bit officer bernard testified that at the scene you heard from officer phillips the victim in the accident was receiving medical attention so as far as direct evidence of a victim that that's all that's a ll there was but again with the totality of the circumstances looking at the crowd of a car parked in the middle of the street at four thirty in the morning and the crowd saying best then that's then it was reasonable for the doesn't that mean that somebody immediately the time causing the accident what has fled the scene isn't what she said inconsistent with the information in the dispatch  wasn't distinguishing them we don't difference between a hit and run just a personal accident maybe she said the common phrase hit and run as she's testifying and there's also in philip's testimony she doesn't mention the victim there was an actual danger when the police officers showed up but there was a reasonable belief of actual danger in the hallway i think the defendant there was a report of the fin was firing ongoing gun shots at is at this place an on so that better with it being so close to the to the accident scene it was reasonable for the officers to believe four thirty in the morning somebody wanting to avoid the police run to a nearby house bang bang on the door when somebody opens to see what's going on daryn walk the door and at that area and there's also subjective testimonies their subjective state of mind is that they didn't believe it was his own house  and the people were in danger i think the subjective state of mind should be taken into the totality of the circumstances here especially when the police officers state of mind is a reasonable belief as it was here according  only at the totality of circumstances like i said four thirty in the morning been running from an accident scene banging on the door highly unusual for their own house so he also  reason to believe the defender was armed well this is equally reasonable to believe that if he was fleeing he would have continued to run then he stopped at this house because it was his house he knew somebody would let him in and that's why he was knocking on the door if he had no connection at all to this house you would have continued running why did you stop there was a man far from the scene so isn't it equally reasonable to commands to stop feeling the scene of an accident there are asleep in their primary concern is avoiding the police and i think it would be better safe than sorry for the police to to enter the house especially to their own testimony they were in danger they were feared for the safety of the people inside the house and they didn't think that it was defended charles i think that's what it boils down to i where the officers knew that there was no danger of people in the house here not only do we have a defendant running we have to figure presumably running into a random house at four thirty in the morning is it your position and were just starting to leave from there you know also expect the officer to notice an injured person my brother if that's what the dispatch does but the dispatch sets but she doesn't testify that she did on some credible information basement after she got this radio call from the other officer up that quickly or maybe they didn't think the police were going to show up at all or to return back to the scene the see what happened since the show they leave i think that's a reasonable inference for the police to make ensnare any information establishing the reliability