for this particular crime submit that was what he needed to know am i going to damage this well he's in practice certain that i will damage this well my one piece of paper is in the poster and i submit you at this time he was you didn't put that in your brief the statement about your from when you said that the trial court denied the funding the opportunity to proceed pro se shortly after that the defendant mentioned your f i believe it's in the record i don't know where you know with three forty one right right an accurate statement of relevant facts isn't affected he had other counsel already retained relevant to whether or not he wanted to proceed pro even at sentencing but i certainly had he said ok and event you're not raising that issue at this point no you look at let me follow up on your question regarding the person i think you allege or you know conveying your brief that the defendant is trying to burn up of the fact that he knows but the place could burn down i mean even assuming he's not trying to intentionally burn the house down ok he's just trying to cover up that there his presence there by burning the papers  on the bourne supremacy tape and you know so it's not just that he put the papers in the toaster correct yours all the evidence that that indicated that he may have or that he knew what i really thought this was going to happen he never said that he says with regard to stoke i didn't i don't know what was going on i turned him off he also says when i left i didn't think that place was going to blow up he also says i w he suggests that we've been crazy i still had to go out and get my x box we knew that he was leaving leaving the residence he was packing things up but at that time just went down with the toaster intention and he said no no i live those papers and fire him i think if you watch the interrogation they didn't know anything about this one i think detective start taking notes or maybe even call  destruction of evidence do you have any authority for the proposition that a police officer statement to a defendant a statement of opinion even a false could possibly be considered destruction of so you know in arizona versus youngblood the united states supreme court said that the requirement of showing bad faith on the part of the police limits the extents accent of the police police's obligation to preserve evidence to reasonable balance in confines it to the clase of cases where the interests of justice most clearly require it that is those cases in which the police themselves by their conduct indicate that the defendant could that the that the there is bad faith that the police knew the potential for the exonerating evidence not it's like you know we placing or losing a spent showcasing or a bullet from a body that could have exonerated a host of examples where the police you can show that the potential is there that there is a potential exonerating on a circumstance and in here what did the police kno identified because never unlike other situations where the evidence does exist and it's destroyed or didn't exist at some point in time we have no idea whether the sevens heated up or existed correct correct even the defendant doesn't  right right and here your client had a clear memory exhibited not just on the tapes but also in his statement to help you ssion he related again what took place by the defendant by a hundred francs one hundred fifty pounds yet he was able to overcome the victim's efforts through his wrestling experience right now i i have not reviewed them i took actions after that anyone to stay challenging if there was some sexual there was not some sexual component to this that's not a clear doesn't i'm not sure the state i think the state's position is we don't need to though there was clear evidence that the the defense the same multiple injuries greg defended the defense bite marks on his back and bruising on the shoulder yes he had injuries to his face his i get a huge not necessarily huge that typically types of stoves are impervious to most incidental claims haws by either the gas claims coming from the burner or pro he wanted to do something beyond he's twenty eight years and he's out of his mind although he can say i put her papers in the garage nothing else happened the movie had nothing to do with the state did they open that closing