his parents residence the mother called the mental health professional to have him taken to western state hospital which is in washington which is a hospital for the mentally ill the mental health situation escalated i would suggest after the police called both the mother and the father the divorce and had them exit the house which they were able to do without any problems at all at that time when kent the war was calming down to what i mean by that at the very moment and that's through all the testimony at the very moment he puts these knives down that were in his hands in the house that were apparently moments before a chapter whatever at the moment he pushed so the found walks away from the kitchen table is the very moment they try to get into the garage door and then of course everything falls apart can't the bore runs back to the kitchen table at the background in this case the situation here and is whether the actually leading up to that shooting should have taken place at all and i would say yes your honor is that based on the alexander case that came out of california nine hundred ninety four that this case is almost identical to that situation where a person in another mental of mentally ill individual is ultimately well that kate killed a while the cases get mixed up is that the case that involved entering a house without an arrest warrant that's correct and what is there any problem like that here there's no arrest warrant but there's no difficulty about entering the house because the parents had called for for assistance not from the they called for assistance and they were escorted out of the house and there's no indication that as the owners of the house they told the police they could not enter i mean it seems to me is a very different situation you don't have a question of unlawful entry here and i don't see any suggestion came out they didn't even seek to get any information from the divorced find out from them what the situation was the mental health professionals come there they didn't find out from them to get any background information about who can than she had called to the house for assistance to get him again to the institution all of those cases since alexander that distinguish it involve entirely different situations where a person has committed a crime either in the presence of the officer in that case the buildings in the case if i'm pronouncing that correctly from idaho or situations where they're coming there to investigate a crime and the officer in those situations is under the threat of attack him or herself immediately upon the firing of a shot and does nothing leading up to that to set the situation in motion  of course again they didn't have to do what they did and that's the whole essence of the claim and when judge brian focused on the moment of the shooting and granting qualified immunity and dismissing all the other claims as a result that finding him is the essence of it and that the moments leading up to the shooting yet to perry are actually that the moment of the shooting that was in self defense but he didn't say everything going up to that was  but it didn't seem i would say that but i don't think as much importance that we had when that happened leading up to that point the officer didn't seem to be too threatened because he stayed by the door and again after that point in time and this is all within about twenty or twenty five minutes that this takes place but after that point in time again he calms down he puts the knives down the knives at that point were never thrown at the officers i mean all these other situations including the u s supreme court case we talk about excessive force you're talking about when they when they up hold summary judgment you're talking about the two asians where either it is on to serve himself or herself or the public is being threatened either  some type of threat and fear he's in the house can't the ball or is in the house and the only person arguably he's a threat to is himself but none of the cases speak of using force in the context when you are a threat by himself or they had time of medication i can't remember the name of the midst of warner depositions that as she had finally convinced him before they got there to take a pill or a couple pills that she call for help and the first thing they see or they think they see is is can over his father you know threatening fashion and style that i have some difficulty comparing this to situations which you can say in the first instance if that if law enforcement hadn't used force nothing was going to happen in this case they faced the threat from the beginning and i think it's a little different to say that well maybe they could have inquired and found out about medication but there's no evidence they knew about medications so they wouldn't we're not dealing with a criminal they were dealing with a mentally disturbed person that knowledge that there was no threat to the police if they didn't rush into the house if they stayed away and let the situation  and the police were not in danger of being assaulted if they didn't enter the house well number one i will state two things iran are an answer to that number one this picture of the divorce situation he had personally observed behavior that showed in his mind and i believe in any reasonable person's mind that this gentleman was extremely dangerous to himself and also to the public were he to get out of that house doesn't the court i mean every training system for how you deal with mentally disturbed honor i will tell you what that circumstance here is and that is that when you have a situation like this you don't have the ability  to speak with the individuals who might possibly have now and i can i i guess i can only speak for the record where you have sergeant hutchings with visual contact with  and he is doing all of these things with not they have the obligation to take him into i guess we'll call it protective custody because the purpose was to get him to the hospital he's  facts it's an extremely exigent situation it needs to be resolved quickly now there's talk about if they had only known if they had only known and then the question becomes if hatchings position could hamper believed that that conduct was reasonable and you know i want to remind your honor that that number one of all of that had on the evidence and this is part of judge bryant's pain and that he is number one the mental health professionals that were there we're not going to come to the window and carry roberts is the one the only one that knew we can't their theory was well if they'd only allowed her to come and try to deescalate well in her deposition she's very clearly said that they are rules  that she was not to become involved at all with a violent person and that it was the police who were to do then furthermore furthermore with respect to this question of well you know if you don't do that what  do you do if you try to have the mental health professionals come and talk to him now they won't do that ok the next theory was just getting to the police as the mental health professionals is that  we now know that he can ask them they would not have come but they were not of told them what the best way to deal with such a person neither of them indicated the slightest knowledge your honor in terms of their knowledge in terms of dealing with a violent person during these units and these people of the state hospital part may have no knowledge of how to deal with a violent person your honor these people are not from the state the first you say that record shows that the county mental health experts have no knowledge how to deal with a violent person what i'm telling you your honor is that the person that the plaintiffs say should people well i don't know your honor i don't know but she had virtually no knowledge at all and the other day other gentleman from mental health there's no record that he had any knowledge in dealing with mental health people that i know who are mental health experts would normally be able to tell the police how you deal with those but you say they're also are you're asking me i'm not sure how i can answer that i can just i can just speak to the record and and it is completely devoid of any constructive knowledge on their part that's been identified that would have changed the situation in other words you're on or something like they would have said well if you had allowed us to we would have suggested that you do this or that that is something that years not in this record there's nothing that's been suggested by either mental health professional or anyone else that they would have done differently than what the officers did all of them sad because they weren't involved in the process this was an extremely dangerous violent person and it was for the police to get him secured on a gurney and them they would take over and their job was simply to make sure that he was transported to st peter hospital where he w then receive mental health and medical care thank you you breathe because they have to but you know there's nothing in the records just these people didn't have the knowledge and in fact may waltzes he would have liked to have the opportunity to speak you didn't have to be by the door that's what they were saying we weren't going to go by the door it could have been by phone or it could have been by any other mechanism and it's not just the mental health professionals over there that were the bores who have intimate knowledge of how the car down there and their kids and they've shoo them away as well this didn't have to just as it was an alexander when they reversed the district court is the claim is that in that case queen's fourth amendment rights were violated because the force of police abuse was unreasonable under all of the circumstances and that's exactly what the situation is here or loosely but break open the door to the moment they create the situation that they have to use deadly force in self defense judge find a district court  is you know just this increasing including the use of the taser i would just agree or out of the taser under this situation was reasonable because again they didn't need to go inside they were not he was not a threat to the public or to the officers did not commit a crime he wasn't resisting arrest because he wasn't being arrested and nor was he trying to flee and those are the circumstances you look at when you talk about qualified immunity and whether the officer's actions were reasonable