http:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/audio\/2014\/02\/victim-assistance-america\/<\/a><\/p>\n[Audio Begins]<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: From the nation\u2019s capital, this is DC Public Safety. I\u2019m your host Leonard Sipes. Ladies and gentlemen, back at our microphones, Will Marling. He is the Executive Director for the National Director for Victim Assistance, www.trinova.org, www.trinova.org. We\u2019re going to be talking about a variety of topics in terms of victim assistance in America. Will, welcome back to DC Public Safety.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Len, thanks so much. You know this is one of my favorite things to do. I just really enjoy our time.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: Well, the remarks that I get from Linked In and the other social media sites plus our own website seems to indicate that you\u2019re very popular. Every time I bring you on we get nice comments, so we want to start off with a constitutional amendment for victims. One of the things that always boggles the minds of everybody is that the overwhelming majority of the criminal justice system is there to protect the rights of defendants, but very few rights are there to protect the rights of the victim and we have a variety of states, somewhere about 30 that do have state constitutional rights to protect victim rights, but what we\u2019re talking about a federal law to establish a strong victims\u2019 presence in the courtroom and then law enforcement and the rest of the criminal justice system protecting victims\u2019 rights when a federal law is violated. Correct?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Well, that\u2019s right. I mean we\u2019re talking about the highest law of the land, which is the United States constitution, our founding document. So this represents an amendment to that founding document to affirm rights for victims of crime specifically.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: And how is that coming?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Well, it\u2019s moving. We\u2019re moving forward, you know, a lot of folks that listen to your program; things like this aren\u2019t clearly visible because there\u2019s a lot of activity. There can be between 10 and 12,000 bills introduced into Congress during the course of a two-year session and so you know, there\u2019s a lot of noise, as I might say it, in the bills but we are continually educating house representatives specifically. It\u2019s House Joint Resolution 40, and the main thing that we\u2019re doing apart from just educating them is asking them for their co-sponsorship. They can literally put their name on an official support list and said yes, I will co-sponsor House Joint Resolution 40 and so it\u2019s a continual effort to build momentum, to educate, and to move it forward.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: How could you not support victims\u2019 rights? I mean, I would think the entire Congress would get behind this.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Well, we agree. The reality is that when people are asked on the street, should victims have rights? It\u2019s an overwhelming response in the affirmative. And most people, even those who might resist this would affirm victims\u2019 rights. There are some folks who are purists and we shouldn\u2019t amend the constitution and you know, I agree, maybe not very frequently, but the reason it\u2019s to be amended, is because it needs to grow and change. There are some that are concerned that it would impact the rights of the accused or defendants, and we simply respond that is not true either. We affirm that those rights need to be there and the Bill of Rights, the amendment is designed to protect those accused of a crime need to be vigorously upheld. We\u2019re only saying that victims of the crime of which that person is accused, they need to be able to have standing under the law to affirm dignity, affirm the right to information, the right to restitution if this follows through, and the right to be part of the process officially. That\u2019s really what this means.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: Well you have a lot of federal crimes that are in the news lately in terms of the military. So what you have is a situation where a lot of women in the military are basically that they were sexually assaulted, and advocates have stated that they have been ignored, that their rights have been ignored, this would provide them with the rights they seek, correct?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Yeah, it would, because an American under the constitution can affirm rights that are inculcated in the constitution. We say inalienable rights and what we mean by that is there are some things we just know are true. The average person knows they\u2019re true. But we still have to state them in the constitution, they have to become part of a written document, so that someone can say hey, right here, we\u2019ve said this. And in the military context, that\u2019s especially true under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, historically, there really are no rights as such for victims of crime. Now, I will say, that in the latest National Defense Authorization Act, the NDAA coming out, there have been some very positive progress with the affirmation of protections for victims. But nonetheless, this is, as I like to say, an amendment would cover a multitude of sins. It would address this issue of victims\u2019 rights, crime victims\u2019 rights, but also it would affirm at large, even those people who don\u2019t engage in the criminal justice process as victims, it would create a national discussion about what rights are, what rights should be and hopefully raise the level of prominence, the needs that people have when they are harmed by others.