and he started the him after the shootings over while you're on i'd suggest again that that is the question is does that distinguish it from a situation in which he's going to confront mr evans but does not intend to shooting if he if he there was a shooting at his parents house that morning that he was angry about it as he drove to the scene at the start that he drove up there whether shooting and he drove away that's all they then stopping the car and getting the shooters out as soon as you're away from the scene we suggest that there really if i only stopped a few minutes later only a walk away there is strong evidence that they stopped  something just getting them out of the car at that point is evidence busy that they were not coordinating with the people they got them out as soon as they could and they went a different direction from the shooters i'm not sure you heard an answer to the question but his i understand the question isn't the fact that there were two shooters doesn't that make it less probable that your client was unaware of what the shooters were about reasonable application of supreme court going to the facts that's right ok but in this particular case i would certainly argue that under the hideous review which restitution to the evidence claim has it we certainly have the motivation from what happened earlier in the day that because it was targeted the family was put out for a long period of time by the search warrant and then later in the day the petitioner and his co not as good a friend of his i believe was a cousin or a nephew had gone looking earlier for mr evans but exactly when the shooting to explain and this is where the yesterday she talks about it's use of state law but inferences are certainly a lot of how mr gove was motivated by the anger that he was there was another is that he was the driver of the car and then it comes down to he sped down the street he intentionally underbrush police stopped right in front of the group of men that they thought contain was because his car was right there and they knew that he lived there he had probably stopped the windows rolled down he didn't drive off he stayed there while the shooting took place he waited for the shooting to stop then they drove  it retrospect and say this is the evidence or maybe this is what the evidence where it occurred in this particular case there wasn't any evidence to support that theory and the evidence that came from the victims of the shooting suggest the time that he drove to the place they were both of them at least two of them are in the car and the car stopped in the windows rolled down and you say that's sufficient for shared well there could be better i mean there certainly are cases where there's more but i think it's enough in this case when you look at all of the other evidence together and i think when you look  at the reaction afterwards the reaction for hand and when you have that one little piece when you start looking at your princess to gather and circumstantial evidence and the ballistic evidence all together i think that's what gets you over the hurdle for the  just ask you essentially are you going to rely on the evidence of speeding off and may be lighting one of the shooters out of the car were that they considered as part of it that was the shooting had stopped the windows were brought back out and then the then the car sped off of the scene perhaps to remove shooters from the scene i believe the codefendant was also  only piece of evidence which i believe my sister identified which i have not already addressed is the rolling down the windows i would suggest that that is still completely consistent with the situation in which he is going there to confront mr  i am not sufficiently familiar with the bill frist testimony to know about the guns your honor i don't believe there was anything in the testimony about how long it was in control of winter the people he was going to confront were people who good enough to carry rid of the gun in this and the other shooter presumably to get that out of the car yes because no guns were ever found no guns were found so presumably the car did start shortly after leaving