it please the court good morning my name is judy plan again appearing on behalf of the petitioner or i don't want to know and i'd like to reserve two minutes for about all i meant the board of immigration appeals erred when it adopted the immigration judges flawed reasoning and held the immigration judges adverse credibility determination in this case the board also engaged in improper fact finding on the issue of objective evidence st the board erred in ignoring what were clear factual errors and not evidence based assumptions in the immigration judge's decision for example the immigration judge correctly determined that hereto had two chances to make his claim of fair return to border officials on his nd entry to the united states order fizzles never asked him about his fair return there's no evidence of this in the record there's no eye to thirteen there's no sworn statement testified that he was never questioned about  fair return it was her old in at that time as a material witness or possible testimony against his model or and then he was assigned an attorney he never spoke to that attorney and that is clear on the record and this is contrary to the immigration judges determination that he could have spoken to his attorney he never spoke to the attorney there was no trial in smuggling case his mother pled out and then within twenty one d days around a was released from custody contrary to the immigration judges finding that he testified during the trial against a smuggler he never testified there was no trial record is clear on that geraldo as not being credible saying that she that he knew that his brother was gay and that his brother had filed an asylum application back in two thousand and seventeen and they're hard somehow he should have not had any fear of hers expressing his fear return joined us for his answer but the record is very clear that this is not correct and her and her united states in two thousand and eighteen he didn't know that his brother was gay he didn't know that his brother and filed an asylum application and in fact he didn't find out until his brother visited him while he was in detention after his july two thousand and eighteen entry in addition the immigration judge gauged in speculation she stated and heard avars credibility determination that her right of could have asked for a female officer if he was afraid to speak to men but there was  and again so the judge engaged in speculation here bullying and harassment throughout his life in mexico the board's decision upholding that breast credibility determination is not supported by substantial evidence he had reasonable and possible explanations for these admission endured two years of brutal rapes by an adult cousin starting when he was only eight years old based on his perceived sexual orientation he testified that he was ashamed and embarrassed about being gay as shamed about what had happened to him he was traumatized by what had happened he experienced physical pain as well as depression anxiety and nightmares that continue to this day it never told anybody about what had happened and for years he had never told anybody close to him that he was gay and so it was reasonable that he wouldn't be able to tell a border patrol officer these intimate details about his life he was afraid of men and this is also a reasonable honor sexual trauma is something that lasts for a very long time but not only did you experience that you experienced harassment and physical assaults throughout his life from elementary school through middle school high school and even as a university student very was on a scholarship he was there for a three year he had three years all right scholarship and he declined to take it because t it still doesn't account for saying you know what i'm not afraid to go back well i think he credibly testified as to why he was afraid and the difficulty and and talking about his reason for coming he was ashamed of bear as he assumed that he was going to be asked numerous other questions details about what had happened he was afraid of authority there had been no consequences for example when his uncle at point blank shot his sister in front of and when he was a young child his brother his uncle was jailed for one day and released he had multiple reasons for being afraid to talk about what had  while he was being interviewed we also know that the board erred in making improper a fact finding as to the objective basis for his fear  e recognizes that someone might be reluctant to just a personal intimate details of a sexual orientation claim with border agents and equate that with not expressing fear and indeed affirmatively expressing no fear orientation doesn't address the agency's reasoning that a person genuinely fearful of harm in their home country would take some steps or about to get some means to avoid return and to that country where they fear clearly stated during his testimony that he did not did not tell the truth he froze he stated he didn't have a beer and we presented numerous explanations for why he wasn't able to s looking at the totality of the circumstances including my client's years of sexual assault and harassment by society in general classmates neighbors he feels like even now he's not even cable completely saying what happened and that there has been so much darkness in his life that court the court has to look at the totality of circumstances and simply failed to do that in this case i think you can also the case history will be submitted for a decision i think both of you for your argument today and will proceed with you are going to in the next case