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: And about 30 states or so have these rights, and the process in those states that do have a constitutional right, a state constitutional right, guarding the rights of victims of crimes, it\u2019s worked in those states, it\u2019s been a sea change. My experience has been that everybody is now very much attuned to the rights of victims because it\u2019s the law. And in some cases you\u2019ve got to spell it out and in some cases you\u2019ve got to make it crystal clear. That\u2019s what others have said to me. Is that correct?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: That\u2019s exactly right. Now I will affirm that of the 33 states that we know have crime victims\u2019 rights in the state constitutions, the affirmations in the state constitutions vary from place to place. In other words, what they affirm as a right can be different in another state. But let me give you the example of Arizona, that has had victims\u2019 rights for 20 years and they\u2019ve been able to demonstrate that the process can be safely adjudicated so that the rights of the accused are not impinged upon, and the rights of the victims can be affirmed so that a process can pursue justice. And equitable justice. We know that there are inequities in the system, in many ways, and I recognize that even in my victim advocacy role that the accused many times, can be shortchanged from anything the defense attorney that they\u2019ve been assigned or whatever. But we want to and vigorously want to affirm that the rights that everybody should have and we also say, victims want a good and healthy process for everybody. They don\u2019t want a process where the accused is getting shortchanged, because commonly that just means an appeal, another trial, more and more pain and suffering for them. So you know, that\u2019s really why a fair and balanced system can serve everyone.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: But speaking of pain and speaking of a sense of injustice, the average person going through the criminal justice system before a state constitutional amendment would often times say that it\u2019s the criminal justice system itself that acts as an inhibitor to the healing process. If the state criminal justice system or the federal criminal justice system is going to be so difficult to deal with and where rights are not respected, can you imagine a person going through a violent crime and a family member is a victim or a violent crime and then now, they find that it\u2019s just an impossible process in terms of getting the information that they need, getting the information that they seek, getting the respect that they deserve, and having their day in court, if that was not recognized, if that was not embraced. Then that victim is almost re-victimized, and I\u2019ve heard that from crime victims before the constitutional amendments over and over and over again. The criminal justice system re-victimizes me by not respecting my rights.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: You\u2019re exactly right, and it\u2019s one of the many reasons I like you, because you\u2019re in tune with many different facets of the criminal justice system. What we hear as well is re-victimization, re-traumatization, common themes. Why? Because the system itself is a system. It\u2019s a machine. It\u2019s designed with sometimes harsh mechanisms that are without respect for humanity, that\u2019s the system. But the people in the system are the ones that affirm the dignity and compassion that need to be affirmed for people who have suffered so egregious losses. And so, that\u2019s all we\u2019re doing, we\u2019re wanting to affirm those things and we\u2019d love for people just to do that automatically. We\u2019d love for people in the system to affirm inalienable rights of crime victims, that actually many people believe are already there. They have no idea that they\u2019re not there. But we know that those need to be affirmed. So that a victim can say I have the right to this, and I want to assert that right and I want that right protected.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: If you\u2019re interested in additional information or if you would like to support the National Organization for Victim Assistance in terms of this endeavor, www.trinova.org, www.trinova.org. Will, we\u2019re going to move on to the next topic, distance learning with the victim assistance academy. You guys are doing an awful lot of training. You were doing training for the Defense Department in terms of training the trainers, if I remember a previous conversation. All throughout the history of the National Organization for Victim Assistance, you all have been involved in training victims\u2019 advocates throughout the country, throughout the world. Then the next big step, a little while ago, last year was your work with the Defense Department and now you\u2019re talking about a distance learning victim assistance academy. Talk to me about that please.