the the evidence is not just the testimony of the the testimony of the petitioner there's also documentary evidence there's evidence of country reports so what i'd like to point out there is that we have it in the record that actually supports my client's claim is that there's a country a port showing numerous police killings and only one police officer ever prosecuted for an unlawful killing which clearly shows the parents and the reality of impunity with police officers in jamaica killing and killing supposed suspects the only that there is political  ok and that's one of the things the that's one of the things the you know the immigration judge nor the the board of immigration appeals even even looked at they didn't even consider it at all in fact the board's the board's decision merely  just basically says that the judge's decision was right and what's the problem with the judge's decision it doesn't make any polygamy doesn't make any analysis a legal analysis of the withholding claim or that were the can't claim it just it just kind of and you know there's no and that's it and that's basically what it says but he didn't say that he didn't believe the petitioner and and fact so the presumption there's a presumption of credibility but there's also some other evidence and the in the record that that's what i think is you know is very telling particularly that his cousin sheldon williams was killed by the police there's there's an article about that that's in the record and we have the death certificate as well in fact the first time this happened to him was when he was nine years old and he was kidnapped and put in the car and set on fire and that to me is clearly past persecution he was nine years old and couldn't obviously  know give the you know good the same account of as an adult but he did say that it was because of his father and they said that his father had to die and because a where is the evidence in the record that there is a nexus between the past harm and potential future harm  the harm and what they said to him when he was attacked well when he was attacked and when he was nine this it was because of his because his father his father need to stop spittle activities and he needed to die and what was his father's political activities other than being fun sittin mr with the head of the you know we he was unable to articulate that you know that specifically but he said he was a supporter and always had been a supporter and even in even the articles that were submitted showed that the area that it was from was it was the it was the former area that that the you know the prime minister's path i mean for farmers was passed but that was his that was his that was his political area i mean i mean that was his his areas as a member of parliament and more divided by the by the neighborhoods and wherever that where they lived but he was unable to specifically you know say that he campaigned for me said he knew him he said he always supported him that that was his  you know that's the only this is the father thing the record and say honey are you referring to position or are the father the father but everything that happened to the son was always big because of the father so even if it's not political it's because of his membership and you know in his father's not it's primarily i mean it's primarily put political activity but also because of his family and we and we mention several times because of his relationship to his father which is which is it's really it's really but but isn't there substantial evidence in the record that there was a turf war and the father was head of this libel of this important game there's nothing to say the father was head of the gang or just a mention that he was supposedly and i gang back in the one nine hundred sixty s i mean that's you know over this bob i mean that's what that is but he but it put it on but you know he always said that his father supported the p n p and then there's also evidence in the record that the that everybody from that in the neighborhood tell of eve i believe is that where he said he was from is also supported mainly that and then there was that there was political infighting amongst the groups and there's another you know one of the other the other articles talked about the tribalism and infighting between the groups that was  though they supported the same party i have a question about a period of time that was not mentioned in the police and that is between i think of possibly two thousand and two or two thousand and three this is when the petitioner was living with an individual named mark wright and he said he was shot at so he left that individual's house and then there was nothing there was no other alleged incidents until he was shot out in two thousand and six so what happened during that four pure period of time he was hiding and on the street and you know trying to stay out you know trying to survive i assume but it seems like the absence of any incidents during the four or five year period of time supports the immigration judge and  finding that there was no well there was no violence perpetrated against him because of his political connection what he was able to look at and that's a very good good point your honor that he was able to leave  he was able to leave but he said he left because he was afraid for his life after he left his cousin was killed and i think that's you know that's the thing and you know the thing is if he was persecuted in the past the you please the court juanita maj on behalf of the united states runners if there's only one thing that you take away from our discussion this morning it should be that agency's job is to make sense of it all and substantial evidence supports the agenc making sense of petitioners generally credible but otherwise confusing and unpersuasive testimony by finding that any past and likely future persecution was and would be based on ongoing gang violence in kingston jamaica and not based on as he