wo fifth amendment issues in this case one issue is which opinion sieverts controls and whether miranda warnings mean anything when you first get a confession without giving warnings second say oh yeah you have these right and thursday now wanting to put what you just said in writing the other issue is whether you can get a defendant to talk by telling him quote we can do this the easy way or the hard way unquote and quote we have enough to and just to the first to make sense maria and the warnings given in the middle or in this case really near the very end of a continuous interrogation really are almost meaningless and the alternative combined with other factors lead to inductive argument and you know it sandwiched between those and confessions admissions and direct and this court cases frankly have distinguished between that and i was to meant the prosecutor saw that very distinctive when he made a closing argument in this case and how did he characterize the confession and how did he use the confession in this case in front of the jury if that is his last and best point he called it the heart of the  se he said that the confession is basically this whole case and he argues that because logically and if you look at the evidence that is true the confession was the most damning evidence in this case and it was very harmful and remember the test isn't whether it's harmful or close the test is whether they can show it harmless yonder reasonable doubt and i submit the government cannot do that when in closing him the united states i'd like to take up your question judge fisher first and then trying to judge by his question about the meaning of seeburg and where we find ourselves today with respect to your question or your honor a t harmless error a point i would make several points first of all the case involved a confession that was described as a full confession that is a confession that included details about how the fence was committed to the then that other person is the one who actually comes to pick up the finished passport so even apart from the confession when you just look at the evidence of the basic facts of this case what he did is that you listed height that was in between his height and the height of the individual who eventually i came to pick up the passport or tried to pick up the passport so even apart from the confession which the defense characterized as both the plurality decision and justice kennedy's concurring opinion so i would argue that if you look at what was driving both of the decisions it's clearly a concern with the to look read withholding  defense counsel indicated the courts have not lived outside the fourth amendment context and this is a first amendment case i have not rejected subjective casts chest that is that a focus  the around the warning followed by the confession there's no policy this is just the actions of this particular police officer that's all the evidence under that one passes  but your honor what cardless of whether there was a program magic purpose that i just as candy was trying to establish as being the linchpin of his test or whether he actually envisioned courts going into and trying to determine williams was told just tell them say what you've told us and quote that excerpt of record one ten they expressly incorporated the oral confession into what he should pay in the written confession i think that's about a direct continuity to get i addressed all the factors of justice souter's test at page twenty six of my opening brief on page four of my reply brief and i'll just refer the court's about third it whatever might have motivated i mean the motivation of miranda was to avoid involuntary confession and not have to do the paid by case analysis perhaps the motivation underlying justice souter's opinion was did avoid miranda idea this deliberate evasion idea but the way he did it was by creating an fact the tipping inquiries into the officers had also frankly was the effect on on the on the person hearing the right in the middle of a confession when he's already confessed and then they go right into asking and we'll say it again on a harmless error your honor you know application that's pretty powerful but sometimes when people see they look at the person when they're listing they look at the person speaking to them not seeing the whole you know three feet away from someone looking at them and with they held laughing you're looking at them and seven thinking held up you might not photograph that was in your peripheral vision you're not focusing on that that early these are the kinds of arguments that i made that could be made we had mr williams say he was going to london before this application was ever set that was very powerful consistent