helped us with our work before and we're very grateful that he continues to be willing to to do so and to to visit with us probably it probably sat in a number of cities now within our to get straight to the heart of your argument we're probably going to have some questions for you and you should pay attention to the traffic light system and don't treat the red light as aspirational when shines it's time to wrap up your argument if you're answering a question from the court of course she can finish your answer but don't be respectful of the court's time so we will begin this  contradiction doctrine which i would expect the court is probably more interested in hearing about that's the one i'm most interested in hearing about it does seem like the amendment to the federal rule has made it clear that impeachment by contradiction is permitted but it would nevertheless be and so perhaps the district court would have been mitt would have misunderstood that legal point yes but that kind of impeachment would nevertheless be subject to the strictures of r three and it may be too that this is a case where the evidence was so overwhelming that any legal error was harmless so at least those of the questions i have in my mind i can't speak for the others ye i do agree with the court that it appeared from reviewing the record course there was another trial attorney mr gainer who did a good job and does good it appeared from the court's ruling that  i don't know that she grasped his position on the specific contradiction doctrine it's not one that writing lipase of at least not my number of years of practice but either way said thanks but for the amendment to the rule that would shows the defendants at the gas station your client's fingerprint was found on a shotgun shell found near the scene of a robbery and a glove and a glove with his initials was discovered at the crime scene i mean it seems to me that when you take all that evidence about the crime itself and the point to touch about box racing about having been able to shed that he's a liar that that really does appear to be a harmless  conspiracy mr carson i did not do the trial mr carson had two attorneys prior to the trial one of the attorneys is now a sitting state court judge judge  that was really rare for say that the issues that mr carleton wanted us to present as i did try to explain to mr carter carton the constitutional issue was totally against him when it comes to the senate scene and there's nothing that i can do that's my issue for there is nothing i can do about that he insisted that he was there they did not prove that and therefore he he feels like he needed and i did present all of his issues to this court ok did the defense attorneys on cross examination did prove that he had a reason to lie in this case based on the fact that he had several of the charges six of the charges dropped against him and instead of facing the  that's really some instances is going to just be somebody testimony against somebody else's testimony about whether that was a lie what he said was a lie unless you have a finding by a judge that there are sort of perjury going on i thi have specific instances where the witness earlier lied and it was directly material to the case that that would be a specific incidents that would be and that would be that would  never be involved in all that they have in specific incidences where he was involved in the drug dealing or literally or point or something of that nature yeah but it could also be that what is earlier misconduct was that about which was something think even in the breeze for this court they haven't presented any argument about why this lying in these other proceedings would have biased mr martin against these two defendants and so i think that  what was at what point mr lewis learned about his sister's representation and even though she had already removed herself from the case by the time he got on it we don't know what was said when he found out about it or any of those  well we just don't know what he did and what he didn't do we don't know whether he felt he had enough time here and he's or and those things i do think that it's that it would be more appropriate twenty to fifty five all right thank you for a convictions sentences thank thank you thank you mr ma this this account that account is not the same thing as an express finding of perjury or lying under oath right yes i completely agree with that i do think it carries a lot more weight  all but i do want to know for the record that you were both court appointed it we appreciate your willingness to accept the appointment and call your service to the court thank you very much