E6 - Quiet Quitting, Student Loans, and a Murderous Owl

[00:00:00] Jeff: This week, what is quiet quitting? Student loan forgiveness. And did an owl really commit a murder? Welcome to Subpar Talks.

Hey everybody, welcome to Subpar Talks, where we have conversations about everything. I'm Jeff.

[00:00:34] Chris: And I'm Chris. 

[00:00:35] Jeff: Thank you so much for joining us for another episode, we've actually got three topics this week. Before we get going, we have our little disclaimer, as always. Our tagline in this show is conversations about everything, so we really don't leave anything off the table. We will at some point talk about some touchy subjects and we're gonna inject humor into those. And if you don't think those two things coincide, then maybe this is not for you. I think if we had a, if we were a TV show, we would have viewer discretion advised, right?

[00:01:11] Chris: Oh yeah. Absolutely. 

[00:01:13] Jeff: Listener discretion advised. May contain adult language and mature subject matter. There you go. 

[00:01:19] Chris: Maybe presented immaturely, but it's mature subject matter. 

[00:01:23] Jeff: Yeah. Hence the subpar part.

All right. So this week, beginning with our first topic is something that's come up recently. As of this recording, just in the past week I've noticed this, Chris has noticed this and y'all have to know, we don't really discuss anything about what we're gonna talk about on the show before we get rolling here.

So Chris and I have not really talked about this at all. We just both became aware of it independently on social media and some other places. And that first topic is quiet, quitting. So Chris, tell us all what quiet quitting is. 

[00:02:08] Chris: Yeah. So, I've been seeing this quite a lot in the last, yeah, at least probably a couple of weeks. And you know, on the surface, honestly, didn't know what that was talking about. And so reading into it and, and seeing various people posting. So basically the idea is where people are deciding to no longer go above and beyond on their job. Essentially, this is what I've been hired for. This is what I've been hired to do. This is the time that I've been hired to do it. I'm going to do all of that. I'm going to work during that time and do what I'm supposed to do. But beyond and outside of that, I'm off. You know, you as the employer are paying salary or hourly wages or whatever for this time and beyond that, it's my time.

And so that's what's being called quiet quitting as though they are no longer fully doing their job. 

[00:03:14] Jeff: So, I wasn't aware of this, uh, either. I saw it, I think it was first an NPR article, or it might have been in the New York Times, quiet, quitting. And I was like, what in the world is that? And then I've seen a lot of backlash against the term itself. Have you seen that? 

[00:03:31] Chris: I have. And, and I don't, you know, I don't necessarily disagree with it either. Because first of all, the, the term in and of itself, sounds like, hey, this person is not doing their job. They are quitting their job with the, like quitting their job without quitting, you know. Kinda like Newman said, he's Jerry goes well, so you quit the post office.? He says, well, kind of, I'm still getting paychecks, but I'm not delivering the mail. So, you know, this makes it sound like, hey, I'm, I'm not doing my job anymore, but I'm still gonna collect the money and that's not what this is. 

[00:04:13] Jeff: Yeah. I've seen, so the backlash was, was, you know, who came up with the term and I have no idea who that was. The New York Times article I read about it said it, it was a TikTok video that went viral and then it just exploded, uh, in other areas and, and quiet quitting is, is what it got called. But the backlash I've seen as far as the term goes, is, is people saying it's not quitting anything, you're just setting your boundaries.

You're setting boundaries for your proper work life balance. And what, and, this is a broader topic, I guess, but what allegiance does somebody have to their employer above and beyond what they were hired to do? And I saw there were a bunch of people in this New York Times article commenting, and I mean, they were from various, uh, professions and, and different areas and so forth, and some people were, were upset at, not upset, but just taking this quiet quitting and saying is that necessarily the best way to go about making any kind of change or voicing to your employer that you would like, uh, a better work life balance or anything of that nature? And I remember one guy said, what if you're on a, a team, an actual team, and you're all working toward the same goal.

Well, if this person on this team says, well, I'm, I'm not gonna do any more than I have to. And then somebody else says that when well, if you do that, you might have an actual issue, which I can see. But for the most part, yes. And I think this is, you know, everything is cyclical. And, and if you look at what's happened in the past 35, 40 years, corporations, employers in general have gotten a lot more power and workers have gotten less power and things run on a cycle.

