california to washington along with his wife ten year old daughter and then at the driver of the van at the time of the stop who is a man named hero sanchez and of all duty to establish the on a reasonable doubt but is there any evidence that he was driving at some point a speck and that is another hearsay statement through detective because if you look at the sequence of when exhibit nineteen the call the call from the van to pedro and that's not just spirited that that happened that was five fifty to six zero one pm and we know from agent smith as a d a that he said you know trying to find this vehicle at about six pm and we know that the car was cold over after it stopped for evolves out on his cell phone goes into a gas station comes back out they follow him they stop him about six thirty we know at the time of the call pedro says you're about fifteen minutes away if you look at exhibit nineteen what i think is very interesting is that i think it's very clear that the driver of the very end i was actually the person on the phone when he obtained a vehicle belonging to one of the relatives well that that's what's interesting the defense attorney says in opening they're not related but the evidence that comes then you know the evidence that's considered instruction and you know there's three things you have to have your suspicion aroused you have to deliberately avoid taking steps to confirm or deny those suspicions and that you also did so in order to provide yourself with the defense and that's what the barricades turned on you know there was no evidence that he was you know deliberately ignorant she provided him so you've got about a minute if you want to such as well let's start first of all with his explanation about what he was doing he told me to talk to that scene that he was going on a vacation keep in mind however he had left at ten o'clock at night with a tell you know i know people who wen when the children were small meant to sack weaver and the children went to sleep and they would drive all night and i think that makes sense as well your honor except when you couple that with the fact that she's a ten year old school age child they're leaving on september twenty eighth which is a saturday on your own children have school i thought well if that's not unusual but when you take into account the fact that they're driving nonstop they're leaving on a saturday night to visit somebody in auburn washington and no offense to the oper congress congress that's not a vacation destination they're driving to meet somebody named pedro who they have never met before and once the van is stopped mr escott feller's taken never asks why are you searching my van why is there a dog here where are you taking my van why are you taking it away from me when she had to get my van back he said that the vandal want a relative of his but he never makes any attempt to find out he said he asked how to get to the airport he wanted to get to the airport he felt comfortable enough with the system that was after the impact has been time to change right and my point is somebody every small person under that circumstance with no knowledge or no suspicion of what's in the fan would not say my family is in trouble i need to get out of here i need to go to the airport what they say is how can i get my friend back i don't have any information about how i can compartment was in the spare tire location it was bonded over the tools for that bundle were found inside the van it was well hidden because i mean even on the cursory search that the police couldn't find that it was well taken so there's no reason why he should have known about it except that logic tells us that if you're going to trust somebody to drive two hundred fifty thousand dollars worth of that cell phone was in his wife's stand at the time and we also know that he could not be excluded as the person speaking to additionally with regard to paper what do we know we know that the defendant necessarily would have the circumstantial evidence of his reaction at the time that the van was seized tells us that he knew what was in the grand it his wife is not behaving in the same way he is iran's conscious and of all is not