problems with drugs donna's street cred again running the prison as far as being able to buy drugs this whole incident was as a result of a fight that broke out allegedly due to some for a transaction but what's key here is what was what was the administrative we have a lockdown scenario that's not a lockdown another contentious me that we that mr butler has to ask for protection i suggest to the court that that that is not the proper standard nor is that the standard or to the right in the cases i know by billing for nine hundred eighty three actions goes for the notion that when the supervisor puts certain acts in motion there's a certain degree of certainty that something is going to happen that they we've set this possible classic i understand we talk about robert bayer bay one side it may be true on the other side it may be just a way to say i don't want to be responsible for what goes on i think you know the director is not going to be respon said well i don't even know what's going on and nobody tells me he leaves the area to be conserving and he walks away and then this horrible thing happens because nobody's taking care of business and i suggest to the court the reason nobody is taking care of that everyone's up the chain of command is responsible for the actions of their subordinates which are clearly is not cannot be applied in this type of case either that or they say it's kind of a rest it's absolute thing if there's this kind of thing happens in a pri that mr butler was voluntarily subjected to this lack of protection the record shows the doors and we're on what they call local control in other words they can only be opened from the inside so mr butler had to let himself out the most forceful argument is that having had this right basically the big fight and having the warden having decided properly to impose the insults out so in terms of just protecting people in there that shouldn't really be an issue and the other thing is with that kind of does it say well everyone who's ever in a rumble in the prison yard to somehow in the same situation or  situation as the transmission transactional in farmer that somehow this that should be subjective knowledge on the part part of the prison officials that everybody who's tangentially in a fight is subject to be beaten up immediately thereafter and interestingly enough the whole situation history of iraq screws to the contrary these rocks have been there forever it's a desert but rocks are always going to be there and all access to money and opposition is twice they've had the power  and the rocks really were kind of thrown around a little bit but no one was ever harmed millan's ever had a serious thing like that happen and there's no indication that somehow it offends decency to have the rocks on the ard or that it would even be practica stuff out if you will if he was really so much danger he shouldn't have done that and have the prison officials are supposed to know that he's going to let himself out and put himself in a danger obviates their subjective knowledge that this could  defendants would have known the characteristics of this plane if this characteristics were the use of violent aggressor not that he was going to be likely to be harmed by anybody who's also fairly well known that there was tensions between the black prisoners in  director was sitting there and said and called the warden and say don't bother taking care of me in this because what they really try to do is put the prison system on trial and say that well they haven't they've never remove the rocks and then they got these you know arguments that the prisoners were running the place drugs were rampant well none of that really is in the testimony that's characterizations by counsel string together various answers in depositions here and there for this person w on local control while groups of prisoners were taking the that's what that means on the record in this case what they meant over overall by policy in lockdown was never ever came out in testimony anywhere the one vulnerability i think we have in this case is there's language in the just district court decision indicating that well he didn't tell them therefore liability but one place the court has this is that the other place it says for example he didn't tell them and i think what the court is saying that corporal overstaying is under these circumstances it was reasonable that he would have told them because otherwise he was known not to be not to be somebody who would be a victim but the fact that he didn't tell them or didn't say anything  variety state negligence claim against the state they needed to make it a federal case because the court kept in state court that would limit them to fifty thousand dollars but they haven't been able to show under the for under the growth of the law that they come to that standard and so we suggest the district court was correct i have only one question to you as to your point about the prisoner having to unlock the door from the inside totally escapes me now are you saying that he could have stayed in there and locked up the rest of are the problem with the notion the george butler had some control on what he was going to do about letting him out of the cell is just not what the record reflects correctional officer smith suspected there's a light procedure that signals  aware we have filed the appellate thank church the record and at two thirty seven of our experts we specifically have identified a total breakdown of any reasonable policy and procedure for handling prisoners  defense is trying to say gee this is george's responsibility to presume a lockdown is going to break down and that's ludicrous george can rely on that walk down as much as anybody else can rely on that lockdown he's entitled to not be the minerals quickly forty three argument just made in the matter just argued will be