiopia, Ethiopia. Sir, okay, So you want to know
what recourse you have against either the archdiocese or the
Catholic Church in general or the individual priest. How long
ago did this happen?
Speaker 7 (22:20):
I was in my nine and I was born there.
It came perfect in my possible to everything, Okay, due
to the never ending civil war Ethiopia has been always
pretty much that could Palestina, and I also to say
it never ending war.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
Yeah, of course, of course, and I'm aware of that. Okay.
How old are you now.
Speaker 7 (22:43):
I am now in my fifty nine fifty nine.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
Okay, so this happened fifty years ago. Okay, here's your problem. Okay,
First of all, let's say you have a lawsuit. There's
no issues to damages. Of course, you were abused and
just a horrific situation. Here are the people that you
can sue. You can sue the archdiocese, but that's in Ethiopia. Okay,
good luck suing the archdiocese in Ethiopia, Ethiopia for a
(23:09):
priest that molested you fifty years ago. You could sue
the individual priest who is probably long since dead and
has no money because he's a priest. You can try
to sue the Catholic Church as an entity. But each
archdiocese is an entity onto itself. So when you talk
(23:31):
about these lawsuits for abuse that have been filed and
have been settled and have gone to trial where the
jury and or the judge has gone forward and nailed
the archdiocese, each one is different. There are a couple
of archdioceses that have to go bankrupt. The archdiocese had
(23:51):
to go bankrupt, the churches didn't because the legal entity
is the archdiocese. So unfortunately, GEO, there's no place to go.
There is no I'm sorry, there is no place to go.
And I know living with that is just horrific. We're
just starting to understand how deeply dangerous and horrific and
(24:15):
the emotions that go with it, how damaged people are.
And you know, yeah, so I'm sorry about that. Yeah.
I was just an event last night as a matter
of fact, talking about this very topic. And that is
an organization that helps teams who have been abused by
(24:39):
uh these facilities, these centers that quote help teams I
deal with their problems. Good luck on that one. Let
me see, all right, Chris, here you go, let's try you. Hey, Chris, welcome, Hey.
Speaker 3 (24:56):
Good more than do? Okay, So years ago I bought
shares and American Depository received traded on the you know,
on the New York Stack Exchange of a Russian company
called Luke Oil. You might see their stations on the
East coast. So anyway, so right now they're worth about
twenty one thousand dollars and I missed out on about
(25:16):
four thousand dollars worth of dividends because and you know,
after the Russians invaded Ukraine, they ended up. You know,
the Biden administration put sanctions on Russia, and it made
my shares. You know, Americans could no longer trade Russian shares,
even though you know, I already you know, the Russians
(25:36):
already had the money and they were paying me dividends,
so no cash was flowing to the Russians. Nothing would
be helping them out. But needless to say, they put
the you know, the restrictions on the people who own
these stacks and many other Russian stacks, and so now
the shares are basically worthless. I can't trade them. So
I'm wondering what's my legal recourse.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
Yeah, yeah, So here here is the issue, even if
they are willing to pay, if under law, if the
President the Biden administration is allowed in which it is
to put restrictions on trading and receiving dividends from a
Russian oil company, that is considered part of trading, and
(26:19):
it's going to be a situation where I think it's
legal for your shares to effectively disappear in worth. For example,
let's say you have an Iranian company or an American
company doing business with Iran with a contract where money
is paid and goods are being shipped and the government
(26:42):
stops it cold stops it at the port, says nope,
well you're out your money because it's legal. You just
got caught up in it. So the only hope you
have is that frankly, Trump gets elected. And if Trump
gets elected and Trump like putin, you know, Trump likes Russia,
(27:03):
the reinstate the money flowing and reinstates the ability for
Russia in the United States to do business. I don't
think you have recourse at this point because the government
is able to sanction and you're you're basically part of
the sanction saying you're not allowed to do business with
Russian companies.
Speaker 3 (27:23):
It's that simple, right, So the money was flowing to me.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
No, I understand, it doesn't matter. It's still doing business.
