All right, it's see Eddie Rocky Show. Eddie Rocky out Jason Williams alongside my partner in pod Dan Carol. How are we looking, brother, good? You're already I'm good man. You came in here hot. Let me know you're you're ready to play some golf tomorrow as this weather is heating up.
Yeah, buddy of mine, buddy of mine contacted me earlier today, so we got tea times for tomorrow.
I said, I'm there, go win some money, my friend.
So so my I'm gonna say this right up front. I'm gonna lean on you tomorrow for show prep. I've already been working my friend already been working it. I've already go enjoy, go enjoy there your time at the golf court. I'll show prep tonight. I show prepped all day today. I'll show prep tonight.
Them you know what, I got an easy way for your show prop Just just ask Ai Ai Ai? Who should I? What should I do for my radio show tomorrow? I mean, is that? Is that what you do?
I am using AI sparingly now when I want to get some get some facts or some background on some stuff. But I have not asked it to create anything for me.
Well, interesting, you bring this up because we have our official Eddie and Rocky a oh, I did, okay, the main our official AI correspondent of the Eddie and Rocky Show, our good friend Dave Hatter, who as long ago gotten rid of his tinfoil hat because he it's officially everything he says is true.
Well you you asked the first question, because I'm going to be busy responding to this text message.
It says we dropped the ball on that one, Dave, Dave Hatter mayor Merry Christmas? How are you.
Merry Christmas? Birth? I'm good, thanks for having me on. I took the day off. And Jason, you may be too young to appreciate this. The damn will. I just watched the original Alice Cooper Band how about that Songs for Christmas Pudding event the other night. It's pretty awesome.
Really, I'll get much better than that. Well, it's funny because Alice Cooper, when I was a kid, was seen as like, oh man, like he's like one of those satan heavy rocker guys, and like he's about as normal in that world as you get, speaking of a normal. Well,
they dan just mentioned there about using Ai. I did not do this in thinking we were going to have you this week, but over the weekend, Dave Hatter, I was looking to make a special logo for a special event for my youth baseball team, my thirteen year old baseball team. And I'm like, oh, you know what, and it's a slogan that we use for the guys. And I'm like, I have a co pilot on my laptop up. So I'm like, all right, and I took the plunge.
I used AI for the first time, and I got down a two hour rabbit hole with AI on designing all kinds of different logos for my baseball team, not just the specific slogan one, but just other ones. And I am I am fascinated by it. And not only that. So then I turned around, just you know, an hour ago, I'm given this gift of he's not listening baseball tickets.
We were trying to pick this a different stadium each year to go to my sons and I and so we're going to go to Atlanta next year, and so you know, I wanted to make like kind of a fake ticket stub to give to him as part of his Christmas gift. I'm like, ah, man, I got to find a template. No, I go back to AI boom. Five minutes later, we got it all tweaked. It's good to go, ready to print out, Dave Hatter, I have crossed the threshold. I found the AI am I am? I Is that a good thing for me to be
using that? Or is it? Is it stealing all of my info as I'm doing this and it's going to come back.
To haunt me?
Well, possibly some combination of both. Like most technology, Jason, you know, it depends on the platform. You know. Here's the thing with AI where it stands today. Now, you know, I think a lot of the bloom was coming off the roads, and you've got a lot of the people who have been involved in it for a long time saying, you know, it's it's kind of perhaps peaked based on its current the current way that they've engineered it. I
don't know, We'll see. I can just tell you it's funny you mentioned the graphics thing, because just recently used it for something similar to that, and all I wanted to do was replace a single word in the image that it created, and I could not get it to
replace that word. Just one work so you know, I think as long as you understand what it's good at and what it's not good at, when you understand the issue of foluc nations and so forth, and then to your point about it sucking up all your information that the trade offs that you might be making when you use it, it can be a really valuable, really handy
tool as long as you stay within the guardrails. You know, if you don't know anything about a subject and you just assume that what it tells you it's fact, that can be really problematic. But as long as you stay within the guardrails, it can save you an enormous amount of time, especially like from a prototyping standpoint, if you just want to get an idea for something, it's super handy for that kind of thing, Like it will save you an enormous amount of count.
And I thought this was pretty harmless and it was fun. It was actually fun, like and I know what you say. I know what you're saying, though, Like there were some points where it's like, hey design this, and then it would keep coming back and it wouldn't get You'd literally tell it, hey drop that C logo, and it would kept dropping that in there somehow, some way, and finally I'd be like, let's do a reset get rid of the sea with the quote, because it was calling at
that and then it finally did. So it took some time, but on some tweaks, but I found it to be useful and fun, and I think I'm going to use one of those logos that it spit out.
Yeah, it really can be useful. Again, as long as you kind of understand the limitations and work within those guidelines, it can be a very handy tool for any number of different things and an enormous time saver. But but yeah, here's the thing I think a lot of people don't understand. You know, the guy who spent a long time as a software engineer. Most of the time the kind of software I was writing was for business use, and it was deterministic. You know, if you gave it a formula
and certain inputs, it would produce the same outputs every time. Right, it had to be correct. These large language models are using a probabilistic model. You can ask you the question twenty times and you might get twenty different answers, and some of them will be just completely made up. Right, That idea of hallucinations. So depending on you know, if you need a deterministic answer, that is not necessarily a good way to go about it. And if you don't
understand hallucinations, again, you could be setting yourself. There's been all kinds of stories about people trying to use AI, you know, based large language model g in AI type things like rock or chat or chat GPT or Gemini to like plan a vacation and it, you know, plots places on their itinerary that just don't exist. So again, when you understand those kinds of things and you understand it is not deterministic, it can be really valuable.
You know, Dave, There used to be a saying back in the the relatively early days of computing called geigo garbage in garbage out right.
Uh?
I think I think that same basic principle still applies. And I caught this story the other day when I was getting ready for one of my weekend shows, and it turns out Merriam Webster Dictionary has chosen their year, their word of the year, and that word is do you know it, Dave.
Flop slop?
I do know it? Ye slop?
Or yeah, AI generated junk? Tell me about that? Tell me about slop. I think that's a cool term because I mean, that's still sad. That sounds to me like the same principle of garbage in garbage out them all.
Right, well more or less, yes, and I think that's true. You know, when these large language models get trained. Again, you know, I'm not a mathematician and I don't build this stuff, so I can't tell you exactly what's happening inside it. And that's one of the problems. I'm not sure anyone can. But you know, it's using a probabilistic model to figure out okay, you use this word, this is the word that's most likely to go with that,
and it's all based on probability. That's why, again you can ask the same question and get a different answer each time. And that's why you know, until recently, it's been really poor at math of doing things like give me an image of an analog clock that's showing a certain time, and it can't do it right. But the bottom line is, yeah, Dan, if the input you're using to train these models is biased, if it's incorrect, that's problematic.
