witnesses is much diminished mr bailey says he's not able to work he said you know what he says that income score says that we agree with that he can't deny it and we believe that if he's unable to hold a job and calling the case and there was some evidence around that i honestly can't remember much from it because it was just that i was expecting the question to be honest with you but there had been filed that i don't believe it ever ceded to any kind of final sibling and prior trial had started providing services for the miner in issue but they had been in the home and bed and in fact miss shirley had testified that she'd been in the home and saw no problems she never called the c f s anything like that and she  kid that the child put the mother and is a pervert have a child with maternal grandmother's house i mean this is some serious types of things for somebody to be stated and doing so i don't think the child comes up short with both parents i think it's clear the child comes up short with bailey who i believe it is really clear his want to say anything and do anything whatever it takes to meet the day the needs of the day there's a man whom face all these complaints and none of those complain he was able to do that again it's a situation where one circuit a person comes in and says they're physically disabled basically it's a major conditional stop you can't say if you can take care of two year old i with no common sense we have many many gay care e for two year old or you're not capable of taking care of your kids well when you look out i mean well that got me but when you say you're not capable of physically taking care of yourself that you need somebody else to support you i think it's very  don't believe the judge stayed his or the facts i cannot say that he did and i believe that he certainly would have i believe judge he was a conscientious judge i'm not going to say otherwise i believe that his application of them however just misses the mark he misses it to the more credibility but at the same time my client has another child only child about four years old these children grow up together live together it's a significant family familiar relationship that is being impacted here disabled means you're not fit i totally disagree with that there was no evidence brought out why seeking a claim for social security disability disabled mr pandy from being a fit parent in fact the witnesses that testified on behalf of father sat when the parties for together when jennifer bandy i hope and they lived together with michael bay and these parents michael did the child care and that within or by default against mr pandy and contrary to what my colleagues brief says that motion to vacate the temporary order was never heard it was to be taken up with the trial of the case on the merits how we would take that motion we would reserve ruling on that motion and just try the case all at once because trial is coming after this amber and jane where the other print comics that i want to address is colling if you're a parent calling b c f as which i think julie bandy the paternal grandmother did over the abuse that she saw addison the older half sibling of charlie being empty she saw addison receive better mother's hands that's the record that was abstracted shabby at all it's a different case number but i see it's in our letter it's at appendix sixty five and there after you can see what the basis of on a sixty seven there was for seeking an order a statement a work in fact that was we went through all the factors in the evidence and that was the one factor that the father had evidence on the other was violent toward him throwing truckies throwing a cellphone at him threatening to have his face messed up and all this was in the presence of the child at the separation stage but my point is this just as you said how is calling authorities making someone a necessarily a whole class or it could just be a concerned parent and that's what judge de compton commented during the trial he said c f s is called doesn't mean someone is a nasty parent or unwilling to cooperate it just means they're being a good parent and concerned for their child so it could be taken that way too it doesn't necessarily mean that that proves a fait accompli that factor number eight has been proven just because my client called the police and authorities about an order of protection mr guilt or wants us to believe that that's an aha moment that it proves michael b indeed is not willing to cooperate and facilitate a close and continuing relationship between mother and child so i want to talk about those two premises i still think you can we can in this courtroom make a giant leap and just as judge today didn't make a giant leap from the disability all the factors and then as i laid out in my brief the cell phone the facebook the texting the propping up the bottle and playing with their family instead of holding them bonding to a baby child when you're feeding it and the fact that that she was not credible credibility is a big thing in the us and just because mr gill stuart and his client evidence that they presented which is kind of people in this case i would have to say  just because they didn't present anything that that disputed the disability and put on any evidence of how it affected michael bandies parenting doesn't mean he can sit back and say there's no credibility issue it was his duty and others duty to present those facts to the judge and now we can't use it against the judge today because those hunter burning facts were not assertive we can now say oh it's undisputed therefore it's not a credibility issue both parents stood up in court at the financing of mr bandies parents against the paternal grandmother who was seeking custody of both addison the three year old and charlie who was nineteen year old at that time and that guardianship proceeding was going on the parents prevailed on that there was no third option either after guardianship because the superior rights control or act this case there were no intervenors there was not and or yes and it's in the testimony we had a dialogue about and the judge said we could just talk about the events of the i'm founded report but that doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen on the transcript probably three page twenty four now i hurt myself i'm for page twenty four just a judge days as you can ask her about the and then the court advise him for page twenty four line twenty three says yes and we've covered that it was unfounded and the effort is i took it to mean that it doesn't mean that it was necessarily a fox report just because it's unfounded that's why we don't have met unfounded reports the c f s regional council will tell us that every day all day long we can't change or move to strike or i really it didn't matter to me because it was excluded by judge  still in high school he and his old home school teacher came and testified about her observations in fact all of father's witnesses had seen both mother and father taking care of charlie and all fathers witnesses to comment on oh qualities of parenting and parenting skills and care however mother's two witnesses had never met father never saw mr bandy in the presence of the children only saw them exclusively in the mother's care so it's comprehensible and probable that judge day didn't give us much weight to mothers evidence that such as you did to fathers evidence i don't have too much else to say other than  because you may be disabled from working and you can't sit in one place too long it doesn't mean you can't parent a child and both of these people mr bandy and this is the end have significant help from their famil s in child care and financially and either matters this argument about being disabled sounds more like a financial argument than a parenting or custodial argument to me the judge didn't make mom the custodial parent because she was not credible and this record showed that she was the better parent of the two the only competitors before a judge today were mother and father and between the record no reasonable person would have been able to if custody of this little boy that was testified to mother and it would have been against the manifest weight of all the evidence that was presented manual labor yes was no not with my injuries like manual labor basically so your father and i'm going to paraphrase there's no doubt you could think of anywhere that you could do and answer is no i'm not trying to get you know legally legal just that somebody is on this disability that legally doesn't mean they can't take care of kids but when somebody says they can't do manual labor by manual labor they can't do any work they can't do anything order for them to temporary visitation just to clarify at the end of your protection hearing the judge they directed the client my client and the child returned to her and counsel sat down together and did what counsel i would think wholly appropriate to do try to figure out some