there on a saturday morning they respond to a thirty year history of different basis he was taking longer with assignments he was on and it's reflected in the record that he wanted it to be a meaningful exercise it wasn't about trying to just get it finished and check boxes and program but rather he able to go into the community and receive treatment and through these phases after having been released from the detention facility and actually there was evidence presented to the judge we as to success stories for people have actually gone out on conditional release even though they have completed all the phases and have now returned to the detention facility and as you see from the record once a person is unconditional release violates any of the violations stadium they get returned to the detention librarian on any terms of his getting along with peers i'm here group therapy and so it was a positive experience for for him and he was engaging in every single session so that  evidence was before judge we may think that goes to some of the factors on especially the final factor which is whether or not a range of minutes could be made in arranged for the respondent to participate in meaningful two would apply i submit to the court that this was a jury case even though the jury determination and courage in march of two thousand and eight it reaching the same case name same case number thing judge same counsel and i in much like a wholesale i object to the entire trial or the trial entire proceeding and therefore whether or written motion is required by this court appellant fail to meet any of these requirements  preceding the talent the attorney general's office has many many times pounded on its head thirty different offenses but we're looking to the three that's what the statute requires because she just basic the level of what we normally are routinely seen as the p k says there was no penetration there was no physical injury and there was no there was no physical harm and so if we look  at for example other s p p cases i mean these cases are always going to include see very unsavory contacts did this statute anticipate stack and that's why when you get to the disposition phase you do look at the nature and circumstances of the behavior  the complaint i submit to you that whether we look at the three or we look at the thirty they're all pretty much in the same ground there was touching and fondling and under rules of a costume trying on or  could go either way but you know one of the one or both of the respondents experts said that that's significant because when you look to what he was doing now all the time he was unchecked by the catholic church he was not found out by the  he has no other mental disorders such as being a psychopath and his report notes show that he is again affected well by treatment is willing to do treatment respond well to it and is the kind of person who ha characteristics that would do well in the community for example he home he held a job at what he was said to rochelle as well as a detention center which is what he would have to do in the community he a clerical garb because she was really concerned and that was what you know that is what it is at all in this case in terms of what he did to offend and so i guess the short answer is while i do believe that judge green was it was not an error in considering the least restrictive option for mr evans ikey if it is there and seen by the court that it was harmless because she already considered those other factors as a part of her decision which is included in that part of the statute the last three factors i'm not going to get too far into it seems like the court is aware and is on point with there was bias there was testimony about where he would live as would as well as to him being supported by his sisters and  arrangements were available in the community and there was plenty of testimony as to that and lastly i just want to briefly touch on dr phoenix issue in terms of her credibility your honor student earlier that maybe it was just a mistake man on day being monitored by g p s with an ankle bracelet he cannot leave his home without telling his conditional release agent i can till this day which is over a year later he can only see individuals who've been previously approved by the department which is his two sisters his brother and maybe two older friends in their sixty's older as in the ninety nine child and she has absolutely no contact with children if he is even close to a school or a playground or anything that when children  it going to treatment right now with the group and individual but that she be further along in my answer to that is that she these are going participated in advance phases of the treatments so it's not as if he doesn't have the any idea what  prevention plan is and he's currently going through these phases now and treatments so the fact that he's in the community service being it's not like he's just free to roam around her and so the safety of the community obviously is a concern but it's been dealt with