And again I'm not an expert on the inner works of this stuff, but there are a lot of people who have been well known people in this space who have now started to come off some of the more hyperbolic predictions that all of our jobs are going to be replaced, and you know, we're going to have AI wipe us out and all this sort of stuff, at
least on this particular path. There are different types of AI, and there are people doing different things, but there are some folks who are speculating that's the large language model that powers things like Gemini at Rock and catch GPP. If it hasn't peaked already, may have peaked. And one of the problems gets back to what you just said, Dan,
which is this idea of garbage in garbage out. If I have an AI model and it generates the output, and I eed that into another AI model, and it generates the output which goes back into the original model you originally. You eventually just hit this. It's all just made up stuff. It's slamp. It's just garbage being thrown out by these things. And as you get more non human generated original content, the slop causes entropy. And there's
an actual term in the business called model collapse. And I'm not saying we're there and this might never happen, But there are people predicting that, you know, based on these tools the way they work now, with the kind of limitations they have, they they may not be able
to progress much beyond where we are now. And there have been several very well known people say the idea of getting to artificial general intelligence, this sort of you know, it's better than human beings and everything and eventually wipe us out. It will never happen using this particular technique. Now again, you know, I only know what I read and what I see, and I've seen evidence of the slop and the Internet is now full of all these ridiculous videos and means being generated by AI, which is
then get sucked back into the AI. So I think there's something to that idea of entropy. And I do love the term flop because so much of what you see from this stuff really is just garbage.
Changes.
But that's want to go back and say, when you understand all of the things we're talking about here, and you know how to work with the tools the right way where things are good at they can be unbelievably handy.
Dave, We've got a couple more minutes, Dave, had or our tech guy here on the Eddie and Rocky Show speaking of sloping garbage. It is prime Christmas fishing season with a pH any particular scams going on out there right Nowadave that people really need to be on alert for.
Well, I'm glad to ask about that, Jason, because the FBI has just recently, the FBI had a great website, the Internet Crime Complaints that are IC three dot gov and then just the standard FBI website. They've put out a lot of warnings and PSAs lately on social media and so forth about scams and broad and the sort of things to see this year. You know, those are always talk full of useful tips because it's not just speculation,
it's it's stuff that being reported to them. You know, the standard scams this time of year typically revolve around Okay, this deals too good to be true. I have to act on this now or your package is delayed. And remember, folks, fishing comes in all kinds of forums. Now, it's not just email, it's text messages, it's voice calls. Voice calls that might be using some kind of AI tool to
close somebody's voice. So you know, back before Amazon Prime Day, I saw a study that over two hundred thousand in a four month period of time, over two hundred thousand fraudulent websites were set up to scam people around Prime Day. So you can bet there's at least a similar amount that have been created to try to scam people between Black Friday, Cyber Monday, and holiday shopping at General. So, you know, be skeptical, take a brass. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is. Don't click
the links, don't call the numbers. You know, if you've got an email that has a deal it's too good to be true from Walmart, then you go to the Walmart website or the Amazon website or whatever. Hey, go read those tips from the FBI. You know, a lot of times if you just see a credible source putting out information like Daddy, you read it. Could you just put enough awareness to help avoid some of the scams that are always rampant this tiny year.
Dave always great stuff. Always appreciate uh. Whether I'm I'm on with Eddie and Rocky or with Dan Carroll or I'm I'm a listener. I always always am informed by what you know, by what you what you talk about You're the best, buddy, You're the best.
All right.
You were, Dave. You were as Eddie as Eddie. As Eddie says in our prep show preps when we have you on, he always says, Hatter on Hatter stuff. You were Dave Hatter on Dave Hatter stuff today spot on Mary Christmas, my friend.
Thanks you guys to see you see, Thank you. Dave.
News Radio seven hundred w l W Jason Williams, Dan Carroll in for Eddie and Rocky and we got a hot off the presses here as you heard on our our news break there. UH prosecutor Hamilton County Prosecutor Connie Pillag has put out a statement setting the record straight. UH And now Hamilton County Corner UH locks me san Marco has retracted what she said yesterday regarding the Elwood Jones case. It' it's it's kind of complex, but let's
go right to the source here. We've got a Hamilton County Prosecutor, Connie Pillach on the phone who to talk about setting the record straight on basically yesterday locks me San Marco, the coroner saying that she had uncovered new new evidence in uh the uh the Elwood Jones case regarding the lady who was murdered wrote to Nathan, now, Connie Pilach saying, hey, no, that's not true. Now. Also, just within the last handful of minutes here, doctor Lockxamee
San Marco has said she has retracted that as well. Yeah, she writes that today.
I'm in reciping of a document titled Microbiology Reference Laboratory Test Report provided by Attorney David Hine. In that document, there are reference numbers the correspond to our autopsy and death records. In the body of the report, there's a reference to a cadaver specimen. The printed result state the blood specimen was hepatitis B surface amage and positive. Considering the correlation of the numbers on the report with our records, it appears that this is the actual Hepatitis B test
report result for Rhoda, Nathan. And with that, let's go there.
There's a lot there, Dan, but let's let's yeah, let's let's get to Hamilton County Prosecutor Connie Pilach, Uh, Prosecutor pillag thank you for joining us here. And I know this is kind of crazy, and uh, there's a lot lot here, but uh yeah, I mean Connie, you your your your press release, I think related out for you. Uh you know you're here to set the record straight on this and it sounds like, uh now that lotchiby
San Marco. The Corner is on the same page with with your office as well, and more importantly, on the same page with what's the truth of the evidence that was undiscovered was discovered in this case? Correct?
Yeah, that's right, and thanks so much for having having me on.
To thank jumping on so quickly, Thank you.
I'm happy to do so.
So.
Yeah, the Corner did not uncover any new information about the victim's medical history. What she had done was review a laboratory report that actually was reporting on the blood of Elwood Jones, and she made mistakenly attributed mister jones negative appetitus B result to the victim. So this was just a mistake and it was just a misreading of the test. I did speak with the corner just just when I sent this press release out clear things up, and she understood that this was a mistake and told
me she was going to retract her comments. But look, it's very clear. It's very clear that every part of the file that we received from the coroner said that on September eighth, nineteen ninety four, testing done through the coroner's office showed that Roda Nathan.
Had hepatitis B.
And this test was even stipulated to by both sides in the federal case, and.
Elwood Jones evidence said that he did not have hepatitis B.
Correct, that's right. And we also learned that his test was taken on September sixteenth, nineteen ninety four, so about a week after the murder, and then late twenty years later he was tested again by a defense expert. The test done and he was found to never have contracted and still has not contracted hepatitis B. This is one of those antigens that stays in your bloodstream forever, so we would have been able to find out.
China, billis this is this is Dan Carroll and uh, thank you so much for the for the for the for the time today. So the the the guilt or innocence of Elwood Jones. Are you suggesting that that guilt or innocence rides on whether or not he has hepatitis B and contact contracted it through there did not contact it through contact with the with the victim in this.
Case, No, because there was a lot of other evidence that was disclosed long after his conviction that produced a lot of doubt.
Well evidence, Okay, what what evidence are you talking about?
Oh, well, we had numerous witnesses that were interviewed by the police that pointed to a different individual or a couple of different individuals, and these were these were noted in some investigators notes, and that stuff was never disclosed to the defense until years after.