Doesn't matter which way the money goes. Is it still business?
Speaker 3 (27:37):
Well, then isn't it. Isn't that a legal seizure of
my property by the systemendment?
Speaker 2 (27:41):
Uh? No, probably not, because if that was the case,
no sanction in the world would be effective none. Then
the whole concept of sanctions disappears.
Speaker 3 (27:54):
So it's not reasonable for me to ask why wouldn't
they have done a nuance sanction?
Speaker 2 (27:58):
Because they didn't see that because they didn't. Yeah, but
they didn't.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
I don't think they did.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
Well, if you don't think they did, then you file
lawsuit about it against the federal government, which you can,
and saying their policy uh, in which you were out
and out receiving the money is not under the sanctions
and therefore you should receive the money and file a
lawsuit against the United States. And you're arguing it gets
(28:28):
the Department of Justice. What do you think that's going
to cost?
Speaker 3 (28:31):
You could securities class action take up something.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
No one will do it. No one will file a
class action on your behalf on that one. You're on
your own.
Speaker 3 (28:42):
You're on your own government.
Speaker 2 (28:44):
Yeah, yeah, that's exactly it. You're because sanctions. You're screwed
by your own government. So it's every business doing business. Yeah,
that's it. Let's talk about bad breath for a moment.
You know, I suffer from bad breath. As a matter
of fact, I'm sitting here beside them behind the mic,
(29:05):
and I actually see my breath affecting the metal of
the microphone. And so let me suggest what I can do.
And what I do do is Zelman's minty mouth mints.
These are the ones right here, and what they are
is a mint, at least a mint coding on the
outside of these capsules. And you take the mint off,
(29:25):
you suck them off, and then it goes down into
your gut starts to work because so much bad breath
happens in your gut, and it just does what no
other mint does. That's Zelman's Minty Mouth mints. And believe me,
I don't walk around without them. Zelman z e l
M i N s Zelmans dot com. Use the code
K use the code handle at checkout and get fifteen
(29:47):
percent off Zelman's Z l M i N s zelmans
dot com. This is Handle on the Law. You've been
listening to the Bill Handle Show. Catch my show Monday
through Friday six am to nine am, and anytime on
demand on the iHeartRadio app
You're listening to Bill Handle on Demand from KFI AM
six forty.
Speaker 2 (00:08):
This is Handle on the Law marginal legal Advice, where
I tell you you have absolutely no case. If you're
injured and need a lawyer, go to handle on the
law dot com. And if you're a lawyer and want
to join our team because people desperately need your help,
go to handle on the Law dot com and click
on the join today tab at the top of the page.
The following is up be recorded program. Oh let me
(00:31):
tell you about what happened this past week, and this
has to do with the Menendez brothers. Remember the two
brothers that ended up killing their parents, and they were
I think nineteen and twenty one, and they have to well,
they got life in prison without possibility or parole, Lyle
(00:52):
and Eric Menendez. And there were two trials. The first
one was a hung jury because the trial lasted for
months months, over one hundred witnesses and a lot of
the trial happened to be involved with the abuse that
Eric underwent by his father, and he described in very
(01:13):
specific detail what his father did to him, just total
sexual abuse and humiliation, I mean brutal stuff. And his
brother knew all about it and couldn't do anything, And
there was evidence that was produced over and over again,
and the jury deadlocked. The jury couldn't come to a
(01:33):
conclusion because of all that evidence of abuse, particularly at
least that's what the experts say. So the judge gets
really pissed off. Judges do not like mistrials. They do
not like sitting on these very long, very complex trials.
And in the end the jury says, we can't decide,
(01:55):
so a retry and a couple things happened. The judge
doesn't allow a lot of this evidence regarding the sexual abuse.