claims his father's political affiliation or any other statutorily protection ground and i will pause here briefly just to note that to the extent petitioner today raises for the first time a claim based on particular social group as i think you're on your own as acknowledge in your questioning that claim is at least waived and as much as it's not addressing his but in opening brief and i believe it would not have been exhausted as it was not raised below so returning make any sense of petitioners claim in light of a shift in his testimony from fearing only the jail p two also fearing the p n p who apparently shot petitioners father which would have meant they shot a member of their own party the key to making sense of it all for the agency here it was petitioners on exhibit seven from which the i j and the board reasonably deduced that this is actually about the unfortunate circumstance the petitioner was raised by a gang member in an impoverished gangland environment of indiscriminate violence to paraphrase from pitch pages fifty one fifty three of the record and indeed on page fifty two the immigration judge elaborated that this this deduction was based on a record which was devoid of documentation of petitioners father's political activity and the only article supporting his father's existence the immigration judge noted establishes rather than that he was politically active that he was a member of a gang and he had an alias to the effect of dixie boy that's on page two hundred eighty two of the administrative record and furthermore that his father was part of a violent vicious and indiscriminate among central kingston neighborhoods which i'll note for the court as exhibits other parts of exhibit seven reflect this these gang wars are mainly in fact gang related and not about politics as most of the actually the entire central killing either indiscriminately or because of some political motivation his family that is rebutted by the record evidence that shows just a walk through those instances there was the shooting of fish in his older brother clive williams  he claimed that he was shot by police but he even clarified himself that he was shot by police because they thought he was a thief also there was the killing of his half brother winston kelly which he acknowledged himself as well was in the context of the police searching for someone else and was a fortunate circumstance of his cup his half brother being in the wrong place at the wrong time when in fact the police were chasing another individual and then you have the cousin of the shooting of his cousin sheldon williams who was killed by police he says petitioner says because of political views but if you look at the record in particular petitioners own exhibit seven record page two seventy nine we have an article here clarifying th petitioners cousin was with a group of people who had opened fire on the police and then the police returned fire so that was the context of that shooting and you know also note your honor that you know to the contrary of any suggestion petitioner makes that the police or the government in jamaica is acquiescing in or participating in torture as a relates to this as it relates to his claim especially the gang violence and the p n p political opinion the record indicates to the contrary it not only indicates that the fighting is not politically based but rather gang based but also on page twenty five of the record it notes that in a two thousand and thirteen article which is rather recent that the police are actually increasing their efforts to curtail bloodshed and as runners know well this court has announced in many opinions not least of which would be garcia million which we cited in our brief that the government does not act we asked merely because it is aware of torture but in a fact of in we're powerless to stop him and certainly that's what we have here w evidence indicating that the police if anything is ramping up its efforts to try to cool his position to have been before the board and the i j a that he is torture claim is based upon his political opinion as well as his withholding claim i understand them certainly to overlap although you know he doesn't need to show some kind of doesn't need to show that right he just needs to show that there's a likelihood that he would be tortured by or with the of government forces in jamaica and to the extent that he attempts to satisfy that burden the immigration judge reasonably deduce that actually what that's not the case in light of the record evidence that i just perhaps a reference here i don't recall who allegedly shot him in two thousand and six but i do know that he testified to that effect on i think it's broken page one ninety one he doesn't get any place that's correct your honor and as the immigration judge i can reasonably deduced everything happening here is based on the unfortunate circumstance of the ongoing violence gang based violence in kingston jamaica have no further questions the government digital do have any other questions no questions here thank you thank you for hours in the case of the government for those reasons and for the reasons stated in its brief request that the court deny the petition thank you version the eyewitnesses i'm looking at the article the eye witnesses at the scene that said that that's that's not not true that he ran away from the police and the police william saw the police patrol and ran he was chased and shot they said he would say that he ran because he had a bag of cocaine or something but he just ran and he turned around so i think that's not there's a lot of dispute in even the u s the country report says that that every time there's a police shooting the police thirteen report said over two hundred people were killed by the police during that year of jamaica's a small country i think is three million people that's a lot of people killed by the police and no one was ever prosecuted for it and his kind of his cousin was shot