wanted to plead guilty they had negotiated a plea for a four year sentence and he came into plead before a judge and held him up and said that he was pleading to make the lady happy or something like that meaning the victim's mother and the judge would not accept the his innocence which is apparently what he was doing what he told his attorney when he says he didn't do it well his attorney put him on stand guard correct presumably the attorney who was going to meetings in a sense throughout the trial correct c could that in your creed that's not that is a reason in the record why the supreme court would not accept a plea of guilty because it's exactly the same reason the court wouldn't accept the plead guilty additionally the defendant was pleading idea why they would make up this story during the original proceedings at the very yes yes that's true but if he had indeed if he had an offer that was made to him for the four years re offered under under present representation and he wanted to take that and the conversations occur outside of the record and the gist of this claim has been raise it's been supported with an affidavit it's gotten attention to tension the documentation the other way all it would have taken that was racially slower i didn't think so i may be as wrong on or i don't i don't know but i do think that considering the nature of the issue that was in the post conviction edition that it would not have added to it well you say with nothing in the record  that getting it from the prosecutor if they were to a prosecutor would probably be probably be as equally difficult as getting it from the attorney who's representation you're attacking and that the interpreter had the wrong name and the state even uses the wrong name in their nov twenty ninth when they came in on november twenty ninth it was gaffney who was still representing the defendant he informed that he had spent time talking to the defendant and the defendant wanted the bench trial and the judge did make such a statement that was not on the record the conversation that the defendant alleges in his affidavit that occurred between him and the trial judge also did not happen according to the record nations are rebutted in some respects no there is nothing on the record that affirmatively states where the other is that there was a second offer we do not know that we just know when one expired and the fact that the cause was never taken off the trial col after the defendant agreed that he wanted to go to a bench trial it was never removed from a call after th but the fact is that if he was making statements she would to tional people about this desire to plead guilty that is where we come in states that those would be affidavits that would support the have that is why the affidavit is important to how if he did say it and it wasn't made part of the record because the record is not supporting the allegation as it stands and if this was something that was said if there was a statement made that was not part of the actual hearing truly interpreter that is something off the record that we have no support of and that is why the additional information is  decided that was involuntary because it wasn't that he wasn't finding it of his own free will of what he wanted to do but he was doing it for somebody else so it but it will be really wasn't making a statement whether or not he was maintaining his innocence either way the fact that he brought out well i guess i'm just going to do this to make somebody else happy it really said nothing to his maintenance  five he would have had to bring it out in that sort of thing because it didn't include conversations that occurred outside of record so as far as bringing it up on a direct appeal  as far as the grounds for the missile was improper but there was reasoning to support where the record is currently contradicting his claims and he wasn't supporting it with the hearing on april twentieth two thousand and eleven it does not reflect what the defendant said to the interpreter it does not affect anything that the interpreter made the said to the judge assuming there was anything said i'm not going to assume that bit does not necessarily mean that he didn't say something to her her job is according to her to assist the court and to assist him she is not a lawyer and if you were to say to her i want to plead guilty it's not her job to tell the recycled your case for you today blah blah blah she's saying that she's entering that to him and they're taking a pause and when the prosecutor responds that's all going on right but there's no questions being put to the defendant guilty on the twentieth by the time get to august