And part of it was at that time, when we're
talking thirty five years ago, people didn't believe that boys
could get raped. There really wasn't sexual abuse against boys. Well,
(02:19):
obviously that's changed and we now know very differently, and
so it was basically dead. There was no question that
it was going to be a conviction. The judge effectively
set it up. Also, the judge rule that there were
only two ways the jury could go first degree murder
or they walk. Well, considering the evidence that they admitted
(02:43):
doing this, killing their parents and arguing we were frightened
for our lives. If manslaughter had been part of the
decision that a jury could make. Maybe they would have
gone for manslaughter. They admitted killing their parents and they
were lying in wait, I mean all the elements of
first degree murder except the emotional destruction of their psyche
(03:07):
because of the physical abuse, the emotional abuse, the hitting,
the sexual abuse. So they were convicted. They got life
imprisonment without possibility of parole. So here we are thirty
five years later, and a letter that a judge would
not introduce the judge was basically brought forward. This is
(03:30):
because there's been a Netflix documentary and a docu drama
and has brought this to the forefront. This letter and
this testimony from a friend of theirs were six months
before Eric talked about the abuse of his father and
he was frightened for his life. That changes everything, and
that could have really changed the course of the trial.
(03:53):
And so the DA in Los Angeles, George Gascon, who
is going to be tossed out because he's so way liberal,
he has decided to ask the judge to re sentence
the boys, in other words, effectively go back to manslaughter,
which means they're out because they have done thirty five years.
The problem is the judge has to say yes to that.
(04:14):
The parole board has to say yes to that, and
the governor has to agree to that, and any one
of those three can stop it cold. I'll tell you
what I think is going to happen. I think they're
going to be released as they should be, by the way,
because this kind of sexual abuse and this kind of
exploitation is so rampant. All right, let's do it. You
(04:40):
got some fun phone calls? Mike, Hello, Mike, welcome, Thank you, Bill.
Speaker 3 (04:46):
Yes, I have a question. I have a tenant with
six dogs in the house.
Speaker 4 (04:52):
Why can I do to get that? Then? Dogs out
of the house?
Speaker 2 (04:55):
Okay, well, got it all right? Question do you have a.
Speaker 4 (05:01):
Yes?
Speaker 2 (05:02):
Does it say anything about dogs?
Speaker 4 (05:04):
The lease says that they can only have one dog?
Speaker 2 (05:07):
Oh, that's easy. They're on a breach of a lease.
So there's two ways you can go on this. You
can a victim on a couple of different ways. One,
they're breaching. They breach the lease, that's simple, and that
means that they have a right to cure, which means
they have a right to fix that lease. And fixing
that lease means they have to get rid of five dogs,
which they're not going to do Yeah, they're not going
(05:29):
to do that unless they're of that ilk where they
cook the dogs and the barbecue, and they probably aren't.
Very few people are. So the other basis for suing
them is there is a statutory basis. I don't know
what city allows six dogs in a facility? How big
is the apartment? That's what I will like, so know, Yeah,
(05:51):
it's easy to look up. It doesn't matter. You got
them on both. You got them on both. You have
them on the law that says you can't have more
than X number of dogs. I'm sure that six is
too many. And the other and the other one is
breach of the lease. So you're victim. You're gonna be fine.
They breach the lease, and.
Speaker 3 (06:10):
Not only that, they never pick up the dogs.
Speaker 2 (06:13):
That didn't matter. That's their problem. They live with that. Yeah,
that's that's great. Just uh and you're not gonna have
to pay relocation money if they breach the lease and
you tossed them out, so you know, get rid of
them and their dogs and enjoy yourself or let them
enjoy themselves. Uh eva hi eva hi, yes ma'am hi.
Speaker 5 (06:34):
So I'm on disability recovering from cancer and California Stay
deposits my paycheck to Money Network banks. So in March
two of my payments were stolen. One of them they
approved as a fraud. Somebody withdrawed it. The second one
sixty five hundred dollars I'm fighting to get back. They
(06:56):
keep saying that I withdrew it, and they would not
give me any proof on that. I've appealed. They denied
my appeal. I appealed the appeal. So I don't know
what to do with this.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
Yeah, I think you're gonna I think you're going to
uh and when you appeal that, you appealed it within
the bank, correct, Yes, Okay, so you haven't gone to
any authorities yet. It's all the.