And I think this is just an another example of that, where you've got a lot of people in this country who are saying I'm fed up. I've seen my wages stagnate. My wages, salary are not keeping pace with inflation. You hear about, you know, multi-billion dollar corporations, multi-billionaires, individuals, and what is my time worth to you?

And if I'm not gonna be fairly compensated for that, then why should I do anything extra in my job? And I think there's a, a general feeling out there that, that, well, as I said, people are just kind of fed up. 

[00:07:06] Chris: Right. Yeah. I, the, all of that's true. And I think, you know, something else to bring up, the cyclical part. That's a great point is, um, you know, it, it's coming around. It's coming back around is that yeah, the corporations have, have gotten more power and more power and now it's kind of a, we're not gonna take it. We're not gonna take it anymore. And it's, it's a, it's like a quiet rebellion is, I mean, that, that's really what it is, is we're rebelling against the way things have, have turned out. Um...

[00:07:44] Jeff: Yeah. I also wonder, no, go ahead. 

[00:07:48] Chris: Well that, I was just gonna say, you know, I, I think putting all of this in some context is recognizing how much COVID was a driver to where we are right now. You know, um, when, when COVID broke out and, you know, we started having lockdowns and people getting sent home from work, whether it's like literally not working or to work at home, you know, it changed people's perceptions. And saying, oh, this is really nice not to have to commute every day. And it's really nice that I can maybe take care of something personally for 15 minutes and then I'm back to doing my job. And, you know, did that hurt anyone? And, and, and even at that, you know, so maybe you take the 15 minutes when you needed to in the middle of the day, but then you work 15 minutes longer to finish up something that you need to finish up. And anyway, that, that perception of the, you know, just the way we look at our time, the way we look at our lives, that work life balance, all of that changed with COVID. And so then as people started getting jobs again, or going back into the office, you know, then we had the great resignation, which I don't think is over. Maybe lesser, but people then start questioning, is this even the place where I wanna work. And I think now when you look at the quiet quitting is maybe I'm not unhappy with the job with the, you know, the company, the work itself, whatever. But exactly what you said, I want these boundaries set. And I think we have to recognize that companies hiring employees, it is a market. And a market is supply and demand. And it is in this particular case, the company is, they, they have a demand, they have a need for work. The workers, the employees are willing to supply that labor. But they're willing to supply that labor at a given rate, a given, uh, fee, salary, hourly wage, whatever.

And if that company isn't willing to offer what they want, what do they do? They go look somewhere else. And you're looking for that equality of, I'm willing to accept this amount of money and they're willing to pay that amount of money. But then you have to think, what are they paying for? They're not paying for you 24 hours a day.

And so, you know, then it's like, well then how much am I willing to work? Am I just gonna be on the clock all the time? And people are, yeah, people have just had it with that. 

[00:10:53] Jeff: If you look at, uh, polls that are done, surveys of people, and this is regardless of, of career, regardless of job, whatever. What do workers want? And flexibility is always really, really high on the list. I mean, obviously salary, wages are really important. But people want flexibility. They want the ability to, oh, I gotta take my kid to the doctor between 11 and 1 and that's not a problem. I'll go do it. I have to leave early today. You know, they want that flexibility.

It's flexibility to be able to leave during the day. But it's also, my boss is gonna be flexible and allow me in some unforeseen circumstance, hey, I gotta take off a little bit early today. Is that OK? You know, and as long as that's not a repetition on the, the worker's part, then yeah, that's what workers want.

They want that flexibility. And I think a lot of people would be willing to sacrifice some pay for that increased flexibility. And I think you're probably gonna see that. 

[00:12:00] Chris: Most definitely. I, yeah. I have seen that too, that pay and flexibility are both right there at the top. Sometimes flipping around. I mean, obviously you, you need/want a certain amount of money, but yeah, what are you willing, are you willing to sacrifice some of that money for that freedom and flexibility? Um, I mean, I can, I can say personally, just speaking for myself, I feel like I have that with my job. And if I can, for example, take 30, 45 minutes out of the day to do what I need to do, and then, like I said, maybe I, I work a little bit longer that day or work a little longer another day because I need to, to do something, make up some time.

