conclude that the the irresolute conduct was not justified meanwhile provides that a person may use a reasonable degree of non deadly force d in self defense and also that a person may use non deadly force to the extent they believe it is necessary to terminate a criminal trespass facts known to officer andresen in this case establish that mr kerik on them used really a reasonable degree of non deadly force to defend himself and  home is a supreme court as noted in th amendment cases context is very important and the undisputed context in this case was that mistaken in described herself as the more aggressive party that she assaulted m in a jealous rage that she refused to leave the home after being ordered to get out the judge he continued using force throughout the encounter and then she was fighting back not because she was trying to defend herself or assert any rights as a  tenant but because she wanted mr campbell in lieu to explain why he had text messaged with an ex girlfriend the district court erred by discounting this contex when it focused in on two facts drazen would have had to speculate that the so called neck grab was an unreasonable use of force in the context of the ultra cation and that's simply because he didn't know anything about it the only facts that  grayson knew were that mistaken and didn't have difficulty breathing and that it happened at some point during an escalating ongoing domestic incident in short he didn't know the when the why the what or the how of how the neck grab heard and it would have been speculative for him to assume that the neck grab was done in a way that was just proportional to the force being used by mistake in him or that he was red and had blace and had blood spots on it and so given so why would it be unreasonable for him to conclude that he that your client had choked her and that that level of force was unreasonable and even under the circumstances as you described i don't i don't believe that her neck and face area being read in blood she would itself be indicative that he choked her particularly when you although it could be here that in court all the time that this evidence of choking and the evidence of choking usually is written area of the neck well if there if there direct you but i would like to pursue the little bit from the actual facts here in asking a hypothetical and i hope you don't front the hypothetical take up your time and the only answer my question but it's hypothetical and then the district judge or is there some way that we can decide whether it's jump ball the court of appeals will make that determination i hope i hope i'm following the question right you honor may i mean if there is probable cause that might that my client's use of force was an reasonable then that would be the fatal across the board to his case but i think i'm posing the question in which there is probable cause to believe both of their ideas that she was the aggressor or your client was the aggressor and the choices made by the st the officer on the scene and then by the district judge that it's reasonable to have chosen one over the other is there any standard that we would apply to would be different from other than essentially recognizing the discretion that sexercise by people under those circumstances oh they have those in those will go back i'm sure to the raw facts but assume that they can point equally to either side what happens there and i as i understand it your argument is the been there should be ignored for review but if you're informed that your client can push how he could down the steps on to the garage floor where she heard her ribs to some extent could if that's correct could a reasonable officer conclude that notwithstanding the criminal trespass that was an unreasonable use of force to achieve her removal from the premises i ate i don't believe so your honor not in these caught not in these circumstances because we have an on going to best against them where they make their way from the bedroom to the entryway into the garage this hiking is refusing to leave the entire way she's pushing back she's assaulting mr karem on a low and when they reach the doorway he again tells her to get out she says no according to her statement she becomes even more frustrated and then she pushes on so at that point under maine law mr care model who is entitle to use any amount of any amount of non deadly force that he reasonably believed necessary to terminate her criminal trespass and so yes you're saying he could reasonably push it down the steps into the concrete floor of the i think that's what you have to say is that we need to find that no reasonable officer could think that pushing someone down the steps onto a concrete  then that is the argument yes under these under these specific circumstances of course if you take that kind of fact in different circumstances or in isolation and officers determination could be different if she was voluntarily leaving of course that would probably be an unreasonable use of force but not in these circumstances where we're viewing really with two thousand and twenty hindsight decisions that mr kara model is making in the midst of an ongoing trespas where he's being salted so you calling it if you're calling it an ongoing trust best but he entered with the garage she entered with the garage opener  that's right and we never taken the position that her entry itself was unlawful or burglary however she did become a trespasser when he took one mr care model who told her to get out of the residence and at that point because she was not leaving the residence and she was remaining she was a trespasser office let the officer do is that she entered with the garage opener and it according to her she stayed there on the weekends statement really established that she was an odd resident of ninety cornfield point when you look at the way she described her relationship to the residence she talked about going into mr care model his bedroom not our bedroom as one would if she were cohabitate ing with them she qualified that she entered without his knowledge which would be an unusual way of describing returning home d if you actually live there she called that cell checks house she didn't say anything to officer andreessen about having to return to the expected by my colleague will be discussing that but the fact that miss that is not that is does not contradict the information that ms hiking in provided particularly where she described having an on again off again relationship with monolith so all the registration says is that you may finish your answer all the registration says that some earlier point in time she had registered her motor vehicle to ninety kornfield point not that she actually lived there on and on june th or twenty team thank you for the questions ok thank you thank you mr smith at this time you can use your audio and not asking us to look at did once the next day we had contusions but other photographs i believe you're referring to are the ones taken by the plaintiffs and the only photographs material and probably her statement in context it's clear she's talking about a process where he's trying to force her out of the house and pushing the house she had no trouble breathing she it's seems to paint a assume he did it was a criminal trespass once he told early that she didn't leave and it was in the so it seems pretty clear she was engaged in a criminal assault didn't he have a right to use force to push her out of the house reluctant to admit that he could use reasonable amount of force to push or are we talking about a statute that allows a use of force force to nice sounds like pushing someone out of the house doesn't sound like throttling them that in  not that's not my question i don't think it is what force was used by the defendant under the circumstances he push it i'm asking you to consider that only pushing down the stairs is that sufficient apropos of the question the judge cry out i was asking which is that this is force different from structures as under the hypothetical this is force different from  officer to reasonably conclude that she had a legal entitlement to remain on the property without permission as opposed to she was a guest who was committed to frequently being on the property well you are  being pushed through the through the garage door down the steps once again i posed the question i think judge thompson touched on it in a in a question i don't think was fully answered of what was mr hair modeling to do with that point miss i can wasn't just refusing to leave at that point when they were at the garage door and he demanded that she lead she didn't just say no she assaulted him again and pushed him out of frustration and then regarding the number of steps i think it's also important at least it to be cognizant of the fact that she described it as being pushed down the steps into the garage which certainly doesn't imply that it was a flight of stairs or anything like that and it also means race and already made his duress arrest decision before even went to have probable cause that a crime has been committed and at this point by the time that is that officer andresen has made his way they finish or answer but the time he's made his way to the care model its arguments in this case attorney smith attorney park you should disconnect from the hearing at this time