for four counts of mail fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit mail fraud at the conclusion of the government's case and she removed her judgment acquittal in essence his argument was and is before this court that the government failed to patient in a fraudulent gain knowledge of the fraudulent scheme and intent to further the objective of the fraudulent scheme there is no question on this legal standard that must govern your decision the evidence to the government introduced in this case in chief of intent was all circumstantial and that's fine as this court well knows juries may be sororities on inferences drawn from circumstantial evidence but they may not base their verdict on speculation or suspicion no dispute about that disputed about the application of that principle this case your honor i'm going to make one point about the application of the principle in this case because i think it's frankly been well briefed by the parties and i won't belabor it fact and after make a point i'd like to reserve a couple moments for response the point is this is the court recalled what is right about the arguments in the briefs and as it thinks about those arguments and here's additional argument today the court to take a close look at the parties use of the term inference and this is critical in my view the government uses that term far too liberally the government refers to reasoning processes as inferences when in fact they are not let me give you an example the government cites evidence circumstan some were repaired and passed off as non damaged vehicles there are also cars that were stolen and vehicle identification number a place where switch from the damaged vehicles onto the stolen vehicles and that those were sold there was evidence of this occurred different numbers that are often stamped on apparently the engine block and these are cross right cross reference of all through the manufacturer to the vin numbers of law enforcement can track down vehicle parts in mass and of course the point i was going to make your honor is  go the jury can infer that mr mckay a lot must have been the person who did that good mechanical work and therefore must have known of the underlying fraud and therefore there is evidence sufficient to support the conviction that is use to draw inferences and when i just isolate the automobile business because he was receiving according the record receiving pink slips in the mail that correct peter could i'm not sure i heard what you said it leaves or is just it raises more answers or pardon you more questions than answers how did that application get submitted there is also evidence in the case and these mail fraud still be aware of the underlying fraud if he may personally go drop that thing in the mail but if he doesn't know that he's being used as upon by his codefendant for twenty counts sure you claiming there was no evidence to identify  time thirteen is quite different than the others is it not no i would not see any material respect your honor i mean there are slightly different players involved but i would suggest and i suspect the government may greet the same body of evidence would be considered generally by the verdict or by the jury in determining whether or not my client had the necessary knowledge it would be important to that count  in order to sustain his burden the defendant much show that the only evidence in the light most favorable to the government and granting the government all reasonable inferences that may be drawn from that evidence no rational trier of fact could find on  contemplative of the conspiracy or the mail fraud but that's not the only evidence in each case we have cars there are three counts of cars that were stolen and the bins were switch and we have one car where it was just a salvage vehicle and all those cases we have the co defendants in this matter either tokar in mainland or shuts off taking the cars originally been originally titled and then we had the defendant either getting his friend's information to title  troubled by that one can you point in the record to evidence direct evidence linking mccaleb to the title of washing of the one nine hundred ninety seven toyota camry the placement of it's been plates onto a stolen camry for the sale of the stolen toyota camry i planted another counts but i don't see them that one can you help me in that we do not have evidence that he was involved in the actual title wash and what we can point to i think th car related to count thirteen and when duma trash spoke to him and said i can't give you your money back he said i can't give you the money back because you can often i saw this car together and i gave him the money from the sale so we have the car and because generally he's involved in a conspiracy we also have his general involvement in all aspects of the conspiracy including the title washing which will involve him in the scheme to  decisions your honor suggest very strongly that as in this case where there are merely circumstantial evidence that appear to be suspicious that the defendant's fingerprints are on the case that is not enough for a conviction