I also don't mind responding to an email at night, because I had that flexibility. I think it's a, the give and take of respect also is like, hey, you respect me as a person to recognize that I have other responsibilities, obligations, whatever, outside of my work. And if that happens to creep into the work time, you're giving me enough leeway and respect and flexibility to take care of that.

And then that goes the other way that, hey, because you are doing that, I'll do the same in reverse. Something happened at night that is more of an immediate issue. Sure, I'll take 15 minutes to address that and help things run smoothly. That goes to flexibility on, on both sides of the spectrum. 

[00:13:48] Jeff: I'm reading a book right now called Bad Blood. It's about Theranos and Elizabeth Holmes and it was a startup. And, and I mean the bottom line is she misled investors. Uh, I kind of followed the story when it was happening, but this book is, is fascinating. But anyway, this is a startup company in Silicon Valley and I mean, that's a different world than obviously what I'm used to. But I just read a page yesterday where she was coming down on a guy because he was spending only eight hours in the office per day. Like you're not giving it your all, you're only here for eight hours and, different environment, but I, I, I read that and I thought about, you know, quiet quitting right there. It was like...

[00:14:38] Chris: Absolutely.

[00:14:39] Jeff: What does he owe them? He gave them eight hours. Like, unless he signed on for more, he doesn't owe them anything. 

[00:14:46] Chris: Right. Well, and that's yeah, just kinda, like I said, that I think everybody needs to keep in mind that, you know, it's an agreement. You, as the employer, are agreeing to pay X amount of money for this amount of time. You, as the employee, are agreeing to provide that amount of time for that amount of money. Anything above and beyond that, like you said, it's like, what was the agreement? And there's no reason to have expectations outside of that. 

[00:15:19] Jeff: Yep. That's true.

OK. So as of this recording, just, well, a couple of days ago, Joe Biden announced some student loan forgiveness. You saw this in the news, I'm guessing? It was all over the place. 

[00:15:37] Chris: Yes. 

[00:15:39] Jeff: So, for those of you who don't know, uh, Joe Biden announced that that the US government is going to forgive up to $10,000 for individuals making less than 125,000 bucks a year or $250,000 for US households, and then an additional $10,000 in forgiveness for people who got a Pell Grant when they were going to school, which is for low income individuals. Speaking of backlash against quiet quitting, did you see backlash against Joe Biden's announcement. 

[00:16:14] Chris: A little bit. I have not followed it quite as closely, but I mean, certainly from the question of a tax implication standpoint, you know, how's this getting paid for? Who's paying for it? That kind of thing. 

[00:16:29] Jeff: Yeah. So I guess I followed it closer maybe because I have student loans. I don't know what your situation is, but I do. Still paying on 'em and yeah, there was a lot of backlash from conservatives. I mean, let's lay it out there. It was backlash, as so many things are, it became political.

It was Democrats against Republicans. And so there was a bunch of backlash against Republicans, uh, from Republicans and conservatives about that. Like how much is this gonna cost overall? But the thing that bugged me the most, was I saw so many people commenting about the fact that, I mean, they would say something along these lines, oh, I worked hard in school to not take on any debt, or I got student loans, but I worked really hard to pay those off. And now these people are gonna have a bunch of their debt erased. How is that fair? That's the argument I saw. And, I gotta tell you what, I've never understood, and I've seen this argument in other contexts, but I've never understood the argument that I had it bad, I suffered, so subsequent generations should also have to go through what I went through.

[00:17:52] Chris: Right. 

[00:17:53] Jeff: That really...

[00:17:55] Chris: That even happens in parent/child relationships. 

[00:17:59] Jeff: Yeah. 

[00:17:59] Chris: Just like, well, I didn't have that. So you shouldn't either. 

[00:18:03] Jeff: Yeah, it really bugs me. I mean, you can put that in any context. It's like, um, I don't know if somebody was in war, like the Vietnam War, and then they fought there for three years and uh, you know, got a leg blown off or whatever. But then somebody's there for six months and then they end the war, hey, how is that fair? I had, you know, I got my leg blown off and whatever. Like, that makes no sense. Or to put it in more modern times, if somebody got COVID and like really, really sick from COVID. Would you say to somebody else a year later, don't get the vaccine, how dare you get the vaccine? I had to suffer through COVID. 

