little girl and what we had this case was a trial i need to modify what i did earlier bennett agreed visitation restrictions the father had agreed that he had major alcohol abuse  anger management problems you never read too about his limited visitation i think i've ever seen in all my practice which was just to be in the motor or the mother's and father's home for just an hour or two times per week after a period of time he management restriction because of the father to show that it was the best interest of the trial child drop those but then there was also even if he prevailed there was still the overriding issue of the best interests of the child which is where a lot of our evidence happened to focus because of the position that we took and that was a father just simply ill equipped for whatever reason to handle a small child under all also taking a step of the next round here the trial itself there were some major major problems and i i know i've i've done this for years i know i've seen enough to know someone of us was after we tried to get through the case you know swiftly as we could because they're really was a mountain of evidence we unfortunately i think ran into the problem that it was four thirty and the day before christmas eve and we were trying to go fast  mr gibson was trying to go fast on course and i think the trial judge was trying to go even faster because he said he cut off the trial after we had put on our last witness he said i don't do any cross examination i one of the problems with that i think i want to talk about that first while i'm on the subject closing arguments are important in any case and i know that there seems to be a distinction between a fundamental right to have a closing argument there should always be a right a fundamental right to summarise all i think us as a matter of law that should be a rule i think it's important to note that when we talk about closing arguments saw the witnesses trial judge read everything you saw how everybody acted i agree with that legally but it seems to me that that's even more important why you should have to have a closing argument so you can summarize everything i put in reams of exhibits you josephine you would probably hit me or throw me in jail if i tried to publish these like in a jury trial where i had the client read either of the witnesses read and read we would have been there for two more days i don't know feeney could have known how i was trying to trying to tie all this together as i've tied together now in our reef without knowing really what i was actually caught driving at it seemed to us that he had to continue so i think we were definitely shortchanged in connection with the your closing argument issue and i think in addition where the  visitation the issue is this i don't really think that what's happened here is that's the way the arguments went and i think that's the way the argument appellee is at this point they include overnights after a few months and i don't think that they are that is what the law is i think the way this stash to set up you have to prove it's in the best interests of the child and it's not just be just a limited a couple of modified visitation from a couple of hours a week and pretty much through the door open to carte blanche and this court said that he was an abuse of discretion to have not had a more gradual modification  our father in our case did not have any real hours by the time we were in front of judge sr for the trial he had only never more than a couple hours in the home of the mother or the mother's bother talk or review to see where everybody else is i've never seen a case done other than like this when you go from restricted to somewhat unsupervised if you're doing a stair step the whole idea of the stair for him to prove there's no problems than to be a serious and dangerous task which i think my understanding is that might be what we have to be facing if that's what's came about where there was no review in the meantime so all we're asking on that part of it is since we have a right now i have overnight stayed we think there should be some or would be there should be some process to see what's been happening in the last few months and regardless i don't  any way to you know break here on earth eavesdrop on what's going on when the other has the trial so maybe some type of mechanism where the trial can be you know interviewed by some professional you know  appropriate so i have plenty more excited and the other questions in regards posts points at this point the back on the question of of whether the trial was was appropriate we had these are all in our brief but we have heaps of evidence as to what had happened thank you for that m s a merrill settlement agreement was signed was not the only relevance of this he had made admissions and i try to get across the country i hope i get across the sport you have to have a baseline if somebody has a little bit of a dream around home you may not have to take quite as much for a little bit of an anger problem but if you have to beat your problems with that i would believe that record should have a heightened level of scrutiny as to what's the sex so to speak say conduct case law says that you're supposed to consider it the hand disabuse of this crash or not to and i think the judge just short cut this by just saying going to consider it for one purpose where the major purposes were of substance again those are matters that are discussed and in my brief and when addition on the alcohol which was one of the issues that we said he had to prove that it was in the best interests at that restriction or that basis for restriction be report from one time in front of some of value where in essence you don't have a problem ok not the same words but that's the net effect of what was off the this document at the trial itself so that could not have been timely under under those rules so we think that there was a presidential error that made for an unfair trial because without it i don't think he would have had anything other you know come just come in and say i'm i'm ok i'm picturing i have to come up with something so this was a crucial part of the case but it was clearly hearsay and prejudicially so as well so that should be eliminate i wanted to look for county but it's all in three fifths and what i would ask the court to do just look i want the father's testimony was and the exhibits that standpoint page i have are i agree there's about seven or eight sites on that page to all things that happened even after the merrill settlement agreement where there were a mere man issues that's their wait on somebody passing with the document itself is talking about those particular rules that ties everything together is not some other exception or that it's not so you can tell that there's over forty years trial court experience on the bench  understand that there are different arguments for a there are explanations provided by courts or rulings sometimes very not always but that's why there's a record made of this one before we were first trial  record provided say nothing that's different then the absence or record say anything about respectfully disagree only because we did say hearsay it was obviously at space hearsay going to overnight issue the overnight issue is obviously an important one that it's brought up to bruce and it's also brought up an argument the court didn't automatically go to overnight the court looked at this if that's the case then we're looking at a situation where the proposition by the opponents is ok you proved that this that the restrictions that were previously put on there are no more need now you don't happen you have to go through and you have to prove that no further future restrictions are going to be needed based on your doubts of what issuance the court the go serve the court gave green months judge has a trial like we haven't heard all the evidence until it's blues and i guess some respects to hear all the evidence of all i think west deference has to be given and here  did not hear everything he specifically said that some of the things that were tendered he was math going to give any in my salary to whatsoever from our standpoint want which i've already mentioned exhibits five six and twelve which is the history and comes they've been divorced for years he comes in on the show a life size human target with all of the hole right where the her it's i don't know what in the world could possibly and a judge you have absolutely no weight to relevant evidence i don't think they can specially baton rouge other groups so i think that's the big part of this problem here is so much of what just feel like it's a wednesday so i'm not going to consider on provided evidence in favor of the party that provides it and this this or gibson just said they put their face on very fast when he m to do the things about alcohol their medicine are all things that we have never had the time to go through all please look at those those are vested interests factors and just because he lifted the alcohol in anger that the just me although in the paper cases over we still have the right to show best interests unit was our burden we found like it was but let's say it was our burden to show that the best interests of the child were not to modify these location and supervision restrictions it seemed to be the judge just didn't care about that at all to the point where he stabbed after he left us put on our case when he was done thinking we didn't have anything else he made it was my mind in that regard so i don't think this is a weight of the evidence case and again look at the pictures it doesn't take that this go and look you have photographs of a man who has an hour or two of visitation alling asleep while his he's taking care of his daughter in the living room of my client house no difference needs to be given there that's right in the record there's twenty dictionaries and there there's him on a cell phone or sim girl's life in washington d c monkeying around texting all this is in the in the record so