Speaker 6 (07:21):
Did I did, right?
Speaker 5 (07:23):
I did file a police report.
Speaker 2 (07:26):
That's not that's not really no that that we're not
talking about the regulatory agencies. Uh So the banks are
controlled by state law and federal law. Usually law, the
FDIC controls the banks, and there is probably and I've
never had that problem. So all I'm telling you is
what I know, which isn't much, is that there probably
(07:48):
is a complaint form with the FDIC as to what
they're doing and you fd i C, Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation and other agencies that control, uh, the banking does
the FTC control I don't know, and then I know
state regulations go. So you want to just basically do
a little research. That is, look under regulations regulate tours
(08:12):
in banking, and then see whatever agencies have anything to
do with the banks, and then just ask for complaint
forms because that's all you gonna do to file a
lawsuit for sixty five hundred dollars. No lawyer is going
to take it, and you're going to spend way way
too much money and get out of that bank obviously.
Oh good good. So that's what you want to do.
(08:33):
Do a little bit of research, do what you can
and yeah, those are problems that I can't answer so much.
You know, it's so much easier when do you call
and you go, hey, you know, someone killed my dog.
Do I have a case? Yeah? Yeah, you probably have
a case. Somebody ran through my front window with their car.
(08:53):
Do I have a case? Yeah? Probably? Those are easy ones.
This stuff is drives me nuts. This it is handle
on the law or handle on the law. Marginal legal advice. Hey, Frank,
welcome to the show. What can I do for you?
Speaker 1 (09:11):
Thanks?
Speaker 7 (09:11):
Bill.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
I drive a major interstate here in Georgia and Florida.
It's Interstate seventy five, and there's a lot of farmland
on both sides of the highway, and I have no
skin in the game. I'm just curious some of the farmers.
It appears like they've erected or built these crudely built billboards,
and it's usually a political sign, or it might even
(09:35):
be a political joke. And I was just curious all
these years that if you own like a cornfield next
to a major interstate, are you free to just put
up any kind of sign you want, or are their
ordinances or or.
Speaker 2 (09:49):
Well probably probably ordinances. First of all, on your property,
you can put up whatever the hell sign you want. Now,
there may be ordinances and can't be limited to political
particularly political speech. Now are their ordinances, Sure, one of
them may be the size of a billboard because they're
(10:09):
going to argue maybe a distraction. Maybe the size is
too big because it gets in the way, maybe it's
gets in the way of safety. But on your own
property you can pretty well do what you want to do,
and you can put up political signs, so you just
live with it, you know. It's I mean, jokes are fine,
it just drives you crazy and when and they're usually
(10:32):
political as opposed to we sell berries here kind of thing.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
Well, those are really crude and alongside the highway. Like
I said, it's in both Georgia and Florida.
Speaker 2 (10:44):
Yeah, and probably and probably they're illegal, but you know
who cares. You know, the authorities aren't going to deal
with it. You've got some poor guy who is selling
berries by the sidewalk and this is the way he
feeds his family and the cops have a lot of
other issues to deal with. But they're probably illegal, but
a sign probably is legal. Probably, Yes, that's what I thought.
Speaker 1 (11:06):
It just okay. It had a president I won't say
current are passed, and he had a rocket launcher on
his shoulder, and it had a cutesy political quote. Yeah that
was quite comical. But I always wondered, wow, is that legal?
Speaker 2 (11:23):
But yeah, it is.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
I get what you're saying.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
Yeah, no, it is. It's legal for the most part
unless there are restrictions that restrict all signs for and
it's hard to get around First Amendment, but it can
be done based on what I said, John, And before
we take a break, I want to talk to you
about LifeLock. That's one of the protection organizations that I
(11:46):
told you about, and this is the one that I use. Now.
Some reports are calling you this some mother of all
data breaches. A couple of months ago, two point seven
billion records were stolen by cyber hackers from a company
known as National Public Data. And this is a company
that collects information background checks to employers and other people,
other companies checking up on you. We don't have much
(12:08):
defense against that. So many records are stolen online. We
are so vulnerable. So let me suggest LifeLock. What does
LifeLock do. What it does is the texts and alerts
you to potential identity threats that you may not maybe
I wouldn't recognize, and it happens so quickly. LifeLock monitors
for that, and then they call you and say, hey,
(12:30):
you've got a problem here. Your identity is being compromised.
