given before the immigration court so you can see there is no past persecution here so there's no presumption of a well founded fear right where you are to be read that he was not personally harmed the only hard heart in this excuse me the only harm to him would have been the emotional hardship from seeing his family members mistreated and that has not risen to the level of past persecution the for the circuit but we do so if we do concede that point yes it's for the evidence here goes to rebel revolutionary united front party members in freetown that criminal investigation obviously there were some supposedly criminal overtones for that investigation but during that  used as the basis for our claim that there was imputed political opinion furthermore the tell the documentary evidence is ample and showing that the sierra leone government has used similar techniques uses a very the morning of the court my name is arthur ray then i'm here for the attorney general just actual evidence in this record supports the board's findings that there was no mixed motive here the only reason the police came after the started to show in this case is because of the break in the possible murder of the killing of the police officer and then the arson outside the prison we know this from the record because it's in there and  this is so this is a key date that we have to remember no at no time did the police ever come after petitioner or his family prior to the april second event that is the attempt to break into the prison the killing and the r's well i guess his argument is that coming after his family was kind of a case of overkill that they weren't just investigating the break in but they were pursuing  its well a political purposes and with that you are it's hard for me to believe that because what the evidence shows is that the reason the tell me members were detained is because the police in conducting their investigation were searching they were looking for these criminals i mean if we assume that this break in was not done by our us members if they were done by anybody else there would still have been investigated there would still the police would still have come and look for him for them the administrative record he says my mom told me they came to the town my father was at his friend's house playing checkers when they when they hear that both soldiers came to town trying to arrest those who support our u s our u s members and the support well that's that's not your characterization of the testimony i didn't say the people who committed the arson and says are you have supporters well i would say that's a very broad statement but specifically when he did address to which are they went after on page five ninety five ninety one of the record the fact that only after this incident did they come after him it shows in light of this other statement where he says they came out they're only the guys who participated in the break and well except that then he again around the application where he's describing trumps the more expansive oral testimony i just well expansive i think it is i wouldn't call it that i mean he doesn't explain  he only adds i think some supplemental things it doesn't explain who they went after really shows that you start off with your premise saying there's no evidence in this record none that they were going after are you have supporters generally that they were just going to rest this person so he says no they were going he makes a general states are going after you have supporters and then he says they took away one guy who wasn't involved in breaking i think it's possible that during the day when we were actually you know the net was made broader but it shows application how it applies to him the police went after him because he participated in a criminal event a clearly criminal event well there's no evidence of that except for what he says right and he just  that i i'm just going from his earlier statements about what he said why the police came into the town as to what happened after they came into town he may have you know fights may have broken out and he took other people who were supporters because reason they went to the prison is because there have been a demonstration in town two of their members were taken they went there trying to free them and in his declaration he says they became upset that they could not get into the president and they started torching cars and you know this altercation with the police i don't question that that's the at least part of the known it has to be and to search for the people who did the damage to the prison the only question is is there enough evidence  based on simply that the other events took place after the police came in to town that may be one interpretation and the court may be of the mind but but to reverse the board's interpretation of the facts  court would have to find that that is compelled by the record and not merely that there is some some evidence or even substantial as for would also point to the fact that on a council pointed out to the documentary evidence in th case in the background country reports that support widespread violence between are you off members of government on page five seventy five of the record it states in the  profiles that the president of sierra leone has emphasized that the the there's a general amnesty for the so called little fish to use that term and that only the leaders of the are you off will be tr can and that little fish even if they have committed grevious crimes would be released with a warning and possibly just discharge from their job so there is documented evidence in the record that people such as petition r who may have committed something would not be because he's not a leader in fact he doesn't he's not even a member of the are you a few minutes that but you know here's the case and so i see my time is almost up i would just briefly touch on to process issue because obviously there was some motive regarding the incident in freetown to go to the town of mr mr brown and his family but once there it's apparent and it's apparent from this testimony an action needed tension and his brother those who were mistreatment of his brother his brother did not go into freetown so i think that obviously there was no we can see there was no interest before but one that interest was created from that point brother his detention that wasn't related just how long does it take for someone to state that they don't know the whereabouts of their father and their brother if his brother was felt for three days perhaps longer that was not just our detention or investigation future persecution because of how they treated his family members yes in part that is correct when i talk about detention i'm referring to the brother mr brown girls question i think you may have the same concerns and i did that the problem with your case it seems to me is that you've got it's a well founded fear case so what we have on the record that you think is your best evidence that if if your client were to