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Yeah, thanks. Just stepping back a little bit just to you know quantify what we\u2019re doing. You\u2019re exactly right, we do a lot of training and it\u2019s in particular in this area of victim advocacy and our side of house with crisis response. Lot of these things revolve around the skills necessary to advocate for people but also trauma mitigation, trauma education in working with those harmed by crime and crisis. With the Department of Defense, we are actually the secretariat for the SAC-P. The Department of Defense Sexual Assault Advocate Certification Program. So we\u2019ve actually collected subject matter experts and they are part of a committee built upon the national advocate-credentialing program that certifies victim advocates specifically in the United States military, all branches. And that\u2019s been a wonderful experience for us of course and we\u2019ve been grateful for the privilege of serving in that way, but also encouraged by steps, small and large, that are being taken in dealing with sexual assaults specifically in the military. And out of that kind of context of seeing needs and the like, we hit on this issue of a distance learning victim assistance academy. Now let me explain that one. Since the mid 80s, when we actually have the vocation of victim advocate emerge, there are a number of states who have developed their own victim assistance academies. And it\u2019s kind of a standard approach, standardized approach, with a 40-hour basic training that touches very skill-based aspects of advocacy. And it\u2019s a very important training, in fact, it\u2019s foundational if you\u2019re going to be a national advocate, nationally advocated credentialed person, you\u2019re going to have at least a 40-hour basic, and what we discovered in our work was that not only are there a number of states that don\u2019t have academies, but are a number of people who are far-flung who don\u2019t have access to that kind of training very readily. And so we have recently launched NOVA\u2019s national victim assistance academy, and it\u2019s a distance-learning concept. In other words, it\u2019s real time, with an instructor, using technology, so that there\u2019s a classroom and people are logging in, in their remote sectors and they\u2019re seeing the instructor as well as seeing a presentation and they can talk to the professor. In fact, we encourage that; we encourage live audio Q&A interaction. And the powerful thing about this is that distance learning dimension means that distance is removed. People are actually taking this training in all parts of the world. All across our country, they\u2019re in Asia; they\u2019re in Europe, and other parts. So we are not only pleased and honored by this, we find that people are extremely receptive to this, plus the instructors we\u2019ve lined up are heroes in this field. Incredible subject matter experts, and many people simply wouldn\u2019t get access to them otherwise, you know, we just can\u2019t ship them around. So it\u2019s a great step for us.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: So the bottom line is that anybody, anywhere in the world can receive this training and you have been on a previous program, we talked about the fact that you\u2019ve been interacting with other countries throughout the world in terms of you know, this whole concept of a constitutional amendment. This whole concept advocating for victims, it\u2019s not just an issue within the United States. You\u2019ve been interacting with people all throughout the world.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Indeed. In fact, we\u2019re starting really a consortium non-profit international and enterprise called Victims of Crime International and I know that isn\u2019t especially creative, but what it does represent this true focus of many people in other parts of the world understanding that victims, victims of crime specifically need support, they need resources, and their voices need to be amplified to their national, their local and national leaders. And that\u2019s what this enterprise is about, specifically Victims of Crime International. And I think the training is going to contribute to that, hopefully as we give people, basically anybody that can get access online can be part of this.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: We\u2019re halfway through the program. I want to re-introduce Will. Will Marling is the Executive Director of the National Organization for Victim Assistance, www.trinova.org, www.trinova.org. Will, I do want to ask you in terms of your interactions with people in other countries; I would imagine everybody has the same issue. I would imagine there\u2019s not a lot of difference between Albuquerque, New Mexico and Katmandu. I would imagine when you\u2019re victimized; I would imagine the criminal justice system is often times not the most receptive place to, not the most supportive place in terms of dealing with victims, dealing with their trauma, dealing with the emotional aspects of being victimized, dealing with their informational needs. I would imagine those problems exist wherever you are in the world.