And if there's a problem, they work to fix it
or you get your money back. And that's a dedicated
a dedicated one of their techs, their technicians and will
help you with your identity theft. Easy to help protect
yourself with LifeLock. Join save up to forty percent off
(12:52):
your first year with handle as your promo code eight
hundred LifeLock eight hundred LifeLock LifeLock dot Com code. Handle.
This is Handle on the Law. You're listening to Bill
Handle on Demand from KFI AM six forty and welcome
back to Handle on the Law. Helena, Hello, Elena.
Speaker 6 (13:17):
Hey, thanks for taking my call.
Speaker 3 (13:19):
Bill Sure.
Speaker 2 (13:21):
So.
Speaker 6 (13:22):
In twenty twenty two, I purchased a condo in an
Hoa through a ten thirty one exchange and the HOA
signed off on the sale with no issues, and a
couple of weeks after estro closed, I was I received
a letter that stated that I needed to replace or
paint the window frames because they were the wrong color. Okay,
(13:46):
sent a letter and I asked them to see if
they had assessed any fines to the previous owner who
had passed away. This was sold to a trust, and
they sent me back the same letter stating that i'd
have to replace the.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Fresh I ask you, they already, so they've already signed
off on it when you bought. They said, okay, and
they didn't tell you the windows were the wrong cover.
They did a color they did it after you closed. Correct,
that's correct, all right, So you can do one of
two things. Say no, thank you painted? I mean, what
is it going to cost you to paint the window frames?
Speaker 5 (14:21):
Well, I don't.
Speaker 3 (14:25):
I just don't know how the paint's gonna hold up
on there.
Speaker 6 (14:27):
And the other thing is, well, hold on, wait, wait.
Speaker 2 (14:30):
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait a minute. What are the
window frames made of wood? They're vinyl and they're the
wrong color. So you can't paint vinyl, I don't think,
because they have to replace those window frames. Okay, you
get to find out how much that costs, and that
probably is not inexpensive.
Speaker 6 (14:47):
Yeah, about twenty thousand. And the other thing is this
is an investment property.
Speaker 3 (14:53):
Why never have purchased it?
Speaker 6 (14:55):
I already paid thirty thousand over asking, knowing that the
HVAC is gonna need replacement.
Speaker 2 (15:01):
Yeah, okay, you already know that you paid money. I mean,
that is all that is off the table. The other
the only issue is wrong color and you were never
informed and when the h o A, if the HOA
has to sign off and agree to the purchase for
whatever reason, and they didn't tell you, and they did
(15:23):
it two weeks afterwards. You just say no, thank you. Now,
let's get practical for a moment. They're going to tell
you to do it. You're gonna say no. They're going
to hit you with a violation. You're going to say no.
They're going to hit you with assessments. You're going to
say no. They're going to take you to court. Probably
you're going to say no. You're probably going to win. Uh,
there's probably a prevailing attorney's clause fees with the HOA agreement.
(15:45):
I mean that's I think you've got a good case.
But the problem is is that you still have to
live there, and you're dealing with an HOA that's gonna
hate you.
Speaker 6 (15:56):
So I don't live there. It's a rental all right.
Speaker 2 (15:59):
Then you say, but you still own it, so that
doesn't matter. We're talking about an ongle issue with the HOA.
Speaker 6 (16:05):
Well, the raptor wants to buy it, then sell it
and well, but according to the HOA, now if I
sell it, I have to replace the windows.
Speaker 2 (16:15):
Are you making money on it?
Speaker 6 (16:18):
Am? I? Am I making money on it?
Speaker 7 (16:21):
Well?
Speaker 2 (16:21):
Are you making a profit? You sell it? Now? If
you sell it now? Are you making a profit?
