yes it does or under california law it doesn't work we do it and we do recognize that however it's still not a particularly a serious crime because two for two of two other factors one is that when he entered the home and the d it does speak about the an individual who was a member of a group like my client who concrete steps to oppose gang membership and gang authority ok so that's ok can you get what record just plain in your client was deemed credible and he didn't go to school for ten years and sounds like he was horribly traumatized but my question is and i don't mean to make light of that but your time is ticking and i didn't see that he took any steps to oppose the game but that's exactly the group that we've said is not a particular social club just people who don't join as opposed to people actively opposing him which he didn't he's hiding under he's right exactly he was hiding out so he could have an actively gang violence and in game recruitment to take place and they do not prevent that or or in some cases there's corruption or owners where where in the police are working compared to look to with d if the government is simply ineffective in investigating or in affective and preventing crime are ineffective in stopping gang violence as a practical matter that does not corruption and there in fact seemed to be steps the government took to try to address the problem of gang violence and homicide so can you point me to particular pages that support your assertion that the police participated in the gang violence testified to that but in terms of the country reports they seem to point to the different direction or your own it was also my my my classes for my time i have read an somewhere the reference to the letter being handed over today comes from so twenty one years ago petition was confronted by again crimes gang intimidation and king gang recruitment and six years ago he was convicted of burglary the court lacks jurisdiction to review his untimely asylum application a determination by the board and the immigration judge the courts and relaxed jurisdiction to review that determination that was holding claim is barred by the particularly serious crime bar  california conviction for burglary which he doesn't dispute in the california courts found that it was a burglary involving a person present in the home so it is a particular serious crime and then on the merits as has been indicated the court has already concluded that again crimes gang intimidation and gang recruitment don't add up to particular social group and and lack of knowledge in some circumstances it can but the question is whether the smiths recess or it doesn't in the circumstances the board points out that he's not even a member of the particular social groups that he claimed to be a member gangs in any proactive or active manner it's a passive resistance in his in his home that he opposed the gang he was found credible right correct so could you go to the cat claim and tell me about what's the evidence show have been over this looking at  found was that there was no evidence and that's not true at all isn't there was evidence because he specifically said that one of these people for their account was asked about where he was and where the other person was so there was evidence and the fact that why isn't the fact that the board said there was no evidence suggested things really didn't look at the evidence well i think what the board if he were to return and i think he's pointing to and i'm summarizing paraphrasing but he's pointing to this episode where his cousin went back right lost his life and then his friend's daughter was also killed and my understanding about to to follow up on  bears on the question is that this person this petitioner was found credible and he testified that his father told him right about this threat that was made or or inquiry was made up about his own whereabouts for at the time his is that when eight school school incident that's right and i think that's what judge persons trying to call your attention to so so we're trying we're trying to get our arms around whether the board said there's no evidence of any connection or if there is some evidence of use of the what his father told him and i think what the board that's just testimony about the father's day minnie's rideable but the board is saying there's no connection between the rd grade incident and the end the current events i believe that's not the question the question is whether there's evidence their record indicates any one  for the respondent specifically to harm or to torture and here we have these people who according to his father inquired about him and shortly after whence killed his friend who was with him at the school is that n to establish whether they there was any accuracy in what was said here whether they overlooked evidence which would be a reason for me men to write that in fact there was evidence that there were looking for him and there was a connection to the earlier incident at least because the other two people who were one was killed in a starter were killed were both present during the earlier incident right right they were present during the incident murders but there's no connection if you will to that one thousand nine hundred and eighty incident which i think is what the petitioner trying to draw i'm not entirely sure why that matters anyway because they did ask about him for whatever reason they asked about him but i don't i still can't actually find this place where you say say too bad and never do anything you just say that right as i said and you're under he said that when his cousin was i forget it was the cousin was killed fred's daughter the other way around but anyway that they that  he was fairly sure that at least one of them was maybe bill who approached the police but in general what the police say is too bad for your loss and don't do anything that's what he said right that's what he says but that doesn't mean the government is in effect honduras in the alleged zone of they danger and there's no evidence that either his father or his sister has suffered any harm at the hands of the gang members so again that goes to the question and doesn't it doesn't compel the conclusion that the court with anything they were not at this this location during that relevant time but he tries to bring them into the to the incident by pointing to the bad by claiming that his father's sister aren't in the zone of danger but then he points to his friend's daughter who was killed who is a three thousand and four officials and just missed one thousand eight hundred and thirty five officers while allowing two hundred and fifty six officers storage higher voluntarily now i suppose that to mean that they are they are doing something now but no changed circumstances and in fact we did we've argued that our chain circumstances because he did file within one year of learning of the murder of his friend and or interest present in this case and then he defied one year immediately thereafter and that was reasonable given that he was living there for many years he was in fear of your trauma and then he did follow it as soon as you learned of that situation thank you very much thank you an