[00:18:44] Chris: Right.

[00:18:44] Jeff: Why should you be able to get a vaccine and, and have it easier on yourself? Like that argument just really, really bugs me. 

[00:18:52] Chris: Yeah. 

[00:18:53] Jeff: And I tell you what, there is an entire subset of Americans who are absolutely terrified that there are people out there who are getting something for what that subset believes is nothing. Like the stuff I see on social media, it must keep them up at night. They can't stand the fact that a single mom now, who's already struggling, is gonna have some debt erased from her student loans. Like they just can't get past that, right there, that alone. And I don't get that mindset either. 

And I know we hear a lot about, you know, what about-ism, right? Like you change the subject. What about this? What about that? But, OK. Let's play that game for a second. What about companies like Amazon getting huge tax breaks and paying absolutely $0 in income tax. I mean, were you complaining about that? Seems like that would be the bigger issue than somebody getting $10,000 of debt erased, 

[00:20:02] Chris: For sure. And again, just talking about perspective, is what's a, even think, you know, what's a, say, a 10% tax to an individual versus a 10% tax to a business. 

[00:20:20] Jeff: Yes. 

[00:20:21] Chris: It's apples and oranges and... 

[00:20:24] Jeff: Yeah. Not even close. 

[00:20:25] Chris: Yeah. And, and, you know, there's, speaking of that mentality, there's also this idea that somehow the companies need to be protected. And protected from what? I mean, OK, they're making all of this money. What's wrong with them paying the taxes? And I, and I mean, even at that rate, you could say, what's wrong with them paying the same rate that an individual would? Now, that's even different than the argument of reality, because of course, you know. 

[00:21:00] Jeff: Yeah. 

[00:21:01] Chris: You got people talking about wanting them to pay more than that. Like, essentially the, the true progressive income tax. The more you're making, the more you're paying. And it's completely not that way for them. But now let's, since you brought up the corporations, not only can we talk about the taxes that they don't pay, but how about the corporate bailouts? I mean, there's subsidies given to all of these corporations as well and that's, where's, where's the uproar about that? 

[00:21:38] Jeff: Yes. Where's the backlash against that? Where's the, uh, uproar? Why don't you complain about that? I never hear anybody complain about that. And, and here's another thing. So, because of COVID, if you remember, the federal government passed, I lost track of how many stimulus bills there were during COVID. There was one under Trump and I think maybe two under Biden. I, I, I don't know. As part of that, there were the, uh, Paycheck Protection loans, which went to small businesses, right? So it was it was a loan put in place to make sure that you can keep your business open and that you can continue to pay your employees.

Well, a bunch of those debts have been forgiven and the very people who are complaining about that, a lot of members of Congress, from what I saw on Twitter, they had those loans forgiven. But they're complaining about people getting student loans forgiven, which, that's just so hypocritical. And people, of course, everything is political. I tell my students that all the time, every single thing is political. When, you cannot separate government and politics, like there's always politics involved. And so people were saying, oh, this is just Biden trying to get votes. Right? It's just about votes. He just wanted votes. If it was truly just about votes, then why didn't Trump do it?

Why didn't somebody in the Trump administration suggest to Trump, you should sign an executive order that will forgive a bunch of student loan debt? Or Obama for that matter? Like if it, if it's just about votes, then why didn't you do it? 

[00:23:17] Chris: Yeah. Well, and everything can't happen at once. I mean, everybody's doing something during their administration, like it or not, whatever it is that they're doing. And, this is just the time that this came up. Certainly not like it hasn't been talked about before. 

[00:23:35] Jeff: Right, yeah. It didn't just come out of, of, of thin air. Like, yeah. We've been hearing about it for a while. So I don't know that Biden's signature on whatever he signed is gonna be the last of the story. I am assuming there will be a lawsuit and it'll end up in federal court and it might even go to the Supreme Court.

