impression that mr he has changed his story since he initially spoke with the police after the incident occurred now at this date plans to impeach the defendant which they're certainly entitled to do they can lay a foundation for it the way this was done here but then they are obligated to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trial to perfect that it is free and in this case it was never perfect it and as a consequence of that the jury was laughing with the subjective quality to it and that also goes to you know you never told them that this was self defense or self defense is a legal term how to use in the words what mr keene was explaining from what i can gather from what the judge said that this was an accident force and also whether the jury found him credible and whether there was a serious problem cation that resulted in him engaging in the shooting of the victim in this case so where the credibility of the state's witness which benjamin who's the only other one i that's you know something else which is that he gave a different story they haven't received any evidence so closing argument which is not evidence the jury is a structure that defense counsels are it is not evidence that you know what's defense counsel supposed to do and i would also know you know the judge perfected and he had been shown to be why are you think you stances of not being convicted were enhanced and i think that we have to look at it by what did happen whether or not under the our law this  properly relied on the imus factors and and which i mention in the state's brief that most of the case amel stands for if there is an incomplete impeachment of a witness and it rises to the level of revers now the defendants stated that they had to mitigate the damage but that's not what happened here this wasn't a case of mitigating damage they really went above and beyond mitigation and defense counsel said that was the most powerful evidence in emphasized to the extreme crossing the line from many getting damaged to the most powerful evidence there tentacle story when when and if huge this is strong language and of course the trial court consider this when he allegedly error he quickly noted that the physical evidence completely contradicted defacing defendant's version of events defendant stated benjamin stated the stepfather i said i saw the victim with the staff  how this victim was stabbed that's an obvious error in more in the defendant's testimony that really goes to his credibility and i think it's a bigger impact on his own credibility than this alleged and just on the flip side of that i did cite the illinois supreme court case when it is that it states that the fair defendant article is arguing that his trial he did not receive a fair trial but yet the illinois supreme could and when that objection was granted that's when they called detective means now unfortunately the detective beats was spoke with the prosecutor five to ten minutes before he testified but again good faith has to either rise or fall at the time the questions  they were on the verge of being this being declared a mistrial so the fact that they didn't bring this up in closing argument i think tells us a lot that they knew this was an error and it was on the verge of causing this case to be declared