i'd be happy to answer any questions the court might have about any aspects of this case but i do not have anything to add that to our briefs with respect to the merits of mr heightens to process the claim with respect to the exhaustion issue however there are a couple of points that i think are not made clearly enough in the our briefs and i think their address those an important part of our position here is an exhaustion and is that the state and federal due this kind of claim what's the what's the case that you feel most strongly supports you on that issue but your honor that's the point on which i think our brief is not quite adequate our case our brief to do cite that case analyzed the reliability issue they've gone to the question of whether or not they excluded evidence was essential or critical for the defense but they haven't really talked about reliability in the way that the federal cases have discussed reliability and so  have some serious concern that there may not be going to cali as has would be required to get beyond the procedural bar then the the word i'm sorry i didn't know if you look at the controlling supreme court cases dealing with the liability of proffered evidence being in chambers and crane but holding for exclusion of thousands to violate the federal due process right to fully percent of defense excluded evidence must be reliable critical to the defense theory can you explain then how the arizona courts exclusion of the expert testimony as unreliable was subjectively unreasonable application of either actually was made because the arizona courts never applied chambers or crane to this particular situation nor the due process issue i think it is fair to say that there was not and then there are his statements to the police and that's what becomes the critical point crain did not involve expert testimony though i mean that the testimony in craned that was excluded was the testimony of the uncle of the defendant  who had observed the interrogation and and confession of the defendant and the it's exclusion was was in permissible because it went right to the issue of voluntariness of the confession which the jury could properly consider case of a percent being witness that we're dealing with here this is a doctor off she in this case comes in without ever having done much of anything other than testifying in to the credibility of the truthfulness of the confession in the in the court of the crane decision turns on that distinction and that's what's at issue here as well i th went through what he had a few more which was the transcript of the confession and said well here's an example of a technique and we know that this is one of the techniques that has a tendency to produce false confessions not just reliable and more important thank you for your comments or times expired yes well yes and before i was going to start off before we even get to the standard of whether whether the state standard is the same as the federal standard it's first important to point out that petitioner didn't even raise a state due process claim to the arizona court of appeals when he presented his two to the court of appeals that the trial court erred in precluding his expert testimony he presented it as a state evidentiary issue and it was not until the last sentence of his argument that he said and the denial of the occlusion of my expert testimony to magni due process and that was that he just had due process and then he cited two state cases one of which reason if you didn't use it or understand the standards are different in arizona first of all we know of no cases in arizona first of all when it comes to evidence  where arizona courts result evident truly and the clues in our admission of evidence under the arizona rules of evidence they do not then go and do a separate state due process analysis we know of no cases where the mark as you pointed out and there are for instance in young blood in state versus youngblood dissent in the majority the only thing they could basically agree on in that case was the fact that the state due process in federal due process cla comedy dictates someone a prisoner alleges that his continued confinement for state court conviction violates federal law the state courts should have the first opportunity to review the cleaning and provide any necessary relief so it's only appropriate for federal court to step in and review a state court decision when the prisoner has alleged a federal claim to begin with otherwise if you have a state in state court issues and then a federal court later comes along and says oh we think the standards are the same that's going to allow a federal court to review to interfere with that state court decision which completely undermines the whole exhausted the whole set up of the system and the comedy they have a right to discovery in that case and although a lot although this court should not reach the merits that underline merits of this claim because the because the district court found it to the fence is first of all but he was able to present a defense at trial his defense of trial was that he never had sexual relations with his niece at all and that she was lying he was able to present that testimony  detectives extensively about their interview training and their techniques and they also admitted into evidence the manuals the read nine step interrogation manuals which they wanted to discuss the admitted  evidence the interview view technique manuals for the jury to see and the question the detectives about about their interview techniques and training they also although they precluded dr are completely from testifying they did allow dr asplund to testify that they just wanted his testimony as to what exactly he could testify to but he was able to testify to the petitioners emotional immaturity status his personality can characteristics his intellectual he susceptible to influence and look how easily he was coerced by the by the video by the police interrogation and they were able to get out his stopped ability and they were able to talk about their you know interview techniques and training and they