And it's not about, I mean, the issue will be, did the President exceed his authority here and usurp the authority of the legislative branch. That's what it's gonna be about. And, it might go to the Supreme Court, as I said, and the Supreme Court is really, really conservative right now. So I don't know what their view on that is gonna be, but it's all gonna come down to executive power. That's that's what it's gonna be about. 

[00:24:24] Chris: Well, that's probably, uh, one of the much lesser areas of executive power that have happened in the last...

[00:24:33] Jeff: Yeah. Yes. 

[00:24:34] Chris: 30, 40, 50 years. So...

[00:24:37] Jeff: In the grand scheme of things, it seems so innocuous. Like it's just not that big of a deal. Uh, I think we've got bigger fish to fry. So, I think we're going on a little longer about this than I thought we would, but it's OK.

Uh, there's a lot there. We talked about the, you know, everything cyclical and, and politics is involved. And I gotta say, the Republican party has been hammering away at public education for the past 40 or 50 years. There's a, a large sector of the Republican party who has a profound disdain for public education in general. And I think it gets bumped up a few notches for higher education. There's a large sector that just cannot stand higher education. They think it's a bunch of liberals indoctrinating students and whatever. So they've been hammering that for the past 40 or 50 years. And I think that gets wrapped up into all this argument as well about student loans.

But I, in that article in the New York Times, I found this interesting, and I, I didn't know, like who is actually in default? Who has trouble paying back student loans? And actually those who struggle to, to repay student loans the most are blue collar workers. A lot of these blue collar workers thought they wanted to go to college. And so they took out loans to do so, and then they get a little ways in there and they figure out that's not what I wanna do at all. Um, and so they drop out. But now, they've, they've got debt, but they don't have a degree. And so they're likely not making as much money as somebody who does have at least a bachelor's degree.

So the default rate for those individuals who dropped out is 40%. So 40% of people who take on a student loan and then drop out, their default rate's 40%, where it's only 8% with people who have a bachelor's degree. So the argument that, oh, this only helps the affluent in our society or whatever is the, the facts just don't bear that out.

[00:26:52] Chris: No, definitely not. 

[00:26:53] Jeff: All right. So that is student loan forgiveness. And, and as I said, who knows where that's gonna go? I think it will end up in the courts.

So our last topic here, we got an email from Jennifer and it is regarding our first episode, our virgin episode. 

[00:27:17] Chris: We went all in . 

[00:27:18] Jeff: We went all in, all the way. And we talked about animal attacks, but not animals that you would expect to attack you. We talked about weird animal attacks, like things that you don't necessarily associate attacking with humans, uh, or attacking humans.

And she brought up the Michael Peterson case. Do you know about the Michael Peterson murder case? 

[00:27:47] Chris: The name sounds familiar. I can't think about it though. 

[00:27:51] Jeff: OK. .So, there's a documentary on, I think it's still on Netflix. I'm not sure. There was just a movie made about the same story, but...

[00:28:02] Chris: Was this where he killed his wife?

[00:28:04] Jeff: Well, supposedly. OK.

[00:28:06] Chris: OK. 

[00:28:06] Jeff: So allegedly, and you might be thinking of Scott Peterson in California. 

[00:28:13] Chris: That's the one. 

[00:28:14] Jeff: OK. 

[00:28:14] Chris: Yes. 

[00:28:14] Jeff: So this is Michael Peterson. This is in North Carolina. There's a documentary called The Staircase. I think the movie is called the same thing, but you should watch the documentary. It's fascinating.

So here's what happened. And then I'll tell you how an animal attack fits into this. So, Michael Peterson is a novelist, lives in Durham, North Carolina, and he and his wife were, um, drinking wine by the pool one night and she goes inside. And, we don't know how long after that, there's a 911 call. He calls and says his wife fell down the stairs, come quickly, blah, blah, blah, whatever. Turns out she died.

OK. She's at the bottom of a staircase and she died. She had trauma to her, um, head and her neck and she died of loss of blood. So she bled out. Kathleen is her name. Uh, Kathleen Peterson. OK. So of course, uh, they do an autopsy and the medical examiners gotta release a report, exactly what did she die of? And, and there were lacerations on her head, um, and neck, and he said, blunt force trauma and all that.

