well here is the next case on the calendar united states versus henderson back  relevant to what you just said the question is whether by doing this do you open him up if you were to win do you open him up to the possibility of a death sentence but he otherwise does not is not in  if i might as you say you have some challenges some hurdles to overcome because the various challenges that you're raising were not raise eleven b one d challenge the question really is that to me is whether there is a reasonable probability that back can't see me scratching me please argument regarding pinkerton liability you've got the case for instance of united states forces or mero nd circuit case where we know that two defendants could be held liable for at least that the defendant have some reasonable grounds to believe that this could that that particular action could be a consequence so that if the guy's going to rob a bank they both agree nobody's going to get hurt but we got loaded guns guys i didn't know that the people inside were being murdered i think that would be be covered by pinkerton but this thing here that they detached the gas lines in order to light up the house in order to destroy destroy evidence i don't think that was and the disposition of the clothing they had on and yet they were leaving behind obvious evidence so our capital that's one would think that it's conceivable that one might try to cover that up don't you think yeah i mean all individual who performs that kind of activity and one of the things i think i'd be concerned about which he obviously was concerned about was what about the evidence that's going to lead to me to take care of his clothes one would think that he might be concerned  took the time to make those details arrangements with his coconspirators to then one would think it is time to also consider the prospect of hiding the most damning evidence of all the bodies you know but i'm not sure that he would have he would have i think that's true i think that and crime that they would do that they would do if necessary to conceal the pressure i think i think i'd be stupid not to argue that in any crime that anybody commits they anybody any any anybody committing crime will will it is reasonably foreseeable to him that we will do what is necessary in order to feel ok but whether it's with whether the act the burning down of the apartment building is if foreseeable as being something that's necessary  confidence from my colle lethal before the robbery he purchased new clothes for the robbers to change into after removing their bloody clothes gloves for them to wear during the robbery and he brought guns for everyone when the robbery occurred decked him and his cohorts tied up the traffickers as well as darryl anderson's girlfriend who was acting at the inside man they proceeded to torture the traffickers beating and cutting them in fact that didn't beat one of them so badly that is gloveless bloody and his hand was swollen the robbers then killed all predicti including henderson's girlfriend who was not an intended victim but rather had become a witness to a murder that was just issued reason for the three of them including becton to kill her they cut their throats so viciously that you could see the victim's spine from the front back then the others fled and literally party did miami with their newfound wealth for this victim was charged with capital crimes and the government actually sought the death penalty in november two thousand and six literally days before trial was scheduled to begin acted with two seed to thunder the appointed counsel by his side pleaded guilty to the indictment with a fifty year mandatory minimum and then advisory guideline sentence of life plus thirty years in return the government well presumably the example that chip stack a very early or of an atomic bomb would not be because nobody could perceive that it could even be done that is nobody can foresee that somebody would have access to an atomic bomb but i think a proceeding where not only had becton prepared to clean the scene and cover his tracks by among other things getting a fake id buying new clothes in advance of the murder buying gloves for everybody but also at the murder itself where they had already killed somebody who was for lack of a better word an innocent or even less than innocent one of their own because she had become a witness to the murder it's hard to say that potentially killing others who would somehow provide evidence of the murder would be beyond the pale or would not be reasonably foreseeable for this reason it doesn't matter that we don't know who actually lit the candles or knocked which to conclude the conspirators had contemplated the particular producing the gun under those circumstances there was sufficient evidence to conclude that santos of use of the gun was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the narcotics conspiracy here similarly you think went into the apartment they use whatever tools were at hand addition to the gun that they had with them to torture and murder people including somebody who was not in and to target but had become a witness i do think that at that point it is reasonably foreseeable that members of the consider continue to use tools that were actually at hand in this case candles and a gas line that were in the apartment to continue to cover up their crime by potentially killing others is necessary let me also  attempted to bring one of those kinds of appeals if for instance he said that there had been a miscalculation in his mandatory special assessment and appeal waivers still be enforceable i think it may not be under those circumstances here the judge limited his discussion of the appeal waiver to the waiver of an appeal or collateral challenge to the prison sentence he does not discuss it it is i have to admit it is unclear to me whether the other potential consequences are automatically waived if they are within the people waiver but the judge has to describe them a lot talks  about bringing the defendant attention to be appealed laverick and i think that there is a good argument that once you've brought the the defendants attention to part of the appeal waiver you can say that the defendant understands the whole appeal lever but but i think that's an academic question here because there's no question that the part of the sentence that becton is appealing namely the term of imprisonment is precisely the part of the appeal waiver that judge cuts don't quite accurately described on the