briefs i'm going to ask this court to reverse the circuit court in remain and this case to the commission for a determination of the nature and extent of mr remodels injury coun two points i think the circuit court has handed up to this panel an inconsistent decision on the one hand it finds that mr romano my client is a traveling a point employee and that he does means of travel is a motor vehicle then it goes on to find it is unforseen moment that he would be injured in a motor vehicle accident i don't think that you can write a coherent park i don't think i don't think people leave them i'm sorry i don't think they believed that he was in checking a parking lot with soap home records he first the city was going to go look at some type of a drug house or something like that and a supervisor obviously at school board meeting i don't know what time of yet so trying to communicate with him but to jump to another point i want to make and i think i think this is crucial justice he was he was engaged as as caruso said agent crude so said respondents exhibitor a pony's exhibit number one he was engaged in a mill was park police investigation he had gotten a tip from el rosa park suggested that i did reminyl is not a dual employee of the d e a and most park police department at that moment the moment he's injured while he's investigating the crack business ok doing the surveillance your claim is partner says they were done for the day so what prevents as a matter of fact that a lot of the commission from believing the partner that they were done and anything that happened after that and they come back in the scope of their point if there's a check or can't come in council i think what i'm trying to say he is the commission didn't believe he ever returned to the scope of his employment they found them to be the case he wasn't in the scope of his employment they didn't believe him when he said he went to check license plates just that simple i mean it's not hard to read between the lines they did everything would call him a liar anybody and now i don't know what more they are supposed to do credibility is their call if they testify i mean well first of all i mean the orators that a lawyer but simple concepts of agency should be understood by anyone who is a hearing officer how can you say t disability claim and i want to clarify that as we know it's within the province of the commission to judge the credibility of witnesses and to find the facts and i just want to reiterate some facts that were referenced when i was a consul mr whipple was up here a minute ago and that's that ls testified that he investigated the crack house in new of taking a lunch earlier that day so that he could earlier i'm sorry it's under just daughter's school me in lieu of taking a lunch earlier that day asians turn stead you know actually we never took a lunch earlier that day we just met with our i'm sorry agents turns out that they did take one really or that day and then met with a witness there was conflicting testimony between the two specifically they found him not credible with regard to the his day and did at five now there was no evidence in the record what took place there was no evidence presented to his knowledge about it what took place between five and seven there's no telling what it was doing there during that time but what they did find was that at seven o'clock as in pointed out he attended his daughter's school board meeting from seven to eight forty five using his vehicle for personal use which was in violation of his employer's regulations that's what the and then following leaving the meeting at eight forty five the court further found that his testimony regarding stopping by a cell phone store was not credible as far as commission was  deviation pretending the school board meeting some four hours after his shift and now i want to first look at the issue of traveling employee and i will address the issues wall of collateral stop but first with regard to the traveling employee the certain this issue was argued at every level this was argued before the arbitrator and it was affirmed by the circuit or by the commission and then went up before judge white who remained to do case because the commission did not specifically state in their argument that they did not find him with to be a traveling employee to category the title is an exception not the standard traveling employees or hers pacific people that are granted an exception that they are required to travel away from home i just want to emphasize again this is the exception but even if an employee falls into this very very narrow exception called the trail going to play this does not believe it from him in approving that any accident that occurs was within the course  far as counsel is searched and i have searched and apparently the circuit court has never found that a police officer is considered a travellin employee i will admit that by the definitions that we've seen it could be seen how he would be characterized by his right he's not merely a village employee i mean a police officer is not only supposed to be outside the village but it was contemplated under this assignment he would be all over the chicago land area it was contemplating be leaving the bill of boundaries what your honor i believe there may be decisions that go both ways one case may be i don't have a directly in front of me one stating that the pension board was acting as an ija nt of the city but i believe the case that's most instructive to us here and the case that was relied upon in the circuit court commission and by the arbitrator is rules i believe that's the most patient stating that the village and i'm  pension board stating that the pension funds the monies came from sources other than the city and this these are the same faxes and roads that are in here that you're saying fines are roads that are in the instant case that to maintain separate financial books that matter at that time and with their fear for the prejudiced to great extent based on these readings the decision roads are based on these reasons and the decision roads responded  how does a man get home he's in a undercover vehicle that is assigned to him by d j the b class to be rotated because his home department the party to this case the village of melrose park requires him to live within the village so he's on his way home he's the eyes and ears of the most part police police department on his way home i don't see how you can say on the one hand the demands of travelling employee but going home so he automatically is