OK. So if you watch this documentary, it is fascinating because they are covering this thing in real time. Like, they are filming his meetings with the attorneys, and you can see them planning strategy, and they allowed video in the courtroom and it is, uh, it's riveting to watch this whole thing unfold. But anyway, uh, he was found guilty.

OK. So, I mean, he of course maintained his innocence. It wasn't me, it was an accident. She fell down the stairs, but the jury said you're guilty. Alright, so he of course appeals that decision and his conviction was overturned because on appeal, they determined that the state's blood expert lied about his credentials, just flat out lied.

And that of course throws into question everything that he brought up on his testimony about blood spatter and, you know, the, the, the direction of the blood and all that stuff that blood experts go into. Well, he lied about his credentials, so you gotta throw all that out. So they overturn the conviction, the, you know, the government's gonna refile the charges and we're gonna try him again.

OK. So this is where the animal comes in, and the animal is an owl. There's a, a neighbor of Michael Peterson's who is an attorney. And he became interested in this, I guess, just because of the proximity of this whole thing, right? Like the, my next door neighbor's accused of murder and he obtained the autopsy report.

And when medical examiners conduct an autopsy, they list every single thing found in and on the body, right? Like that's all listed and it's not like the medical examiner, like, like they don't go into detail about, oh, that's interesting that that's there or whatever. They just list all the stuff. And you know, they're not playing sides.

They're not on the government's side. They're not on the defense attorney's side. They're just listing all the material found in and on the body. What the two sides do with that information, that's up to them. That's the trial strategy. So in this autopsy report, the medical examiner noted that in Kathleen Peterson's hand, there was, uh, a clump of hair. It was her hair, a clump of hair. There were pine needles stuck to her hand, along with three small feathers from an owl. 

[00:32:11] Chris: OK. 

[00:32:12] Jeff: So he contacted Michael Peterson's attorneys and said, look, I know this is gonna sound strange, but here's the autopsy report. It says there's owl feathers in here. And, you know, he said he had researched it and yeah, owls can attack human beings. It's happened before. This could be something that you might wanna bring up at trial. And his attorneys were like, OK, thank you. But do you really expect us to go in front of the jury and tell them that an owl caused this woman to fall down the staircase? That's really what you wanna go with? So it never got that far.

And a spoiler alert, if you haven't seen The Staircase. I'm about to tell you the end here. But I think even if you know the end, it's still worth watching, just, uh, for a lot of different reasons. It's an excellent documentary. So they ended up working out a deal, uh, the government and, and Michael Peterson's attorneys.

And they said, if you will plead guilty, then, uh, we'll ask the judge for time served and then you won't serve any time. And that's what ended up happening. So Michael Peterson is out, he served, he was serving time while they appealed the case, but then when it was overturned, that's when this happened and they reached the deal.

It's called an Alford plea. 

[00:33:47] Chris: It's almost a pun. "Owl"-ford. 

[00:33:52] Jeff: Yeah. Owl! Hey, there you go. An "Owl"-ford plea. I like that. But an Alford plea is when you, you maintain your innocence, but you still say I'm gonna plead guilty because I don't want to go through a trial. So you're saying I didn't do it, but I'm gonna plead guilty anyway, just to not go to trial. So...

[00:34:15] Chris: But then what are the implications of that? You've pled guilty to murder? What then? I mean, how's that gonna hurt you going forward? 

[00:34:26] Jeff: Well, in his case, he is a novelist. I mean, I don't know what he's written lately. He was, in the documentary, which is from the early 2000s, he's I, I'm thinking he's like in his mid to upper 60s. So, and I think he had made enough money off his books to where he didn't really have to worry about... 

[00:34:47] Chris: Yeah. So it's not really gonna affect him so much. 

[00:34:50] Jeff: Yeah. But I could see that obviously for other people. But any other person, do you wanna just go ahead and plead guilty and you're not gonna have to go to jail or do you wanna roll the dice and...?

[00:35:01] Chris: I mean, it's, it's a nice sure thing. Like, OK, I'm not going to jail, but yeah, that, that's what I was thinking. It's like how many times, you know, can you be asked in your life, have you ever been convicted of a crime and like, well, yes. 

[00:35:20] Jeff: Yeah. 

