and also the benefit of the aisle is a fully participating member of this panel on this case but he just is unable at this time to be part of zero meeting ok very good  a lot of things have changed since defacto life sentences imposed on randy royer in the year two thousand we've had new scientific information about do the development as you call billable and we've of life without parole or its equivalent it is only to be imposed upon the rarest of juvenile offenders that is permanently and courts of all essentially the worst of the worst juvenile offenders now that's a requirement of course that applies retroactively so the judge to impose a sentence in two thousand and ready or was not aware of that requirement if the judge was aware of that requirement plus the additional requirements sound sam found he was genuinely remorseful for what he did moreover he actually drove the victim to the hospital and these these two things alone under today with thinking would be enough to show that this is not someone who was permanently incorrigible who's the worst of the worst juvenile offender he's someone who just just by those things very morse and what he did driving there to the that finding a course that the judge should know about there's also a requirement now that a new mitigating factors be considered now at the time those are not part of illinois statutes that those factors be considered so for example it was created by the in miller vs alabama certain mitigating factors of youth youth and its attendant certain circumstances had to be considered before someone could a home environment and that sort of thing a juvenile having a troubled home and vironment was something that wasn't specifically listed of course among the factors and mitigation and there's case law from the on our supreme court that said that if it suggests future dangerousness it was something that could be considered in aggravation mitigation or it's something a judge a judge could have just not really considered look through the documents and the people presents investigation report to i think that makes much of a difference at all because again i look at the worst the worst kind of situation the analysis would be different so  buyouts anger or something like that being well known in the home it's unclear exactly what the judges are far into there but the judge said that and right after the judge the judge said and further factors and aggravation are cetera et cetera so it appeared the judge was considering it in aggravation and that could that that could have been a difference here because that was a really important factor and ready situation is he was born unfortunately to and you're saying it's a reasonable inference that he was considering well as aggravating factors under your prior sentencing procedures correct yes ok and you're saying that in the change under miller well to the core well i'd say it's new to the science when we're talking in terms of brain development which is clearly new information yes and either way the  there's no indication that he was incompetent in any way he cooperated with his attorney as he discussed with the police before during and after what occurred therefore that evidence was presented he went straight over the sleeping building and bashed his head in at least three to four to five times this was found in the liquid this court in the original decision to the offense was clearly brutal and the mill in fact years clearly were not set for us at the time because this was in two thousand yet holeman speaks to the fact that did the habit judge have the opportunity to consider all those factors and looking at the evidence and if we put this case in the factors that were set forth in the only decision into this case it's the same type of information that was available and retro after and the requirement is that the trial court actively consider and make findings with regard to the miller factors so doesn't that suggest that there should be a new case court did not find that in the sentencing hearing had to be take place therefore applying polling to this case should be the same result the trial judge had had considered in the arguments by the by the parties that they knew that this would potentially be the sentence that would be for the rest of us late the state recognize that page you know three of the record the d that's a fact that he was a young man does not mitigate my estimation sufficiently to prevent me from sensing him severely you happens here shows the violence of anger by lynch and anger was well known and used in the same incident question was done in the court's opinion in a cold calculated manner that was picked up picked up a bat and went looking for someone it's that point that the trial judge says sectors further an accusation are they attacked a man that was sound asleep with no so does suffer have any bearing on this today buffer only has a bearing that in that defacto life sentence of forty years is the point of demarcation that the the  line drawn so this defendant has six years of clearly gets back to a life sentence as far as buffer and the argument that it somehow has overruled old men because that said that the court did not consider us at the  time well if you look at what two trials judge said at the time this is a paragraph five buffer it only refer to use in the context of the limits to the limit limited extent the financial impact of incarceration given his age and his lack of children and dependents therefore there was no real discussion and there's no indication you know about her as far as what the arguments were of the party is what other reversed also i point out that in buffer the minimum sentence available to the trial was forty five years which was above the beat the just that there were a life sentence there's a twenty year minimum plus a twenty five year mandatory add on because the everything that needed to be considered back at the time that the buffer sent was imposed and that could be similar in this particular case but that's not enough anymore and that's why there was a problem with the court clearly said that the impulsivity in this case and so buffer seems to be in tension with home and it's a more recent case it seems to be indicating that generally it's not going to be possible in most situations for a judge or comply this in the past unless you've got record that clearly shows that they can consider each of these factors as mitigating factors and not aggravating factors but another thing about homan is it's very distinct from  case i mean the idea there's going to be a license in that case was pretty much a foregone conclusion because that defendant had confessed to murdering eight people he's convicted of two other murders in addition to the murder that he got a life sentence for and that particular appeal it's not even close to the factual circumstances of this particular case and you know the state is trying to talk about to certain extent being a brutal and has offense and that sort of thing but the supreme court is specifically set that even for even juveniles who commit him and his crimes are almost always the vast majority of them can be rehabilitated in time and if adolescence is not appropriate for the vast majority of them doesn't doesn't fly and additionally the states are talking about his mysterious past history well there are several things with that i mean st of all he never got to the juvenile department department of juvenile justice you never see the sense of that these two parents are the best one of them wasn't reported to the police the guy was parting with with randy after that the other one was a situation where  he was convicted used to start a battery now time to murder not aggravated battery battery ok so his history isn't quite what the state is making out to be and it stayed out also even though obviously writers are familiar with the facts of extensively covered some of the facts of this case i think maybe there's a different angle to look at them potentially through the dunes of miller it could certainly be seen differently by a judge and the sentencing hearing  you know the record shows that the drug addicted parents and step parents treat him with a combination of physical abuse and neglect there's just there's a letter in the p s i don't says we are never had a chance at life from the day he was born his life was a living hell  recognize was hugely important so he developed mental health issues in this chaotic environment that he's living in he became he developed some issues impulsivity every look at the night of the offense or what happened while like the other people there's no it's a terrible act that he does but it's a sort of thing that maybe a hothead seventeen year old men would do at fifty seven year old ready or would not do which is to go attack his friend out of jealousy because friends with his ex girlfriend now if your arse could just give him a chance here you know i think it's a state it's the state's burden to show that he's permanently in court ball but he would be eager to have a chance to show that he has chance here