honor but the mother and this testimony from the mother that she heard the shots and then she came out she found her daughter laying and the blood coming out of her the evidence has showed that elaborate on the slaying beds and clearly stated we reject the contention that the purposes of flight have been established for all cases because the extent of the run truly undertaking is not simply determined by the specific was providing security guards but it was the cases and found that in cases where the security guards were right there to provide safety probably there was no liability but in cases where the reason i spend so much money because i want to make sure the lock is functional i don't want anybody that do not belong in there going again i do not want anybody we do not have access to the keys to go away he stated  basis and does not depend on the specified act undertaken this is another supreme court decision and a waste of chicago housing authority that also found that when a landlord lost seven years of the building and does for the proposition when you have control of the property you have to ensure safety measures doesn't grow stand for the proposition that when you are aware that master keys are out in unaccount that just switching the key would not constitute a well engineered taking but if you put that along with the testimony that the reason i have the keys because i do go and spend the property twice a month and spec for the bad yesterday he's going to come tomorrow and he's going to fix that i'm going to be honest much safer place when you're talking about public policy this this is going to my second amendment worry about that this is a high crime area this at the same time you know that the doors would be wrecking you know that rights would be wrecking and i can still a big and still eventually protect themselves from the crying in this case that's not what happened this case of the recent working in this case a lie strike breaking it could have testified in great details about the lock on the door that you know it was that he yes pay a lot of money you know the door writes he doesn't write anybody who does not belong in the building to go in there he does not want anybody who then the key to go in there if you analyze it closely showed that when two months prior to the incident there were two reports of home invasion three to four months prior to the incident there was an assault reported six months prior to the incident there was a goodly report of the days same property the voluntary undertaking exception in the landlord and in context is simply an extension of the common law principle that when one voluntarily undertakes do something every duty to do it in a reasonably safe manner underneath th there is a dispute for the lock on that the work was operable on the date of the incident but that's not an issue of material things because under the law regardless my client had no duty to provide that lock and had a duty to is not the duty to police it's simply detaining here if you were here because the lights were out and it kind of tripped this might be a different case but the duty that we're talking about here is something  convenience they are something that should occur and again when you're talking about the kind of undertaking mind of us as port au prince the supervision of a lot how's it going to stop somebody who is towards finding perhaps that they're here there's no indication that he was looking to buy safety from criminal assaults he just didn't want people on and this is his property of the commoners that he didn't want somebody on the property that's a normal thing for a landlord to one  lighting is common provided it's been years something that we want to encourage one of the worst provide that it cannot be said to give rise to a duty to protect against from lack of third parties absence of pretty extraordinary circumstances a my client testified during his deposition that these were security matters and yes you could use that phrase but again security from what he certainly never stated i'm going to put a few lights on the exterior of the building to protect you from these criminal activities we want landlords by like we want to just be able to see what they're going but simply too much to state that i'm putting on my building you're going to be willing to take the responsibility of stopping an unknown prudish from committing a condition committed a crime landlord became aware in those cases the court look at and say well what would the landlord of had to have done to prevent that second the second itself and in some cases something very simple  your seat console himself testified that he actually did provide security but he provided security for his old apartment building for the common area since he had possession of them that is not a question of