[00:35:20] Chris: I know. 

[00:35:21] Jeff: You'd have to check the yes box if you entered a plea. Yeah. So there have been owl attacks. Um, there were two notable repeated owl attacks in Oregon and Maine. And of course, I guess it's pretty much like any other animal when they feel threatened. So if they have a nest around there, whatever the owls will just dive bomb humans and just knock 'em into their head.

And you've seen talons on owls, like, that's serious stuff right there. So if Kathleen Peterson was just minding her own business and she had been drinking wine, she had Valium in her system and something else, like she might be pretty unsteady on her feet. And so if an owl knocked into her head, she absolutely could have fallen down the stairs.

But that's a theory. I mean, that's something that the jury would've had to consider, but it at least creates some reasonable doubt for me. 

[00:36:21] Chris: Oh, definitely. And that's, that's the fascinating thing right there, is, you know, what does it take to create the reasonable doubt? I mean, if, if you're going with the way you're supposed to go with it, if you have a doubt, then that's it.

[00:36:38] Jeff: Yeah. But just think about how ridiculous that would be. You're gonna stand up there and then start talking about owl attacks, an owl could have done it. Like, I, I, I would be afraid if I were in that defense attorney's shoes that I'm just gonna be laughed at. 

[00:36:53] Chris: Yeah. I could totally see that. Yeah. Cuz then, I mean, cuz then you could say anything. So then you'd also have to have some kind of reasoning justification. Why was this owl there? What happened that would've caused that like...

[00:37:08] Jeff: Yeah. 

[00:37:09] Chris: But now, playing that out, if that's not what happened, why in the world were there owl feathers? Like...

[00:37:19] Jeff: Well, OK. Exactly. And, and so the pine needles in her hand, what did that come from? Because she fell down a staircase that was inside the house. So the theory is it had knocked into her and something had caused her to fall. Or maybe she, maybe she saw it coming and she ducked or whatever and her hand hit the ground that way, but it stayed on top of her, like get away from my nest or whatever the bird was upset at, and, and followed her in there and, and hit her in the head and she fell down the stairs that way. Who, you know, I, I can see where you could create so much reasonable doubt by bringing that up. But it's on the surface it's so ludicrous that I can understand why the attorneys said thanks, but no thanks. 

[00:38:12] Chris: Yeah, I could too, but it it's, uh, crazy curious. 

[00:38:17] Jeff: So anyway, watch The Staircase. That's a good one.

All right. That is this week's episode. We would absolutely be happy if you would go to our website, that is subpartalks.com. You can find anything and everything out about the show there. You can email us just like Jennifer did. Thank you, Jennifer, by the way, for bringing that up. Uh, you can leave us a voicemail if you want to have suggestions, just like Jennifer did, on something we should talk about, you can leave that there and we will certainly take that into consideration. You can follow us on social media. On Twitter, we are @subpartalks. On Facebook, we are subpartalks. You can follow us personally on Twitter. On there I am at @independentjeff. 

[00:39:06] Chris: And I am @chrisbradfordtx. 

[00:39:10] Jeff: If you wanna find us on other social media, you can find those links on our website. Whatever you are listening to this on, we would be very grateful if you would follow us, subscribe. And if you do that, you are gonna get new episodes delivered to you weekly.

You have to do nothing. It will magically appear on your device. What could be better than that? And while you are at it, on whatever you're listening to this on, you can rate us. We would be ever so grateful again if you would give us five stars. And you can leave us a review. You can say anything, it doesn't matter what you say. But read, or leave us a review.

And, uh, we will be sure to read it. We love hearing from our listeners. And finally, share this on social media. Share with your friends, enemies, acquaintances, shout out to people on the street. Talk to your coworkers. If they are quiet quitting along with you during your quitting time, talk about Subpar Talks, get the word out.

The more listeners we have, the easier it is for us to bring you this content each and every week. And who knows what topics we will visit in the future? So, another reason for you to subscribe. And Chris, any final thoughts on quiet quitting, student loans, or owl attacks?

[00:40:31] Chris: Uh, watch out for owls. That's bad news.

[00:40:36] Jeff: Absolutely. I think that's wise. It's good advice. Alright. Very good. We will be back next week.