mr harris was given a leadership enhanced by and even though we lack the intellectual capacity to perform a leadership role despite the fact that he didn't actually provide any leadership in this case so st off mr harris suffers from an intellectual disability and in order to get this enhanced man one must have the necessary influence and ability to coordinate either another's behavior and as a requirement or requirement for some degree of control and organizational authority sixty seven by another our expert dr dance robber said that it was unlikely given harris's cognitive deficiencies that he could one coordinate a and lead a complex  and i know you don't necessarily concede that that's a permissible inference but if it were a permissible inference that he asked or directed her to take photographs wouldn't that be sufficient even though it's not complicated i suppose that might be sufficient if he's making that suggest your honor the problem is we don't have evidence of that in this case we don't have clear evidence that he was directing her to take photos in this particular case the fact is that with his low infer that it was his idea and that he took the initiative i think your honor because that inference has to be based on something and we simply well that's what i'm asking you because  instigator of least some if not all of the activity i don't know that is permissible you are i mean we have one instance where there was there is evidence that mr harris was alone with the child on one occasion may in the home with the mother present in a different room of the home i just don't think that's enough to make this leap that i think has been made here so our sentencing judge he actually recognized the problem of applying this enhanced  will actually said mr harris has limited mental capacity somewhat undermines the idea that he could organize a relationship or organize a joint activity that would justify the enhanced and then he gave him the does that fall within the your hands i don't think so you are with this particular case we have lists being made by both parties so there was these there's these incredibly graphic notes that are being passed evans excuse me mr harris and miss evans and they're both making lists about what they like to do and it's incredibly inappropriate conduct so i don't know that i would i would agree with the court that there is parallel trafficking business he recruit his co defendants to obtain rental cars and drive them around and eventually deliver heroin for i just think that one's different ramos that case talks about a client or a defendant with limited leading or directing scuse me sorry our contention here is that the the victim in this case was not in harris's custody care or supervisory control the evidence before the court did not support the application of this enhanced so the evidence is being relied upon by judge windmill and by the government here is that one harris and codefendant evidence or evans go have a dated for a few weeks because the victim called harris dad when the police showed up that support the enhancement and because harris admitted that he disciplined the problem one occasion but the government was only because and so what is the relevance of  the the length of time in the following sense suppose that they have adopted this child six weeks eight weeks two days the person would still well we have a limited period of time ok we've got five day weeks no one's really sure how much time there was we've got them living in this small trailer with evan's mother the problem is we have evans telling the police that she never left the victim alone with harris but we know that's not true because we know for example that the defendant your client took pictures of this child when the mother was not present and that the mother didn't know about what the child referred to as the nd game which also permits an inference that she wasn't always present when your client and the child were together well your honor we have i think one instance that is justified by my client state as well where he was alone with the child he took a picture of the trial or took a photo of the child but we don't have any evidence that the mother  parent in trusting the trial to another and i don't think we have any evidence of that in this particular case in fact we have we have evidence that she supply evidence supplied of the police officer suggest that she never  efron's can be drawn from from many places in the record the st of that was in the p s r on paragraph twenty one which details the actual encounter when the photograph was taken that that picture which he did not as it was later found a reason weapons from from that conduct show that he was the person who was leading this leading this photograph to be taken  addition that your honour's the reason weapons can also be drawn from the list in the p s r there's a detail list on paragraph nineteen and which the court in this case was well within his discretion when it made that reasonable inference that the defendant was the person who was the driving force behind behind the sexual activity taking place here and addition to that your honor i think it's a it's a part of what promotes him to be a leader and i went when he's sitting down with the coconspirator and he's writing notes saying how he wants to have sexual intercourse with think that that is what takes this case from you know maybe a mere fantasy to some somebody who's actually adding this role where he's leading to what was also ultimately the commission of the offense when that offender was also interviewed he talked shown by the victim's description as and calling the defendant down this is only further enhanced and is only further justified by the fact that at some point that offended by his own admission  that it's very similar to that he is the aids circuit in united states blue they are the victim actually considered the person to be the grandfather and they you know they lived together but the court didn't focus on the fact the care was never really transferred to that person and so it seems to me that the fact that someone would discipline somebody is not necessarily in disha of care being transferred i mean we've all been in situations where even other people's children are there and we may impose some kind of order and discipline given what's going on so that kind of hardly be see that as saying that you all the sudden are the caretaker of the child so is there support for that approach in any case no you're out of that there's not not that i know of i think taking all