are her findings based on her own assumptions about how the guatemalan army works and how guerillas in guatemala operate the big problem with the adverse credibility finding is that it tainted all of the other interesting individual because based on one of the statutory grounds then that is a basis for asylum the problem is that the immigration judge disregarded most make an individualized analysis of how the change conditions of that said mr garcia paris in his situation now she got she found most of his his testimony not credible so it's very hard to say that she actually was able to make an individualized analysis of his situation regarding the gorilla in addition to that she ignored some of his testimony that affected this or she did not mention his and in her he qualifies as an expert to speak to that the vendor guatamala i mean i understand he can say that but to tell us because you should set aside or we should set aside the obvious credibility duration that doesn't mean that they can say that nature have to be accepted a changed but again regarding the presumption of the future of well founded fear of future persecution the issue is that the immigration judge could not possibly have made an individualized analysis of how his situation was affected by the griller because she did not properly analyze his testimony has been here since five hundred ninety three correct correct form but over twenty years and his testimony opening brief and it the ground forces begin to express an interest mr garcia because he was young on the grill i wanted to join your organization before you joined the military after that it was on to his military experience and how useful he would be to them as a member of their military his  conclude that this was based on a political opinion well that's that's an argument but just the fact that his father was a member of this one organisation it's kind of a big leap to say that there's no other reason they could possibly have pursued him except for the fact that his father was a member of that organisation they pursued any other member of his family based on that ground well that they did receive two uncles and you told us they did that because the uncle wouldn't tell them and the out wouldn't tell them where he was because they wanted him to be in their military not only for that reason that was one of the reasons i mean the issue is that none of the reasons none of the evidence and the information that he did that could be a reason for being persecuted for political opinion was properly considered by the they were interested in him just me and angus houston years old them going to the military fifteen this is two years before he's thirteen years old they're killing his own focus they won't tell him where a thirteen year old us well they're also killing his uncle because for some reason when the germans pushed your car and try to explain why they were killing his family instead of saying that i mean he obviously doesn't know the answer to that but the kept trying to push him to give an explanation and the explanation he gave is not a very good one and probably not the correct one but he said instead of saying they were killing the members of my family because we belong to a political group and had political views you probably could have won a case instead the judge was trying to get him to say there was a connection to him so he said irrationally they were killing killing my family when i was fourteen because they wanted to get me into the military well the problem is the explanation and i suppose it's only speculation on his part but it's not one that would support a claim for political opinion that apparently must have been one that he thought the immigration judge wanted to hear but he did have evidence on the record that could support a claim that he was persecuted leas guerrilla and he was part of that family i mean the problem is we don't know the motives but the that immigration judges analysis does not include all of the evidence that he brought in and therefore her findings that he was please hart my name is jennifer parker on the office of immigration litigation and i represent the attorney general in this matter i'd like to start with the the last part of the discussion with opposing counsel of the court is cracked up to choose explanations just simply were not states that they killed the members of his family because they wouldn't give information and because they wouldn't give support to the girl i'd speculate from his yes your honor but elias sacrifice does make clear that because motive is such an important i mean it's the statute makes motive extremely important it's one of was taken not because of any action in the civil defense but because he was the oldest person there when they came to look for petitioner and it's always the grill is are coming to their houses to look for petitioner whether he's thirteen fifteen or whether he's done with the military he states that every time the guerrillas came in and there were witnesses his cousins were there that said that the grills were looking for petitioner because they wanted to recruit him not because of his family's he's never testified to anything that his family has been the immigration judge doesn't have anything to go on i mean this court has actually gotten on immigration judges for making secular decisions of their own so the immigration judge is basing his decision on what petitioner has a problem which is what this court requires the immigration judges to do if if the immigration judge were to speculate girlish showed up at his uncles and aunts homes was to recruit him specifically him and there was repeated testimony as to whether the girls were looking for petitioner it was always petition or stating and perhaps he's trying to hellish but the problem is this is what he told the immigration judge that he is so important because of his usability climb trees and because of his specialized military training he's so important that the girls are focusing on his family to get information about him not to persecute his family not because of their own political opinions or any opinions imputed to them but because the tradition was so highly valued because apparently the grilles he'd make a great girl a soldier so the immigration judge did exactly what this court requires him to do if she did not speculate on other reasons the girls could have had for possibly going to his family she she based on testimony and evidence presented particularly the evidence that the girl is sent him a letter stating that they wanted him because of his military stating persecuted him that they had disbanded there's no evidence that they've ever gotten back together petitioners presented no evidence that that that is occurring or will occur she also talked about evidence that he was able to reside in the capital city for a month that his famil able to remain in guatemala without harm and that his at that time five year and now ten year absence undercuts any inclination gorillas would still have any interest in him so absent any further questions i'll s contacts with the guerrilla that he went to great lengths to avoid joining the army he had he left the country he fought against them all of these all of the evidence is in the record but the immigration judges adverse credibility determination which is wrong does not allow her to consider all of this evidence even though she later mentions she makes an alternate decision she does not in that everything was correct and the evidence and she does not use that evidence in may in reading her decision regarding the statutory grounds nor does