start with issues three because i think that's the clearest and most obvious way to dispose of this case i am going to argue that the evidence was insufficient i know that's a highly brittle at this point i understand that we have to show that  reasonable doubt lingers that the evidence was so improbable and reasonable in their verdict should stand but if you look at the evidence if you look at mr harris and what mr mckinney said you did before the trial at the trial if it's almost a catch twenty two if they follow it mr fountain you believe he's traveling if they follow him mr harris then you have raise accountable he found it and they were trying to shoot him again now if you look at what happened immediately if you believe the  i believe the state concedes perhaps there was no accountability under aiding and abetting they read about common design and they said the fernandez case common design and for nan that is the case they say in fernandez the defendant and the co i disagree with there's no evidence he allowed hill to lower the window we don't even know that he was never going at mr hill and from being completely unbelievable testimony of mr harris who the trial ju testimony there is something that should come out ok tell me especially in a bench trial wait a minute this stash that you're testifying against in trying to put away you tried to you figured in this crime before and after previously you shot him twice trying to kill him maybe you have something you don't like about this dad let's figure out where it is and not just in there was no consideration of that how can that not be relevant to some degree mr fowler resonate with the put that out and if you look at the the judge did not allow the shooting he said i heard mr harris i think with the judge this is your next to tell me any more about mr harris i think the implication is he's a liar that's fine and yes in this case state that under the cases they say that is a big positive and credible witness comes for and makes a prior statement and makes as that's enough just for that to be to make the evidence sufficient that in this case probably graduation is everything because you have to throw harris and yet let physical evidence anything else that we can say founded this not just that it could really be mr harris was shot but is there anything else there that suggests mr fowler aside how come they're picked up because it didn't happen and then they're talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt because to hang out in the kenny you is your ass as it came in but that can't be enough that gets into cases like talked about thomas case in that case the prior disavowed statement was trial testimony the witness was henderson henderson went to his own trial and said i didn't do anything wrong but the defendant finder of fact had evaluated the testimony anderson and found it to be reliable and truthful and so i submit that was the key to that decision the second thing in that case was that it was clear the appellate court this court was afraid of the defendant now i understand in our case here there are terms of fear but here is his explanation did not make any sense paris is suggesting  think there's this overtone here that this was a drive by shooting but that doesn't mean fountain did it and then council's recitation of the facts i just didn't find the size of what the trial court said about the facts because then then said well i now want to go into this and tell the story of what happened and it makes no difference i submit that the timing of it was about on trial for murder and i see the guy testifying against me who shot at me twice i think