Well, Mark Mark Pete Meyer, who tried the case, was suggested that all these avenues were explored during not only during the case, but during up and down the appellate process. So let me ask you this, Uh, there there were a lot of a lot of evidence in this case that that connects Elwood Jones to the murder. You've got test results, and we had the cut on on Elwood's hand that that the Joe Dieters and Mark Pete Myer suggests came from connecting with the teeth of Rhoda and
this unique gumback here. How did that get onto Elwood's hand? What about the diamond brooch that wound up in his toolbox? What about evidence like that?
Well, let me respond to some of this because I spent months pouring through the case file, looking at transcripts, looking at DNA test results, looking at investigator's notes, all these things. And I understand, I really really like Mark Pete Meyer, and he was very good to me in the transition, and I understand that he's proud of his work.
But what I can tell you right now, from all of the evidence I see that Mark didn't have as far as I can tell, didn't have any access to, I'm not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Elwood Jones committed this murder, and therefore it's unethical for me to try it.
Well, we're not.
But we're not going to I'm not.
Going to relitigate the case. I put out a statement.
I did a but but isn't that isn't that where we are now? Isn't that?
Where aren't we relitigating this entire case now? Because of all this back and forth that that has gone on. Yeah, I mean, look, I mean, look, Elwoo Jones is are He's a freeman. He's a free man. He's free to go because the judge ordered said he deserves a new trial. You looked at the evidence that I'm not going to bring it and that that that's your prerogative. But what Joe Deeters was especially upset about that you suggested that there was in his office there was some attempt to
withhold information. There was some attempt made to maybe not do this case one hundred percent by the books. How do you respond to the comments of Joe Dieters, who was on this station a week ago, came on here with Bill Cunningham for an entire entire segment to defend him himself in the integrity of his office.
Well, what we do know, and what is a stand list fact, is that the state, which could have been the police or the prosecutor's office, I don't know which because I wasn't in this office at the time, but they failed to turn over a large amount of evidence. And in nineteen sixty three the United States Supreme Court said in Brady v. Maryland that you can't do that.
We want to make sure we lock up the guilty, but we also have to make sure trials are fair, and if they're not fair, then you get a new trial. So that's what that's prong number one. But number two, I understand I don't know if Joe was on the case or not. I believe he was in the office at the time. It's very understandable for people to have emotional attachment to the work they've done or the work of their respected colleagues. I don't blame them for that.
But what I'm dealing with now is the reality of a lot of witness statements not being disclosed. Witnesses that pointed to a different person, Multiple people at in the hotel that could not collaborate with the theories of the case were at the time, and none of that was disclosed.
And that's not how.
We run a trial. We try to do a trial with integrity. And what I can tell you now is that after my review, I wasn't the only person who reviewed this case. My top criminal lawyer reviewed it as well. We compared our notes and discussed our conclusions, and we both agreed that this case could not go forward. And
that's the end of the story. But what happened afterwards with the coroner deciding on our own to just suddenly open up the case files and investigate, I don't know what that was about it because she's not the investigator. I'm not the investigator. The police were the investigators, and the coroner and I are all part of the same law enforcement universe. We should be working together.
Okay, because Joe Deaters in the open letter that he wrote to you, says that you never contacted him. And Joe Dieters was it was his office. He was the prosecutor at the time that this case was going on. And you talk about in the statement that you put out that prosecutor pillage a surprise the coroner would rush to judgment before having a conversation with the prosecutor's office. Well,
didn't you do the same thing. Didn't you come to your conclusion on this before you had a conversation with Joe Deaters and Mark Pete Meyer specifically about this case?
You did? Are are you saying you contacted them?
Oh?
Well why not? Why would?
You're having a lot of fun with me. So I'll try to respond. But look, it's not appropriate for me to contact a justice of the Ohio Supreme Court about a case that he may or may not have remembered long ago.
And it's not.
Appropriate for me to talk to me because of you. Let me finish. The court will speak through the evidence that was collect I don't need somebody's opinion. I need the evidence because I can't go on somebody's opinion or their emotional feelings about how hard they worked and how hard they tried to do the right thing. What I need to go through is to create the case transcripts and the court filings and the evidence that was collected. That's what I'm allowed to do, and that's my duty
to do. This is not supposed to be a gossip chain now. And when you talk about the corner, you know, we work together all the time, and I don't know why she didn't talk to me. First of all, I'm her lawyer, this office is the lawyer of the coroner's office. But also we are collaborators in the law enforcement community and we have done so before, so she can only answer those questions. But look, the thing is a victim
and her family are still without justice. There's no excuse to get the facts wrong without being deliberate as deliberate as I try to do, and I'm confident that my team and I came to the right conclusion. You know, I'm really sorry for the victim's family to have to be have this stuff blow up in their face again yesterday. That's that's got to be excruciating.
Well, Connie, Connie, thanks, we got to get to a break here. Thank you for joining. Yeah, a lot of more questions. I didn't even jump in there, but it's really appreciate you taking the time here on this and jumping on a quick turnaround there and the statement everything. So Merry Christmas to you and we will catch you catch you some other time. Let's get to a break here on News Radio seven hundred double Welcome back to the Eddie and Rocky Show. Jason Williams, Dan Carroll. I'm
Jason Williams. He's Dan Carroll and trying to get my heart rate down. They say, man, I was trying to get I was trying to I was trying to get a question and number one, number two, well number one, I was trying to get you to calm down. Number two, I was trying to get a question in. Well it took in order to help calm you down. But I also understand where you were coming from because I know exactly when I covered politics, there were a handful of times when I would get fired up like that. Not
with Connie Pilach. I don't think I ever talked to her. I'm talking about just in general. There were times when things I get so passionate about it that I would just get going.
And I don't know if Connie Pillager remembers me. But I interviewed her years ago back in my Fox nineteen days, and I forget what office she was running for at that time, but she was a candidate and she was in the studio and and we sat down and we talked for I don't know, six seven minutes something like that. So I have met her before she State Rep. Then she might have been running for State Rep at that time, so I had we have spoken before. So you know, I don't know if she actually remembers me.
Though. The biggest thing here was that appreciate because I don't think she's done very many interviews on this if I don't know fIF at all, and and so the fact that really appreciate her coming on.
Oh we're coming on great. Yeah, I mean it, And she did it on short notice. There's been a lot of back and forth there there. We're talking to Kevin Aldrich about this at the bottom of the hour, and we're also we talked to are we talking to the
judgment a little bit? But I was going to talk to Kevin Aldrich and ask him the question because, Uh, I read the Channel nine story on this, I read the Fox nineteen piece on this, A Channel twelve had one, and they all said, Hey, we reached out to the prosecutor, we've got no response.
And that was.
What our newsroom here at seven hundred WLW was saying all day long until just then. And she put this statement out and then she came on to UH to actually talk about and stand behind her statement.
And I appreciate her and absolutely, and that's been that's been great between all the different shows here now in the past week, we've had Joe Deaters, we've had Locksham, San Marco the Corner, and we've had Connie Pillach, Yes, the the you know a lot of the key players past and present, UH in this case. So we thank
all of them for that. And let's let's continue on the analysis of this and some other political issues with our good friend and we hope yours former Hamilton County common please Court judge, all around, good guy local attorney Kurt Hartman, judge, how are you? How was that intro? My friend? That's like it's like Saturday.