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: I would agree. There can be varying reactions to, and you can understand that from the standpoint of even countries that maybe aren\u2019t strong on human rights, we\u2019re experiencing that. I think it\u2019s kind of funny, you name two places, I actually have talked to people about this very issue. Katmandu and New Mexico, of course all across the country there are incredibly gifted and committed people, and even in Katmandu, it\u2019s fascinating the young lawyer that I talk to there, who is really trying to propel the notion of victims\u2019 rights in the context of humans\u2019 rights and he\u2019s just an amazing fellow. The challenge that we do face in varying ways, and I say we, because the human collective represents a commitment to justice anywhere and everywhere. And what we see is sometimes there\u2019s a difference in resourcing, that can be an issue. And that can be here, you can find remote locations in the country where there aren\u2019t as many resources to assist victims of crimes, or you can find locations here where people aren\u2019t maybe well oriented as professional to the needs that victims face, but certainly that is in other parts of the world. That\u2019s why we\u2019re really trying to propel a global voice and a global concept for folks, so that we can shout on behalf of other people in other places that their voice should be heard, we believe that can be beneficial for them. As well as for victims here.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: But it does get back once again to whether you call it a US constitutional amendment, or embodied within the law in different countries, if it\u2019s not embodied in code, if it\u2019s not part of law, if it\u2019s not part of the training of the judiciary, the law enforcement, individuals within the court system, individuals within corrections, if it\u2019s not embodied within law, it tends to be ignored. Or not taken as seriously as it should be taken.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Indeed. And in fact the European Union passed incredibly powerful legislation to affirm victims\u2019 rights and services, and this is, it\u2019s called an EU Directive in that context because the European nations don\u2019t have a constitution as such, they\u2019re a union. Essentially it\u2019s a confederation of states. So they have to have treaties between all of the member states, the 28. And yet their highest level at this point is an EU Directive and the most, this victims\u2019 rights EU Directive that\u2019s being implemented over the next year specifically. There has to be a plan put in place by every member state, but then of course promoting and implementing that goes well beyond. And so that\u2019s what we\u2019re seeing, you know, Europe is seeing the need for this.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: The steam is picking up; the momentum continues to move forward. Just in the United States and throughout the world.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: That\u2019s exactly right. The word momentum is a great word, Len, because it represents what we\u2019re trying to see happen and what we are see happen.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: Alright, we\u2019ve talked about the philosophical underpinnings of victims\u2019 rights in the United States; let\u2019s get down to something very practical and very real. Target credit cards, now the National Organization for Victim Assistance has been involved in cybercrime for the last two or three years. You told me on a previous program that you\u2019ve got so many calls from so many people regarding cybercrime that the National Organization for Victim Assistance was willing to move beyond its traditional role in terms of what I refer to as garden variety street crimes and domestic violence and sexual assaults and robberies and burglaries and those sorts of things into cybercrime because simply there was a demand for it, correct?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: That\u2019s right. What we were seeing was cyber of course is an extremely popular type of crime, and naturally, the cyber permeates everything we do. We\u2019re all inter-connected. And so we\u2019re getting victim assistance calls, we take thousands of victim assistance calls on our toll free victim assistance line and every year, and when we began to see this uptick, definitely in request for help and assistance, we said ok, we need to pay attention to this. Quite honestly, it just meant, definitely boning up on a lot of the dimensions that are impacted here. So we began to train ourselves internally. We did a lot of training with staff, so we do victim assistance that way. And the Target breach represents, quite candidly, one of many different types. It was a high profile event, and we had calls on behalf of folks who had experienced compromise there. Ironically, Target itself is considered one of the stronger security committed companies, and they have a lot of appropriate and meaningful policies in place, but when you\u2019re talking about a breach that as I see it or understand it occurred, you\u2019re talking about mechanisms that were able to break into basically vaults of information. So it\u2019s very profound and it scared people.