all policing is on necessary unless you get a call are you absolutely not a good dancer the order that commuters be served by the officers who are being paid by the taxpayers to watch out for them while they sleep yes  subsequently impeachable when he testified when he was under all those are completely different issues than issues you have before him today because of the analysis that's been proposed by mr zandi was correct there would never be a assume that in this particular case we share a to see if you use it has been satisfied by the evidence and the determination of the commission one of the things easiest mistress own argument that i think is absolutely evident clear is what the finding of the commission was between police officers on the street he is part of the command staff there has been ignored in this argument in this group and it's extremely significant when looking at what happened in this case in the tot case that there were taken off for the entire ship two ships two nights in a roll two to two a half hours so bad is a very very different situation that is if you recognise the testimony of witnesses  on the street at the time secondly we have to do i believe in this case if you want to tell you in case you don't isolate pieces of this case which is what i think is being done in this argument if you look at the underlying misconduct how do we know that the misconduct a you look at the fact that he deprived the citizens of west chicago what those police officers were being paid to do taxpayers do not pay public employees to watch movies regardless of what prior disciplinary record you can't isolate those think should want another this argument that they only consider five years that could very well be based on the contents of a collective bargaining agreement which we now see does contain those types of provisions considerable over five years i don't know what was happening there but i don't think that this appropriately before the score it is whether or not based upon a standard for discharge set forth in the wall this commission gave grounds which were not it is waived however if i had responded it justice mukherjee my response would be there is a significant difference between a superior officer and a police officer with regard to their duties and what they are expected to do and their conduct and they had seen major distinction with regard to the conduct of sergeant the bills in the case he was the sergeant he was to be leader and that he was to provide the guy gets to these people to do their job and do it correctly it's not selective enforcement you've got a completely different position here that needs to be recognized supervisor was one responsible the focus was on where there was other discipline meted out to the other individuals that were involved in it i don't really everyone should be held accountable when you look at culpability culpability this is a shift supervisor this is the individual who is responsible did it on time multiple occasions he would have done it again the difference extensionally those differences between the length of these barbecues one of which happened nineteen years ago by the way others have been on holidays and so forth the entire shift never came in the end to the sanctions where he did not believe that he could perform those jobs with did this support this is a paramilitary organization you have a chain of command up in the chain of command down you have to have the guy and you decide yes to have him back that's how they work and it has to