Night, Jason, it just flows out of your mats like it's natural, like it's meant to be.
So that's great, But well, the history there is, uh, you know, I'm filling on Saturday nights. I've had occurred on as I know you have as well, Dan, and uh so I've got a little intro for him. But I tongue tied myself if the first few times when I said former Hamilton County Common Police Court judge that, uh, that used to uh really stump me. We're good to go now, judge.
Let me let me ask you a question when it comes to Joe Deaters being the prosecutor in this town, the this and and this is what really cracks my cookies about this whole thing. Uh, the suggestion that somehow his office was guilty of sloppy work or maybe cutting corners, or maybe not being thorough or maybe being slightly unprofessional in some way, shape or form.
Uh.
When when you hear that sort of suggestion, what, uh you know relative to to the office that Joe Dieters ran, what's what's your response to that?
Well, Well, let me start off kind of in a generic aspect. Now, you know, well, while as attorneys, you know, we want we're there to advocate for our clients and try to win the case for them. Your prosecutors have a different ethnic ethical standard, and that their ethical standard is not to win a case. Their ethical standard is to do justice.
Yes, and so that's a.
Little different and so and that's what I think, at the end of the day, we all want. Now when it comes to it, I'm gonna be honest with you. In the generic sense, prosecutors' offices, some of them tend to play a little bit fast with the rules. They think different rules apply to them. They think, you know, they should because they're doing justice. Hey, we've got a victim here, and we know, we know this person did it.
Yeah.
I don't always think and I mean a little bit of a skeptic in me, a little bit of the civil libertarian and me I do think at times prosecutor's offices maybe play a little fast and loose. I've never, when I was on the bench, never had an experience knowing where they clearly did not, you know, comply by the rules. Uh, you know that they were subject. I think they did not like sometimes being subject to the rules, and sometimes try to cut the little corners here and there.
But in terms of not turning over evidence. You know, I know there have been accusations in the past against Joe's office. I never had that personal experience. I don't know of any personal experience in that regard. And it is a very serious accusation.
Uh.
You know that that if I was an attorney, if I was a prosecuting attorney, would take great umbrich at. But also, but also I'm not going to be naive and say it does not occur generally speaking, you know.
I general I asked about Joe Dieter's office and the way he ran things.
Yeah. Now, like I said, I think, I mean when I was on the bench, I bumped heads with certain prosecutes I did. I found some of them somewhat arrogant. I found some of them to be so full of themselves that they were so self righteous that they kind of lost that pole star of their ethical obligation to do justice. On the other hand, I found some some of them very professional, respectful, trying to do the right thing.
But would they do but to go so far as to say I'm gonna withhold evident And I mean, if that comes out, that's a law license. You lose your law license on something like that. I'd be hard pressed to believe anybody would go that far. But again I'm not naive to say maybe it never occurred. You know, it's interesting, you know, Kanyie Pillage comes out and makes this kind of accusation, but it's a very generic accusation. I want to see what's the evidence, you know, I'm
in a lawyer. I want to see the evidence that establishes it, not just Connie Pillage telling me that's what happens along.
Those same lines. And Connie Pilach did and she said she did not talk to Joe Dieters or any of the prosecutors who are on the case back in the nineties. Given that that accusation is there, and I'm asking you for your opinion, judge on this, do you feel like if you were in the prosecutor's shoes, do you do you owe a call to the prosecutor from back then or no? You just look at you look at all the case that's laid out there, and you can make
your own decision. And it's totally fine. And I'm not putting words in your mouth one way or the other. I am clearly a neutral person on this in terms of that that piece of it because I I'm not an expert on it and you are. What does the prosecutor in a case itor.
Tony Keillich has conducted this is no, she did not reach out. Let me talk to all the actors involved, right, I want to get all the facts. And it seems in a certain sense by the fact that she did not reach out to Joe Dee or she did not talk to the prosecutors involved previously, she didn't want to get all the facts. Well, maybe you know, maybe she sees this piece of evidence and is viewing it one way but doesn't perceive it differently. How the prosecutors might
be able to explain something to her. You know, if I'm doing if I was in this position, I'd want to get all the facts. I want to know what am I missing, What don't I understand, what am I viewing wrong? Those will be the type of questions I would ask, And I just think and then part of me is, like I said, I wasn't a fan with with Joe Dieter's office in certain regards of how they operated, But I don't have the confidence right now in Connie
Pillage's office either. I just see right now we are so divided partisanally, and you know, the Democrat Party has been taken over by this aggressive progressive wing of the party, and we see it on the bench. We're seeing it, i think, in the prosecutor's office. So I'm not confident in her pronouncement. I'd rather we get everything out there, Connie, you know, put everything out on the table. Let the public see everything.
This is where for ourselves.
I mean, people are smart if you show it to them, here's what happens, here's how I connect point A to B, two, C T D. We don't have that, you know, We've got for a lack of a better head. And I don't know you fucking heads or you know, people talking and saying, here's what the situation is, but we don't. We the people don't have that evident to support it one way or the other. And that that just doesn't
give me confidence either way, you know. So I'm not taking if you will, I'm not taking Joe Deeer's side. I'm not taking Connie Connie Coligen's side.
Sure, I'm skeptical.
On both sides.
Well, you know, she said, she says she doesn't want
to relitigate this whole thing. But based on what's happened in the last four or five days, we I mean, we are going to We're not going to relitigate it in the courts, obviously, but we're going to reltigate it here on the radio and the newspaper, in the court of public opinion because of all this information and all this back and forth that has been going on, and the and the fact that this guy who was on death row is is now a freeman, and now he can now you know, even even if he came out
to the point to where he said that that I did it, he could still walk away from that.
No. And I think in a certain sense, this case, the way it's been handled one way, whichever way you want to take spin you want to put on that which the way it's been handled, it needs to be put out re litigated, if you will, for the jemt, for the public, for Edward Jones, for Rondy Nathan and her family.
I mean in a certain.
Sense that try on correct. Wasn't there another trial on it in December of twenty in twenty twenty two, did it not know?
There was a hearing ok with Judge Cross about whether that was.
Yeah, it was judge Cross was the was the judge? Okay, so that wasn't and that wasn't another trial. It was a.
Theory. But I just think, you know, you're not going to go back into a courtroom and relitigate it. But what I think you can do, you know, for mister Jones sayings, you know, for the victim's sake, for her family, and for the general public, because what is you know, is lay it all out there. Just don't tell us
what her conclusions are. Lay everything out there, subjected to the light of day, you know, suscept that to public scrup me Because right now what is going on beat by Joe Dieters and by Connie Pillage does not exude confidence in the judicial system.
Yeah.
I don't care which side of the spectrum you're on, it does not. And it's Connie Pillage is going to be true to that ethical obligation to do justice. I think she now has an obligation, not necessarily an ethical obligation, but at least a moral obligation to put it all out there.