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: The Washington Post the other day editorialized that it\u2019s time to embrace the European model, and from what I understand in terms of the European model is that it\u2019s a chip and code based system. So if you don\u2019t have the chip and if you don\u2019t have the code, you don\u2019t have access to the information in the card, but the really interesting factor is, is right now, if you\u2019re victimized through your credit card, you\u2019re not liable. You don\u2019t have to pay those credit card bills. In the European model evidently, once they market the move over to the chip and the pin system, then suddenly you\u2019re stuck with paying those bills if a bad guy gets a hold of your credit card information. Is that correct?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: That\u2019s right. Well, the chip and pin is a significant mechanism to protect information. In our country, of course, a credit card compromise like that is considered technically a crime against the bank. That\u2019s why it gets a little complicated because people\u2019s lives are impacted by it. When my credit card number was breached, I didn\u2019t lose track of my card, they got the number from somewhere, the bank was the one that took on the liability. Now under federal law if you report your loss, you can be liable. It\u2019s three days, you can be liable for $50 up to three days, between that and 60 days, your liability can be $500. I\u2019ve never heard of any bank charging that you know to that consumer. So they consider it, I think, a cost of doing business. But what the chip and pin can do, and I used to live in Europe where the chip and pin was important, that chip and that pin have to be, you know, they have to work together. And that significantly limits the risk associated with breach. And it also means there\u2019s, for the bank\u2019s sake, it\u2019s an opportunity to detect when the consumers are actually committing the fraud because you know, in some ways, they have to say, I\u2019m taking you at your work. I had to sign affidavits, I basically swear that I didn\u2019t cause this, I\u2019m not making a false claim, you know, to affirm that I didn\u2019t make those charges, that somebody else had. I actually think that it could be helpful for everybody. But you know, in our society, it\u2019s an issue of convenience and that\u2019s what we\u2019re trying to encourage people to think about. Ok, so it takes a little bit more time to make a transaction. That\u2019s ok. So it\u2019s takes you another 15 seconds. That\u2019s ok.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: Give everybody and those of us in the criminal justice system the three quickest tips to keep ourselves safe from this sort of crime.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Well, yeah we kind of work from a principle, we try to use principles that kind of can be a little pithy that can help people remember. We tell people you are your data. Think about it in that way, when you get a call and it\u2019s a voice, you don\u2019t actually know who that person is. You think you do, because you want to believe what they\u2019re saying to you. But you have to think, they want your data and they\u2019re going to try to get that out of you. Another principle is very simple. If it has a lock, use it. If your phone has a lock, use it. If anything electronic has a lock, your computer, use your lock. Very few people, even if they would say they live in a safe neighborhood, they lock their car when they get out of it. They use their remote, lock it up. We also, this is a really important one in my view, if somebody asks you for information; it\u2019s perfectly acceptable to say, what for. And when they tell you what for, you can decide, mmm, I don\u2019t know if that\u2019s important enough.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: So the bottom line is being unbelievably judicious in terms of providing that information to anybody and if you have questions as to whether or not you\u2019re talking to the real deal, if you\u2019re interacting with the real deal in terms of an internet message, is to call the bank, call the store, not through the telephone number that they provide, but you look it up, you go on the internet, you look up the number, and you call them and you call the billing department and say ok I\u2019ve got this email message from supposedly you guys, is this legit?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: That\u2019s right. There are all kind of scams. I\u2019ll give you one that just came to me yesterday. I got an email, allegedly, from the Arizona court of appeals.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: Really?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Yeah. So the idea was that\u2019s terrifying, what\u2019s going on? Well, I knew it was bogus, but you know, we\u2019re busy, you\u2019re not paying attention and so, even there, you say, when asked for, they asked me to click this link and follow up. Well, I\u2019m saying to myself, well what they want that for? Why would they be emailing me? Of course they wouldn\u2019t be. So once we even stop, most of the time, if we just stop and ask a couple of basic questions, wait a minute, then it all rings false, and then we can just stop, but it\u2019s easy to get paranoid these days. Especially if people telling you stuff like this.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: All of us in the criminal justice system, even those who are suspicious of everybody because we\u2019ve been in the criminal justice system for so long, we still get fooled.