my name is real branson and i represent the frivolous some of the points that i raised perhaps four of them in my opinion require outright reversal without any reason and to the district court for the proceed nevertheless without objection by defense counsel the prosecution entered into evidence the entire grand jury testimony of the witness my client dr kuhn and before the grand jury a complete liar that everything you had to say thereafter there was no chance of go back to judge noonan's question in the absence of objection by his trial counsel and conceding that the testimony is relevant although you now say prejudicial what is the trial that's supposed to do i mean this is certainly information that the jury is otherwise entitle to hear with regard to what the defendant has to say about all of the the indictment for which he is facing trial i don't think that the jury was should have been able to hear the testimony about what the defendant had to say at that point it was the first witness who ever testified about anything that the defendant in that case good but how is this different from calling the f b i agent who says i interviewed him on four separate occasions at his home in my office and elsewhere and he never gave a consistent story when i l the truth so why isn't it permissible to introduce a very statement that the defendant has made on other occasions which indicate that he is not truthful in helping the jury decide whether or not he defendant is charged with perjury in this case only in connection with the quick question and answer to one question specifically stated what it was and you have to disregard any other statements that were given before the of the facts regarding all the other counts charged with conspiracy arranging a murder contract for hire traveling in interstate or foreign commerce to commit acts of racketeering friday on monday apparently someone in the crush sawfish discovered that there was a conflict between the grand jury they're very c on what the defendant was charged with in the indictment and so the judge called all parties back into court on monday morning and the prosecutor announced that there was a hyper graphic  found guilty no there was no there was no error in the language however it is my belief that a defendant is charged with counts and the language just describes what the count their verdict in the courtroom before they were discharged and asked whether or not this was ever yes they did that but my question is is that decision in this case in order education and i think the strongest evidence and proof of the ineffective assistance of counsel is the affidavit by declaration which defense lawyers filed and in order to try to show that it was good trial strategy was the judge clearly erroneous and changing the verdict form any answer is no that's based on rational common sense that this is what the jury had intended oversight that the court  he makes a lot of complaints about motions not being filed he is the only mention here today was that he found a group just that file counsel filed a affidavit in support of his complete briefing on all issues the defendant was given the opportunity to present evidence he could only present i would point out a declaration which really the only thing it addressed was his claim that he thought they were going to follow a motion to suppress and all the other claims i