Yeah. Well, Kurt, we're out of time.
Do me and everybody can see it and we can judge for ourselves.
Absolutely, Kurt well said, that's where we need to go. Kurt Hartman, local public interest attorney, former Hamilton County judge. And we didn't even talk about what he wanted. We didn't want to talk. We had but we had breaking news as well. And this is why we appreciate our legal analyst and you and Steve Gooden and the fantastic work that you all do. And I know James Bogan as well. This is why we get you and you
can adjust because you keep up with this stuff. Dan and I are together for another week, so maybe we'll have you jump back on with us and chat about some of the other stuffy. Merry Christmas, my friend.
You all have a merry Christmas. Your listeners have a merry Christmas.
Marys appreciated Buddy trafficing weather coming up right now. Welcome back to the Eddie and Rocky Show. Eddie Rocky, Eddie Rocky.
I know we're a couple of days away from Christmas and tomorrow we'll get into our Christmas mode.
Yes, well, we had.
This breaking news today and uh and we I mean, we're gonna keeping We had to jump on it.
He's Dan Caro, I'm Jason Williams.
By the way in for Eddie and Rocky, and for Eddie and Rocky, but you know the whole thing with the case against wood Jones being dismissed. We had Connie Pilloch on a couple of segments ago, I had the judge on, and the judge said, I thought Kurt Hartman, former judge, said something I think was very important. He said, he said, right now he has no confidence in this prosecutor's office and the office of Collie County Pillage is running.
It's interesting.
I think that is an important I think the people of Hamilton County need to have confidence in the prosecutor's office. And this, for lack of a better term, excrement show is not not really not really helping to build up that company.
Well, it's it's become quite a war, a war of words on the these on these airwaves here. As we mentioned earlier, we've in this past week here on WLW, Joe Dieters has come on with Willie uh doctor Lockshmi San Marco yesterday with Willie, and then today Connie Pillich joined us. So it's good, this is good, this is good, and we're and you and I are continuing to touch on this story we didn't plan on that necessarily today,
but we're continuing to hit this from all angles. And our latest guest, our next guest is our friend, uh, the Inquirer Opinion editor of my colleague at the Inquirer, all around awesome guy who I know is following this story, and uh, I also enjoy catching him when he fills in on Lincoln War Show. Really really really does a great job on the on the air. And I know you you like to have him on when you host the show. Kevin All that's a long winded way of saying Kevin Aldritch joined Usnow.
Kevin, he's taking all your time. Brother, ka kay, how are you Merry Christmas?
Hey?
Hey, I'm doing good.
I'm used to that, and I sometimes used to do combo columns.
Like Jason was that.
I get like two in and then everybody'd be like, man, Jason chews you up in that argument.
I'm like, man only got two hundred works.
Oh, not only is he a Mike call, he hogs the he hogs all the space and then the paper too.
How about that? That's fantastic bur have him step in and mediate now, Kevin, Hey, thanks for joining here. Merry Christmas. To you and your family and Kevin do We had Connie Pelach on a little bit ago, and I know you followed this story as head of the Inquire opinion page and the editorial board there, and well, I guess just opening the question now of the game, what do you what do you make of all this? As you've as you've heard deaders and and pillag and you've seen
the case, You've read about it, you've reported on it. Uh, you know your sam Marco came out yesterday, Now she came back out today, like what are you? What do you make of all of this?
Yeah?
So, I think what I've been really kind of disappointed and stunned by is is some of the unprofessionalism that I've seen in this case. And I'm gonna I'm gonna touch on each of the three individuals that you kind of talked about. First off, We'll we'll start with the latest news, which is, you know, doctor sam Marco's report. I just think that that was so egregiously careless on her part that to put out information that one you didn't conclusively verify, and present it as if you had
new revelations that changed the dynamics of this case. I think it's just gross miss you know, malpractice. You know, in her profession as a doctor, you know, you're supposed to do no harm. And I think that extends beyond just sort of like the physical aspects of caring for someone's health. But I think putting out inaccurate information that you didn't take a considerable amount of time to verify, Jason.
You know, if we did something like that in journalism, where we were just that careless about putting information out there for the public, that would be ground for termination.
That's the first thingation or maybe termination right out of the gate. Yeah, you're exactly right.
Absolutely so the fact that she did that to me is just it's just unconscionable and inexcusable because of what it does to both sides of this, no matter whether you think Elwood Jones is guilty or innocent. You know, the the Nathan family has already been through a lot. They're trying to process this decision by the prosecutor, and then you throw this out here, and even it was even though it was only twenty four hours or whatever, to put that family through that again, I think for
whatever reason the coroner did it. I just think it's inexcusable in my opinion. The next thing I kind of had an issue with was prosecutor Pillage dismissing the case with prejudice. Now she's come out and she said, I don't I don't particularly have an opinion on her decision to dismiss the case, but I think dismissing it prejudice was I think something she didn't have to do because it fully closes the door to the possibility of new evidence.
I mean, if Elwood Jones were to come out today and say, you know, hey, I did it, there's nothing that could be done on that. You know, he essentially can't be charged again. So I'm not going to sit here and say that with the evidence that the prosecutor talked about, that at a minimum, he would have been entitled to a new trial, right. I think, regardless of what you think, we should all be in the interest
of seeing justice done. And if somebody hasn't gotten a completely fair trial where they're going to be sentenced to death beyond a reasonable doubt, and we find out that, you know, some evidence was being withheld, critical evidence that might have suayed a jury. Other persons of interest who may or may not have been investigated, and the defense doesn't know about that or have an opportunity to explore that all of those things could have resulted in a
different verdict. They're dynamic in the court case, and so whether you're a fan of Joe Dieters or not, none of that matters. I think sometimes we get caught up in these personalities in the politics when our overarching concerns should be getting justice done right, and if that means that prosecutors didn't follow the rules and do all of the right things, then we need to be up there behind to make sure that they're doing that, that they're
turning over all of the evidence. So potentially, you know, if you do have a bad person or a bad guy who commits something that they don't get off on a technicality or something because you didn't follow the rules. So I think we're.
Selective in terms of.
When we want to see a full airing and vetting of the case. Because there have been other cases and I haven't agreed with every decision prosecutor Pillage has made, and I've written about a few of those, but I think in those cases, some of the same people who are screaming about Elwood Jones had no problem with prosecutor pivileage not releasing all of the facts, putting things out there.
So I think we cherry pick when we want to see justice done and when we want to see a full airing and transparency from the prosecutors or whomever in a case. And that's what frustrates me is sort of the hypocrisy and the politics.
That revolves around that.
Our main concern should be justice and making sure that we're holding everybody in that process accountable.
Kevin Aldridge, Inquire Opinion Editor, you are tying it all together here so beautifully. That's the voice of reason on this on you know, man, when we got Connie Pilich earlier, we had just gotten a very convoluted and Dan read it on the air, and I'm still my head spinning from San Marco's statement. And for you to come in here and lay you've answered even some of the questions that I that I had had, you know, just about kind of the bigger picture of all this, laying it
out there. And I know Dan is itching to get a question into you, so I'm gonna turn it over to him.
