indeed in the minute order denying the motion for summary judgment the court stated that it found the ultimate the ultimate issue was a fact question whether or not the officers acted reasonably and in the circumstances counsel what would you expect police to do when they come upon a woman who completely naked was carrying a large knife an appearance of she's going to cross that knife into someone would expect them to do well i expect them to do exactly what they did par y i expect them to do exactly what they did they they confront a situation unusual even for police officers in north las vegas and then they disarmed her they disarmed her right and they tr immunity for those police and it is ok i believe that the officer should have been granted immunity i also believe that that immunity grant had to have the core apply the court that saucy attests to the fact that you state you unreasonable use of force in the circumstances and therefore as a matter of law no constitutional violation that would endure that would stop the qualified immunity analysis that the first step ok if you're are now you could say also you know was how was she at that point from that moment on isn't there kind of a dispute about whether or not the officers kept their knee on her back at that point well i don't think there's a three officers testify that they stopped using whatever pressure they were using when they got the cuffs on now there was a time lag between getting the handcuffs on and getting the flex cuffs on and i want to point out that no time where the flex cuffs attached to the handcuffs threat to anybody he was not accused of a crime he was a mentally ill person that the police had had experience with they knew they were going there solely to protect his own health not for any other medics arrived there almost immediately the medics arrived there almost immediately because the police officers called for medical attention almost immediately they they understood you know when you when you canvass the cases and that's all you can really do  there isn't any evidence in the record i was sure there was i'm sure what there is in the record is the officers immediately pushed the hair out of her face leaned down talk to her asked her if she was ok and he told her that the medical personnel were on their way these are things that are maybe he was trying to protect her but he still has force on her keep him down prone well you're just speed over there i would say if there is a dispute over that it's not it's not relevant to the issue qualified immunity and this is why in those cases where pressure is put on individuals that results in their either injury or death we're talking about the body weight pressure when you talk about the simpson case that side in the plan was for if we had we had a  correctional officer nicknamed be sitting on the person who weighed hundreds of pounds when you talk about the drama case you have officers kneeling the the evidence taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff in that case was you have two officers kneeling directly on mr drummond and perhaps on his neck now in this case it would be hard to characterize those actions it is anything other than reckless if they're not  intentionally focused on injuring the person you had officers in drama and standing there laughing while while the other officers were holding them down you have this kind of reckless conduct and i see my times that you have this kind of reckless conduct do to resolve the situation there's no allegation they could have done anything different there's no evidence of abuse or or or dismissiveness of mr or mrs parker's helping thank you thank you please the court help harder on behalf of the deceiving to gloria parker their two daughters and her mother the important aspect of this case and has not been focused on are addressed in the opening argument here this case deal terms of the analysis that's looked at is in the concept of water reasonable force when you have facts that it should be known to the police and the facts that are important and were point where she is taken down to the ground and the testimony from the officer martin is that his knees put into her back or shoulder area held down and then the other officer startles is on top of her trained in the recognition and training of dealing with people under the influence is well known and what we have are all the classic signs not not necessarily just from the testimony of my expert but from the international  you have mentally ill people law enforcement continually deals with mentally ill people or they deal with people who are under the influence and coherent you know individuals going to go out and commit a crime without any clothes on and a on carrying a bottle of water and that's what was in a rather and was a bottle of water and this put your knife and incoherently mumbling that's the testimony of the police officers as well as the witnesses that were there at that point in time so what is important focus what is a reasonable police behavior is that the point of time when there's a failure to recognize that all of these factors the sweating the fact that she would be excessively strong this is a small woman all of these factors police officers are trained to recognize in dealing with individuals that are accurate in manner that is a that is a given with them most of my expert as well as  defense expert but more importantly they're trained once they handcuffed these individuals in their face down there trained to pull them back up that's that's north las vegas that was in their policy practices procedures manual you have to call the individual up and go a prone position so these types of things don't happen now this is the first incident in north las vegas or in the las vegas valley nor was it the first in it's not something that just came out of blue and it was something that the one officer testified she knew nothing about it and the other officer said he had some knowledge of it that he had had some exposure to it but clearly across law enforcement the testimony from mister former chief of police of bellevue washington it had been known and had been training there they've been trained all across the country since one nine hundred ninety two so i think what's important in that force was deadly in and of itself but clearly the force here was the testimony from the medical examiner experts is that this was a contributing factor in the factors that caused the death of individual directly it was clearly a factual issue as to how the force was applied and that it became deadly in this particular instance let me ask you to see if you know i don't know what's go happen here but do you have a clue or putting aside the claims against the police officer if you have a claim against the city yes we do and that was on the negligent training and there really isn't before the court because qualified immunity only applie put restraints on her legs because she was kicking i just didn't want to put restraints on her legs but she was taking the she took them off and went back and got some other restraints until they were able to restrain her you had they had manacles they're using for mike range judge is a pretty strong just kind of she had not been using cocaine that may not have had that a kind of effect that on her exactly and that's what that's what the whole point is in dealing with individuals who are either under the influence whether it be alcohol or cocaine but in this particular instance cocaine that's what's important that's why there is a recognition on the part that individual is under the influence or mentally deficient and that's what grumman dealt with and that's what this case  i'll give you thirty seconds standing up i think there was some confusion with the plaintiff's expert that she was pepper sprayed with she was on the ground the pepper spray was used in an in an attempt to avoid what they later had to do not not as an punishment for struggling while she was still on the ground ok