straightforward simple question hopefully and you could you know not spend all your time on this one issue which is the the big issue i believe what is your strongest argument is it that the defense constitutional right to a speedy trial was and that's the best the difference that great where he's our custom i knew we would come to that you're you're you're trying to say that because he remained in custody therefore if so facto they had time counts to spee case is that on reasonable would would i mean assume for the sake of argument we know that there was a the posture of the office change the leadership in the office change an unfettered discretion to examine and make their own determinations as to whether or not the evidence is sufficient to indict and then present it to the grid to receive a grand jury agrees that generally they do but with regard to the obviously before that moment that wasn't there and it wasn't there but it was in the common law if you go back and look for more than thirty years the supreme court people of course in the state of recognize this principle the rules of evidence to the committee which just sought to resign specifically articulate those areas there were exceptions and this is not a one off so in other words there was a conversation in the common holding to harass holding to answer what is holding the answer me holding hands or does it me i mean theoretically maybe it would have been cleaner if on february th of two thousand and eight after the defendant was taken into custody related to the murder related to the investigation if they let him out and released him for five minutes or let him step out of the police station and then arrested him on the bottom right location that wasn't realistic and they happened i don't know any case that necessarily  company there was a number of years where the company was was under suspicion there was a pretty big passage of time there is no reason to believe that a lot of additional had complaints about all the possible people could they have been investigating that i don't know i know that that defendant had a lot more parents or someone you live with that seemed to be doing a lot of investigation that may have been a person who was a dentist i had in the reports is a person of interest western investigation of her again i don't know because that's not on the record so yes the only thing i can tell you i supposedly just related to this case well contrary to the defendant's position of people believe that if indeed that was something that was at issue except in saying the defendant can and should have investigated that at the time and could have raised it as a sensitive issue obviously doesn't go to the merits of the burglary itself but it certainly would have gone to the merits of any possible sentencing and to the extent that to the extent that there are you know there was no way possible this is not yes we are some of the post and indictment cases relate to a defendant doesn't become aware for two or three years because there's an ongoing investigation and then the defendant say well we didn't even learn about it so how can we relate back and think of what was going on and that takes time and even in those cases the correspondent that doesn't establish actual substantial where the police arrive on the scene and there's multiple people and you know fifty six a dozen people are taking him into custody does speak troutman all of those individuals if they're not charged if they're charge and kept in jail for six years without anything else going on yes that would start but does it run because the police are conducting an investigation the answers i was defending in custody related to this matter ye in addition to the rules of evidence and common law which was raised previously the people cited twenty two dollars or three cases where the exact issue was raised and the finding was that identification both prejudice outweigh the program value no was it answered contrary to a rule that in essence or the common law or case law no it was all properly actor and again i would disagree that this was not a circumstance where we had a black s u v and individuals would say well you know there's tens of thousands of black s u v s there you know there could be dozens you know on the street wheel package was sold in the area so if you have two vehicles and one of them just happens to be the person who the people were able to type in the scene and had a problem with this attorney yes part of it is the strength of will definitely definitely and just to the extent that that again the argument is that well we don't know what more bizarre other people might have had some of the motives we have sufficient testimony of what the motive was we also have a very it minutely unique and particular circumstance that this wasn't just a murder two days before the defendant was up what have terms of looking at your allegation that this evidence was cool sleeve else we look at all of the evidence not just the what you characterize this week id you look at the other evidence correct you don't look at just a single