Speaker 6 (16:28):
Probably?
Speaker 2 (16:31):
What does that mean? So if you don't know what
to buy it. You haven't you haven't come up with
a price yet.
Speaker 6 (16:37):
I haven't come up with a price, but I don't
want to sell it right now because it's in a
ten to thirty one exchange and it's mya.
Speaker 2 (16:43):
Then you don't sell it. So it's academic. You know.
You're saying the owner wants you know, the renter wants
to buy it. No, because you're not selling it. So
that argument doesn't work. So now the only issue is
the HOA says, change your windows. You say no, thank you.
The HOA says you have to. They have a right
to say your color has to be the same as
everybody else's. Oh, by the way, is it the same
(17:05):
as everybody else's or is it way out of you know,
way out of the normal colors of the rest of
the building.
Speaker 6 (17:12):
It's within it within their rules. It says they have
to be a neutral color.
Speaker 3 (17:16):
They're white.
Speaker 2 (17:19):
How about the other colors around the building.
Speaker 6 (17:22):
So right, there's one window next to us, and it's
a condo that is actually like a gold almond color.
Speaker 2 (17:28):
All right, So you're within you're basically within the parameter.
So another reason you're saying is no because you're discriminating
against me. This is neutral. So that one.
Speaker 6 (17:37):
Not only that they never assessed the owner who put
them in ten years ago when they did the remodel.
They never right, So you've got.
Speaker 2 (17:45):
A bunch of things. So there's probably an arbitration clause there, Elena,
and you file for arbitration and you make those arguments
and see what an arbitrator.
Speaker 3 (17:52):
Has to say.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
Ok, that's all you can do and read. I'm sure
there's an arbitration clause in your CCNRS. I get it. Oh, oh,
here's why been there for a while? Hey, Margie, welcome?
Speaker 3 (18:06):
Yes, yeah, Margie.
Speaker 8 (18:08):
Yes, hi, I'm calling you reference to someone rented some
a space for an RB on my property and they
just basically abandoned it.
Speaker 3 (18:20):
What can I do?
Speaker 2 (18:21):
Right? Oh? What can you do? You do you have
any address for them? Can you hunt them down at all?
Speaker 4 (18:28):
Not?
Speaker 8 (18:28):
I'm not having any looks yet.
Speaker 2 (18:30):
Okay, So here's what you do. They've abandoned the property,
and your duty is to find them, first of all,
and you have to make reasonable attempts to find them.
You don't have to go crazy. It's not like you
have to spend thousands of dollars with a PI the
looking for them, or you hire someone that is a
specialist in this. You don't have to. You just try
(18:52):
to find you know, what address, you write to, any
previous address, you write to neighbors saying you know where
they are, and then you can publish, you know, you know,
any little newspaper looking for just so you can. Okay,
So he tried, that's part of it. Okay, So that's
looking for Okay. So that so you now have tried
(19:14):
looking for them. So now at what point have they
abandon it and you can do whatever the hell you
want with it. And the problem is.
Speaker 3 (19:23):
He rent for the space that he has that he abandoned.
Speaker 2 (19:27):
Okay, is this a rental park?
Speaker 8 (19:31):
No, no, no, it's just my I have a few
acres and he's okay.
Speaker 2 (19:35):
And you rented you rented part of that acreage to
this guy who has an RV and he just left
right right. Okay. So here's the problem you're going to
have as far as getting uh, the title to it
is going to be a real real problem because abandoning
it and you have to get rid of it, you're
(19:55):
not going to physically pick it up. You're gonna have
some tow yard pick it up and tow yard. So
I want to know who owns it, and so you
get you have to get titled to it. And this
is where you work with the DMV and you say, uh,
this has been abandoned on my property. I want to
tow it out of here. I want to get title
(20:16):
to this so a tow yard will be able to
take it. And then you just get you sell it
for scrap or you could sell it if it's in
good shape, you just sell anybody to buy it. And
you do the same thing with the DMV.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
No shape, okay, then then it's scrap.