Well, I mean, what you just said, Kevin Aldrich was was very well said, and we should as a community demand better from those elected representatives that we have, be it in the prosecutor's office or be it in the in the coroner's office. I think Lakshmi Smarco has built up a lot of goodwill and has enjoyed a really good reputation, but this is a this is a stain on that reputation. The way she she went about this.
When I was listening to her on this radio station yesterday, it seemed as if she was, you know, a little bit tepid when when asked some of the questions and
responding to some of the questions. And then we coobe come to find out today that she, you know, may have made him although she doesn't admit that she made a mistake in this statement, but it certainly you can connect the dots there, and she's saying, look, we got this record over here, in this record over here, you know, and it came out the way the way it did.
But Kurt Hartman said something that I think is very important that he said as it relates to the prosecutor's office, and he said, you know, he doesn't have a lot of confidence in this prosecutor's office right now, and I think the way Yeah, you know, I asked Connie Pilichis on the air. She said that she surprised the coroner would rush to judgment before having a conversation with the
prosecutor's office. Well, didn't she come to this judgment before she had a conversation with Joe Dieters, before she had a conversation with Mark pete Meyer, who tried the case. And then she suggested that, well, you know, I don't
know if they'll remember it. I don't know, but it just seems to me maybe as a professional courtesy, just to make sure all your eyes are dotted and your teas across that you might want to talk to the prosecutor, the people who tried the case and say, look, here's my theory on this, let's see if it holds water. It just seems to me that would be a standard step you might want to take. No, I don't I don't disagree with that. I I think that goes to the point that I was making about dotting every eye
and crossing every team. When you're going to make big decisions or big declarations, or hold a press conference or put out a press release.
This is just my thought.
You want to make sure that you've checked off all of the boxes because you know where the criticisms and the second guessing and all of that is going to be coming from. I try to think about this when I write a column. I try to think about, Okay, what are all of the ways that the people who disagree with me are going to try to dissect my argument. I try to do my best to try to address those things. I think when you're in public office in these big cases, you know, checking off those boxes. So
obviously she's the prosecutor. She has the prerogative of who she wants to contact and all of that. But I would think that in the interests of trying to insulate yourself.
Even if you don't even if you talk.
To Joe Dieters or whomever and say and they say you've got it wrong, you shouldn't do this, there's nothing that says that she still couldn't have come through with the same decision. But then she could say, hey, look we at least talked to these individuals. Now here's what I will say. I wanted to say this because there was a third leg of my initial statement.
I didn't get to Joe Diaters.
I understand Joe Deaters wants to defend himself his reputation in his office, but I really felt he was a Supreme Court justice now and I kind of feel like what he did in coming out and making these comments was beneath the office, was beneath the robe. I thought Joe Deaders should have just he's not the prosecutor anymore, and I think he should have just withheld the dignity
of that office. There are other folks, there are other folks who are going to come out and defend him and fight for him and all of that.
All of that different. Let those individuals.
Do that and honor the robe, honor the office that you're in now. And I just think, as I think as a Supreme Court justice, to come out and just kind of comment on this, I thought that was another level of unprofessionalism that bothered me a little bit.
I don't have anything.
I don't have anything against Joe Deear's I've talked to him a few times and my time with the inquir I think he's a pleasant guy. That's not the issue. But this is the issue of that is he's a Supreme Court justice, and I just felt like him coming out and feeling the need that he had to defend himself in his office that he no longer occupies. I just kind of felt like was a little bit beneath the office, a little bit beneath the dignity of the role.
But that was just my opinion.
Kevin Aldridge since then Choirer Opinion editor. Check out his columns on Cincinnati dot com, including you wrote a really awesome piece recently on the mayor aft have pure balls the repossession of his vehicle. When you talk about, you know, looking and thinking through all these pieces and the nuance you nailed it. That was a model of Kevin's columns. And always appreciate your opinions, even when I don't agree
with them. Go check out his columns. Kevin Well said here today we got to get to a trafficking weather, but I want to wish you your wife, your family, and merry Christmas. And really appreciate you bringing that kind of overall viewpoint and touching on everything as regarding rate okayspective. Thanks Kevin Well, Thank you guys.
Same to you guys.
Appreciate you having me see it. There you go, job, Welcome back to news radio.
Seven hundred w O w Eddie Rocky, Eddie and Rocky keeps saying Eddie Rocky show. The Eddie and Rocky showed. It's not Eddie Rocky show. It's Eddie and Rocky. Ed Jason Williams alongside Dan D. C. Carroll will not be What a day? What a day? Man? It's flown by.
You will not be Newslash. You will not be writing your Harley Davidson tomorrow as rain is in the forecast, because Matt Reach just handed that, Tommy, Yes he did, he'd hands the latest forecast see tomorrow eve, Christmas Eve, Christmas Eve, patchy fall otherwise partly sunny with a higher fifty tomorrow listening to tomorrow night one hundred chance of rain. Good, how about that? I'd rather have snow. But uh, anyway, I got riding his motorcycle today. Did you realize, like, man,
I should I should be out there today. It's a nice day out there temperature wise, it was it was it was today. I could have ridden today. I just I didn't have to wear my coat today. Right, you didn't wear a coat, did you? It's out in the car. You impressed me as a guy that probably doesn't wear a coat unless it's negative ten degrees, it's out in the car. Are you what do you? You used to probably be one of those guys that were shorts too in the winter, right, No, you know what, No, I've
never done that. Had a guy. I have friends that do that now, Yeah, I do too. We had a guy in the newsroom for years. It's twenty below and I have got a pair of shorts on. You would always wear shorts in for the night shift copy editing night shift. Anyway, we are what a show. As Dan said, we have continued on with this. Elwood Jones wrote a Nathan case and if you missed this, catch it on the iHeartMedia app. In the podcasts, we had Hamilton County
Prosecutor County Pillach on earlier. Then we had former Hamilton County Judge Kurt Hartman, and we had an Inquire Opinion editor Kevin Aldridge really covering this story from all different angles, and the latest being that the coroner came out today locksheby San Marcos saying after a further review, essentially I misspoke yesterday. That essentially what she's saying, Yeah, well, I
mean she's not really saying she made a mistake. She writes, yesterday, I issued a press release based upon information contained in our case file for Rodea Nathan. It consisted of a single negative hepatitis B result dated nine, sixteen ninety four covered on twelve, eighteen, twenty five. Attempts were made to coroborate those findings with medical records from Trihalth, as well as additional attempts to contact the testing laboratory. Failing that,
we communicated with her family trying to obtain additional medical information. Then, she says, today, I'm in receipt of a document titled Microbiology Reference Laboratory test Report provided by Attorney David Hine. In that document, there are reference numbers that correspond with our autopsy and death record numbers. Additionally, in the body of the report there's a reference to a cadaver specimen. The printed result states that the blood specimen was hepatitis
B surface antigen positive. Considering the correlation of the numbers on the report with our records, it appears that this is the actual hepatitis B test result for Rhoda Nathan.