<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Oh yeah. I mean, it\u2019s a common, primarily because we\u2019re busy people and there\u2019s a lot of data passing. And so if an email gets your network and somebody doesn\u2019t reject it and they forward it on to you, that could be, right there, the lynch pin pulled to access your network. How does that happen? It\u2019s not hard. I mean, again, we\u2019re busy people. So it\u2019s diligence.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: Just a couple minutes left Will. You know, when I did auto theft campaigns years ago, we recognized that if the auto industry just implemented certain security procedures in cars it would drive down auto theft considerably and auto theft over the past five, six years has plummeted because of that. There are many people who are basically saying, look, they\u2019re out there stealing iPhones, they\u2019re out there stealing iPads, they\u2019re stealing my electronic devices, why aren\u2019t the companies making these devices to the point where they can be completely worthless, the companies can shut them down. People are saying why can\u2019t the credit card companies make a credit card in such a way that it\u2019s useless if somebody steals it or steals the information. Do you guys get involved in those sort of endeavors working with the automobile manufacturers, working with the credit card companies, working with Apple and other smart phone manufacturers to improve the security of devices?<\/p>\n
Will Marling: Well, we sure would. We\u2019re willing and committed to speaking into these issues, not just from a victim\u2019s standpoint but from a potential victim or consumer standpoint, but you find a lot of forces at work. We know right now that within any given cell phone, you can have basically a kill switch. And there are pros and cons at different levels on that. Some people would be concerned that my phone could be killed if somebody decided to do that outside of me. But we know that technology is available. One of the areas where we kind of stumbled into this is an area where cell phone contraband is making it into prisons. And that is making inmates accessible, it\u2019s giving them access to the outside world, we know that they have committed significant crimes, they\u2019ve called contract hits on perspective witnesses, they\u2019ve harassed, they\u2019ve stalked, and that\u2019s the kind of thing, it\u2019s actually a big problem. And one sweep in a California prison, it was 6,000 phones that were found. So it\u2019s things like that that have ancillary effects as well, not just some of the things that even you named, I lose my phone and all my information is on there, man I\u2019d love for that thing to be destroyed, you know, remotely. Because I don\u2019t want anyone to have access to it. And I don\u2019t want them to have access to your phone, Len, because you might have, we might have been talking about sensitive things, you might have an email from me, my contact information, that\u2019s private. So it behooves us all to pay attention to that very thing.<\/p>\n
Len Sipes: Well, I\u2019m going to let you have the final word on that topic. I really do wish that the National Organization for Victim Assistance and everybody who supports victims\u2019 rights throughout the United States to be supportive of a United States constitutional amendment for victims of crimes currently working its way through the House of Representatives and also we are all supportive needless to say of additional, every state in the United States should have a constitutional amendment protecting victims\u2019 rights and I think Will would completely agree on that. Ladies and gentlemen, our guess today has been Will Marling, the Executive Director of the National Organization for Victim Assistance, www.trinova.org, www.trinova.org. Ladies and gentlemen, this is DC Public Safety. We appreciate your comments, we even appreciate your criticisms, and we want everybody to have themselves a very, very pleasant day.<\/p>\n
[Audio Ends]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Welcome to \u201cDC Public Safety\u201d \u2013 Radio and television shows, blog and transcripts on crime, criminal offenders and the criminal justice system. The portal site for \u201cDC Public Safety\u201d is http:\/\/media.csosa.gov. Radio Program available at http:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/audio\/2014\/02\/victim-assistance-america\/ [Audio Begins] Len Sipes: From the nation\u2019s capital, this is DC Public Safety. I\u2019m your host Leonard Sipes. Ladies […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[23,47,43],"tags":[237,235,168,128,83],"class_list":["post-1115","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-audiopodcast","category-internet-crime","category-victims-services","tag-constitutional-amendment","tag-crime-victims","tag-cyber-crime","tag-nova","tag-victim","entry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/pBoKk-hZ","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1115","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1115"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1115\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1116,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1115\/revisions\/1116"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1115"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1115"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/media.csosa.gov\/podcast\/transcripts\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1115"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}