Speaker 2 (20:31):
Okay, then it's a piece of c then all right,
then all it is is scrap metal. And but you
have to get titled to it. So contact the DMV
and say money for no if they're gone, no, I mean,
where are you gonna go if you can't reach him?
What are you gonna do? Spend money?
Speaker 8 (20:49):
If I if I find him, can I still get
him on the back rent?
Speaker 2 (20:53):
Or yeah, yeah you can. But if you find him,
then you can't toe it off because it's his and
so that's a whole different issue. So you're not going
to find him, not based on what you say, someone
who abandons an r V is not going to be
out there and be found. This is handle on the law.
(21:13):
We'll come back handle on the law. Marginal legal ad advice. Geo, Hi, Geo.
Speaker 4 (21:22):
Good morning, Yes, sir, Yes, I am calling concerning my
pasty childhood over a sexual abuse that.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
Occur from who sexually abused you.
Speaker 7 (21:38):
Sadly priests?
Speaker 2 (21:39):
Priests. Well I've never heard that story before, all right,
so you yeah, I know, unfortunately it happened to a
whole lot of people. Okay, So what what is your question?
Speaker 4 (21:55):
My question is the number one is since it's unfold
not in California, but in another country.
Speaker 2 (22:00):
Where Ethiopia, Ethiopia. Sir, okay, So you want to know
what recourse you have against either the archdiocese or the
Catholic Church in general or the individual priest. How long
ago did this happen?
Speaker 7 (22:20):
I was in my nine and I was born there.
It came perfect in my possible to everything, Okay, due
to the never ending civil war Ethiopia has been always
pretty much that could Palestina, and I also to say
it never ending war.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
Yeah, of course, of course, and I'm aware of that. Okay.
How old are you now.
Speaker 7 (22:43):
I am now in my fifty nine fifty nine.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
Okay, so this happened fifty years ago. Okay, here's your problem. Okay,
First of all, let's say you have a lawsuit. There's
no issues to damages. Of course, you were abused and
just a horrific situation. Here are the people that you
can sue. You can sue the archdiocese, but that's in Ethiopia. Okay,
good luck suing the archdiocese in Ethiopia, Ethiopia for a
(23:09):
priest that molested you fifty years ago. You could sue
the individual priest who is probably long since dead and
has no money because he's a priest. You can try
to sue the Catholic Church as an entity. But each
archdiocese is an entity onto itself. So when you talk
(23:31):
about these lawsuits for abuse that have been filed and
have been settled and have gone to trial where the
jury and or the judge has gone forward and nailed
the archdiocese, each one is different. There are a couple
of archdioceses that have to go bankrupt. The archdiocese had
(23:51):
to go bankrupt, the churches didn't because the legal entity
is the archdiocese. So unfortunately, GEO, there's no place to go.
There is no I'm sorry, there is no place to go.
And I know living with that is just horrific. We're
just starting to understand how deeply dangerous and horrific and
(24:15):
the emotions that go with it, how damaged people are.
And you know, yeah, so I'm sorry about that. Yeah.
I was just an event last night as a matter
of fact, talking about this very topic. And that is
an organization that helps teams who have been abused by
(24:39):
uh these facilities, these centers that quote help teams I
deal with their problems. Good luck on that one. Let
me see, all right, Chris, here you go, let's try you. Hey, Chris, welcome, Hey.
Speaker 3 (24:56):
Good more than do? Okay, So years ago I bought
shares and American Depository received traded on the you know,
on the New York Stack Exchange of a Russian company
called Luke Oil. You might see their stations on the
East coast. So anyway, so right now they're worth about
twenty one thousand dollars and I missed out on about
(25:16):
four thousand dollars worth of dividends because and you know,
after the Russians invaded Ukraine, they ended up. You know,
the Biden administration put sanctions on Russia, and it made
my shares. You know, Americans could no longer trade Russian shares,
even though you know, I already you know, the Russians
(25:36):
already had the money and they were paying me dividends,
so no cash was flowing to the Russians. Nothing would
be helping them out. But needless to say, they put
the you know, the restrictions on the people who own
these stacks and many other Russian stacks, and so now
the shares are basically worthless. I can't trade them. So
I'm wondering what's my legal recourse.