So essentially, she's saying that wrote A Nathan tested positive for hepatitis right now, and he's ignil just trying to make the case that if she was positive for hepatitis, then necessarily Elwood Jones would have tested positive for hepatitis hepatitis P. Elwood Jones did not test positive for hepatitis P. Connie Pillach and and what she didn't clarify during our conversation was that she said, uh, you know, in uh in her when she made the had the press conference
that she was releasing him from that she was dismissing the case. She said, new medical testing or new medical tests or tests that are available, and I don't remember the exact phrasing, uh, you know, eliminates him as a suspect. And Joe Dieters makes the point afterwards that he said, he said, here's here's what Joe Dieters wrote to her first here claim that modern day medical testing excluded Jones from the murder, and Dieter says, it is demonstrably untrue.
You stated that because Ms Nathan had hepatitis, Jones would have necessarily have contracted it had he been the perpetrator. Yet the defenses own paid expert testified there was only a thirty three percent chance Jones would have contracted hepatitis. Even if he were the person to beat her to death, a thirty three percent probability of transmission isn't is not exclusion. So that is Joe Dieters responding to this. I mean, and he did this days ago before this information came out.
So this whole thing about hepatitis be to my way of thinking the case and the innocence of the day Dan, I don't think it's again criminal justice. I don't think it's the most important from what I'm hearing. I'm just that's my question, is that was it ultimately that major of a thing to the whole case who had it and who didn't have heppatitis B.
I don't think it's the most compelling element of this case. Yeah, it's a it's an element, yes, But is it the I don't think it's the most important. I don't think it's the most compelling. I don't think the guilt or innocence hinges on this fact being true or not true.
Well, we want to we've spent a lot of time on this. You've heard us talk about it, you've heard others talk about it. We want to give you a chance to talk about it. The phone lines are filling up five one, three, seven, four, nine, seven thousand is a big one. And uh, you know what I'm gonna We've already got a bunch of people on whole, but no one has been a whole longer than Pete uh in Lebanon. Who wants to weigh on Pete? What you got?
Gentlemen, thanks for taking my call, and Merry Christmas.
Merry Christmas, and it's time to celebrate on a couple of days ago. Right, I think you did it.
Okay, you stole one of my points by saying, what difference does it make if either one of them had hepatitis? Right, even though it's very contagious, If if if the you know, the so called criminal had it and she didn't have it, or vice versa, what what difference does that make with a conviction with a thirty percent, you know whatever rate of getting of catching it?
Right?
So you guys also missed an opportunity to ask the prosecutor, all right, if this guy didn't do it, who the hell did it? And do we have a murderer out there that's roam in the streets.
Well, if you if well, if you listen to the US when we were speaking to her and thanks. She brought up the suggestion that there were other there a witness or other witness statements that were not fully explored. And she alluded to this idea that somehow the work was not thorough, or the work might have been a little bit sloppy or a little bit careless.
I don't know.
Let you, however, you wanted to describe it. And I just, you know, making that sort of reference to the work that had been done by Joe Dieters and the people that worked for him over the years that I covered his office and saw them in action on a daily basis. That does not jive with my own eyewitness accounts of how I saw these people work over the years.
Yeah, let's go to Kate, who wants to weigh in about the hepatitis BE topic. Hey, Kate, Hi, I.
Was an infection control supervisor for hospitals here in Cincinnati
for years. And Joe Dieters, it sounds like he's got either an infectious disease doc or an epidemiologist who supports this thirty three percent chance of transmission versus sixty six percent not And when Mark introduced the hepatitis V vaccine years ago, I worked the er before that, and if it was one hundred percent transmission, all of us would have had it, because before AIDS or the HIV virus, we were none of us wore gloves.
Everybody was up to.
Their elbows in blood in the er. And when Mark introduced the vaccine, they did assays of nursing personnel in various hospital departments, and they thought the highest rate would be in ther where you're up to your elbows in blood, but they were gloved, and they were about a nineteen
percent trans Nursing personnel were positive antigen assays. But the er, where nobody wore gloves and weighed right into accident victims and everything else, I think they were more like about twenty oh god, they were like twenty three percent or something or twenty six. So again, we all would have had it if it was one hundred percent transmission. And I'm just curious to a certain extent that this prosecutor
won't disclose why she's so convinced. And I'm sorry it raises kind of the vaccine nonsense from you know, the COVID where people told us, oh, it stays in your arm, it doesn't go anywhere. It's like, I'm sorry, it's fluid. A body is over eighty percent fluid. You're not going to be able to keep it in your upper arm, you jerk.
So let me ask you. Let me ask you this.
When Joe Dieters writes that the defense's own paid expert testified there was only a thirty three percent chance the Jones would have contracted hepatitis beat if he were the person who beat her to death, you're telling me that that statement rings true with you based on your knowledge and your experience.
Yeah, okay, yeah, because again, yeah, we all would have had it if it was one hundred percent transmission. And if anybody opens up, you know, any of the research about hepatitis B antigen transmission, I think that's what they're going to find. I don't think those numbers changed over the last twenty five years.
So you know, let's set it up.
A demiologist and an infectious disease talk. We have them in Cincinnati, say can testify.
Good call, Kate, great call. Yeah, thank you for hanging in there and staying on hold forever. And uh, it's always great to have all of our callers. We appreciate, but it's great to do with someone who has an expertise area, who hears us and picks up the phone and calls, and.
She makes she makes an excellent point. So you know, she was in an environment where that stuff is flying around and you're working in it all day long, right, and and she said, you know, said, what were the numbers? There were what less than twenty percent? So speaks for itself.
Yeah, guess what we're going to do, Dan, a little trafficking weather together, and we're going to hit it on time. This time, we got more calls on hold. We're going to keep taking calls, So hang in there, take more call trafficking weather. What do we got? Jason Williams alongside Dan Carroll in for Eddie and Rocky. What a show it's been, Dan, And we'll be here tomorrow. Wrong Christmas Eve, and we got some specials saying we're gonna lighten it up a little bit tomorrow.
I want to talk about Christmas movies. Christmas, We're going to talk about Christmas songs and Christmas movies. Yes, so I want the American people to think about what Christmas. We did this last year and came up with a lot of really interesting Christmas songs and a lot of them that I had not heard before, and we played little snippets of it, and some of them were really good because our callers called in and yeah, let us know on some of those. So, Liam, are you going
to be here? Liam's you got to be ready, man, But those callers, you got to look up them songs.
Man, you ready for it. He's locked in. He's locked in, he says. And by the way, tis the season, Dan, And you know what, you know what season it is?
Uh?
You tell me?
Uh?
For the state to release their rejected license plates? Is that an annual thing?
Yes?
Do they do that every year? And I love The Inquirer gets these every year since I dot com and they put them up. And this year they put them. I love they put it in a photo gallery and they put it on the template of the Ohio license plate. There's a list. It's great. Heeey Brown did this at the inquire since II dot com And uh, this is this is a lot of fun. Now, I know, we'll read off the lettering and the numbers here. We can't say some there's a couple of them.
You don't yeah, phonetically, you don't want to do the whole the whole biscuit there because we have a license to them.
That's exactly. But we can just we can just basically list off the the license plate number that was rejected. My good friend Charlie, Charlie Norman, who is the registrar of You know, Charlie.
I don't think I do. Yeah, I think we've talked about him before, but I don't think. I don't think.
Cincinnati guy Charlie originally what was his stuff? Well, he's from he's from Cincinnati and he went to Xavier. UH and he what did he do before he became registrar. I think he did some stuff in the wine's office. But anyway, it's funny. H Charlie Norman, by the way, great guy. Uh. He sends us a Christmas card every year of him and his two sons and my wife the other day says, Who's who's this? Like we get
a car? I was like, and every year I tell her, I was like, pull out your license and look at the name on the license, and it's that guy. So anyway, Charlie Norman and crewe denied UH. And this is the annual denial of UH. These are actual, real, real license plate request he does not strike me as a vanity plate kind of guy.
No, I think it's dumb. You don't strike me as one either. Tricia Mackie used to have one. I don't know if she still does, but I know when we worked at Fox nineteen together, she had a anti plate that read n w S in w S National Weather Service News and for news and had a letter to and then it said me to me, news to me.
Okay. I don't know if she still has it on her on her vehicle or not, but well, you know I can read this one. I can read this. I'm gonna start off, Dan, and you've got you've got it up here, You've got it right in front of it, so you know what, I'm gonna take the I'm gonna take the easy one here.
And I do want to say the fact that they printed these out to look like they're an actual Ohio license plate, the visual makes them a lot more understanding.
Absolutely, So I would encourage if you want to go look at this since the nay dot com and just type in license plates like that's what I did, and it pops right, you'll find it. So I'm gonna start with this one, Dan, because I could say this and on the air, and it's spelled out just as the words spell it. Old fart. You should say that on me. The old park got denied olda what now?
What now?
Why? Why would you deny that one? That's a good question.
I mean, it's it's look, it's something that people say all the time. It's there's a there's a little bit. I just called you that at the break. It's probably it's probably.
Thanks.
I was gonna say, it's self deprecating. Yes, if if you're the elderly person that's that's driving the vehicle, Hey, how old are you, William? I'm old as dirt, right old? Yeah, you hear people say that all the time. So I don't know, I don't know why that would get rejected. What this next one too? Why would this one have gotten rejected?
H V? The number so the letter h VS in Victor, let the letter or the number two and then P O O P that one's not I mean, I guess, you know, I guess it's stupid, but you know everyone has to do that at time from time to time. And then uh, well, I'm gonna let you read something somebody I don't even know. I can't we might need help on this one. If someone wants to call out, I don't know about that. We have to take that call off.
There.
I got the dumb button here, I'm ready to go. It's all letters f T H M k D S f T H.
M k D.
I mean, I look at this and I think you got it. Yes, you know what it is? I and again, did we know what it was before we stought we went on the air with this because we were talking.
About it off the air. I think I figured it out, but I didn't share with you. Yeah.
I mean if if I'm on Jeopardy, I could not solve the puzzle.
On this one. I think it's uh, I think it's bleep them kids, I think is what it is. I think so.
Anyway it can I don't know. I don't know if it's not jumping out that. This one did not jump out at me either initially, but after some discussion before we got on the air, I can see it now.
Uh.
Here here are all the letters M I L F mb L. Yes, M I L F M b L. And we we don't want your calls on this, by the way, We just wanted to enjoy, enjoy the enjoy the Christmas gift that I'm trying to hide license dates in the state of Ohio.
If you're driving seventy miles an hour across for Fort Washington Way, how how hard is that to visualize?
What the hell is these guys talking about? Right, we are talking about this is not us that we are talking about the denied license plate vanity license plate requests in the state of Ohio in twenty twenty five that h my good bud Charlie Norman said, Nah, baby, nah, we're not doing those. Here's another one for you. Dank the letters. I'm spelling it out f D T m U s K.
I think I know what that one means. I think I think that is for someone. And again now that there was one here, if even though that does not suit me in a political sense, if if I was making the call on this, I'd probably let that one slide because there's going to be just as many aimed at the other Canada on the the you know, the other on the other side.
And I think I think last year's had I think last year did last year's did have a it's not a great Biden one similar let's go Brandon. Was there a let's go brand. I think the last year and I got the nied to. I believe it did, all right.
Well, if you're going to deny it for some, then deny it for all. I guess what I'm saying. Be consistent in this regard. Yes, you see, you want me to give you another, and you got one for me. Okay, let's see, I want to want I'm just scrolling back up to the top because it was like the second or third one that I wasn't sure I've got.
Another one on here Dan that I'm like, you mean later, Okay, okay, this is one where I'm like, why would you deny this? Especially like let law enforcement? No, right, this person's request was l u V l u V m E t H love me love meth. Now why now now to me? Like you know what, hey, buddy, you want you want love meth in your lisis plate. Nothing like putting a target on your back by by law enforcement. So okay, there, pal, hey, look at me, I love myth. Look at me I love hey.
You swear you swerve in a little bit there, follow me around there you go, gee. I don't think it's fair they fall let me around all over the place right, MAYD be like and uh and goodfellas when Rayleiot is driving around the helicopter's following around the.
Yeah, what else you got? I don't, I don't.
I have no clue what this is. P m p O l g y p M p O l g y p m p O l g y O l g and p m P could stand.
Oh, yeah, I don't know what that one. I couldn't figure that one. Yeah, that's a that's a tough one. I mean, maybe are they just rejected because they're too hard to figure out? I don't know. Maybe that one is. Some of these are pretty.
Because I can see I can see where if you're driving behind someone and you see that license plate, can you get distracted by that? You're like, oh man, I'm trying to figure out that license plate. In the meantime, you're not paying attention to, you know, the squirrel crossing the road or the red light or something like that.
Did we say this one? L eight A A G N. And that's the top one on the on the on the photo gallery at the Sina dot com L one's that one's not too hard on L eight a F A g N. Yeah, laid again, I see if you just you're just not included the skipped over the middle, if you just not included a couple of letters, I would again would have been I would bet I would bet there's an L eight A G. Is it a G N at.
The Yeah, I would bet there's one out there that I would Here's one. I have no no clue at all. I T that one.
I don't.
Yeah, b R I T B I T b R I T B I have I have no.
I can't figure that one out.
And there's a space between the I T and then the B R I T and the space between the T and the B.
Yes, that makes not working for me. No, I have no idea. Let's see what else we got here. Okay, how about this one? Uh? Oh?
And again A three? There's a six letters, three sets of two letters. Here we go O, N M Y B S oh so on my B S. I have no idea what the BS stands for? Well, I mean I know a BS, but right, I mean on my yeah, that does That doesn't sound like a familiar phrase.
I've never heard that. But anyway, we've gone through those these. If you want to read more Coda Cincinni dot com. They've got them all, a bunch of fifteen or twenty more and you can interpret it however you want to, but we're not going to share those on the air. So anyway, Dan, great work with you today. We're back at it the R three o'clock. I'll be here, tom I'll be here. We got some got ever everything planned out for you so you can go golfing tomorrow. NewsRadio seven hundred WLW