Speaker 2 (25:56):
Yeah, yeah, So here here is the issue, even if
they are willing to pay, if under law, if the
President the Biden administration is allowed in which it is
to put restrictions on trading and receiving dividends from a
Russian oil company, that is considered part of trading, and
(26:19):
it's going to be a situation where I think it's
legal for your shares to effectively disappear in worth. For example,
let's say you have an Iranian company or an American
company doing business with Iran with a contract where money
is paid and goods are being shipped and the government
(26:42):
stops it cold stops it at the port, says nope,
well you're out your money because it's legal. You just
got caught up in it. So the only hope you
have is that frankly, Trump gets elected. And if Trump
gets elected and Trump like putin, you know, Trump likes Russia,
(27:03):
the reinstate the money flowing and reinstates the ability for
Russia in the United States to do business. I don't
think you have recourse at this point because the government
is able to sanction and you're you're basically part of
the sanction saying you're not allowed to do business with
Russian companies.
Speaker 3 (27:23):
It's that simple, right, So the money was flowing to me.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
No, I understand, it doesn't matter. It's still doing business.
Doesn't matter which way the money goes. Is it still business?
Speaker 3 (27:37):
Well, then isn't it. Isn't that a legal seizure of
my property by the systemendment?
Speaker 2 (27:41):
Uh? No, probably not, because if that was the case,
no sanction in the world would be effective none. Then
the whole concept of sanctions disappears.
Speaker 3 (27:54):
So it's not reasonable for me to ask why wouldn't
they have done a nuance sanction?
Speaker 2 (27:58):
Because they didn't see that because they didn't. Yeah, but
they didn't.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
I don't think they did.
Speaker 2 (28:05):
Well, if you don't think they did, then you file
lawsuit about it against the federal government, which you can,
and saying their policy uh, in which you were out
and out receiving the money is not under the sanctions
and therefore you should receive the money and file a
lawsuit against the United States. And you're arguing it gets
(28:28):
the Department of Justice. What do you think that's going
to cost?
Speaker 3 (28:31):
You could securities class action take up something.
Speaker 2 (28:35):
No one will do it. No one will file a
class action on your behalf on that one. You're on
your own.
Speaker 3 (28:42):
You're on your own government.
Speaker 2 (28:44):
Yeah, yeah, that's exactly it. You're because sanctions. You're screwed
by your own government. So it's every business doing business. Yeah,
that's it. Let's talk about bad breath for a moment.
You know, I suffer from bad breath. As a matter
of fact, I'm sitting here beside them behind the mic,
(29:05):
and I actually see my breath affecting the metal of
the microphone. And so let me suggest what I can do.
And what I do do is Zelman's minty mouth mints.
These are the ones right here, and what they are
is a mint, at least a mint coding on the
outside of these capsules. And you take the mint off,
(29:25):
you suck them off, and then it goes down into
your gut starts to work because so much bad breath
happens in your gut, and it just does what no
other mint does. That's Zelman's Minty Mouth mints. And believe me,
I don't walk around without them. Zelman z e l
M i N s Zelmans dot com. Use the code
K use the code handle at checkout and get fifteen
(29:47):
percent off Zelman's Z l M i N s zelmans
dot com. This is Handle on the Law. You've been
listening to the Bill Handle Show. Catch my show Monday
through Friday six am to nine am, and anytime on
demand on the iHeartRadio app
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Monster: BTK
'Monster: BTK', the newest installment in the 'Monster' franchise, reveals the true story of the Wichita, Kansas serial killer who murdered at least 10 people between 1974 and 1991. Known by the moniker, BTK – Bind Torture Kill, his notoriety was bolstered by the taunting letters he sent to police, and the chilling phone calls he made to media outlets. BTK's identity was finally revealed in 2005 to the shock of his family, his community, and the world. He was the serial killer next door. From Tenderfoot TV & iHeartPodcasts, this is 'Monster: BTK'.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.