before i began i'd like to see if the court brief overview of the two issues that we're going to focus on today the first issue that we like to focus on today is whether the other crimes evidence should have been excluded at trial this is the issue that we filed a motion decide this aggravated battery should not have been if you like it wasn't relevant to the charges that's what happened in this case was it depend it was was interviewed over this aggravated battery and during the course of this interview he confessed to a separate armed robbery  sole reason that he was driving a vehicle and the vehicle that he was driving was owned by his girlfriend whose license was suspended and we'd argue that this stuff under the circumstances on was was on reasonable  argument that when the officer learns the driver the registered owner the presumed driver is a female and there's a man behind the wheel maybe that would extinguish probable cause but we have to have some factual record that the appearance of the person behind the wheel would have negated this information that it this name and say well i don't know it's a male or female and at that point stop his investigation not now not pursue any other not try to determine any other facets to whether the driver was a male or a female emphasize as to the second issue about the other crimes of the standard disabuse of discretion and there was none here it went to why the defendant offered to show the police where the gun was the basis for the charge addition it's unusual for a defendant assuming any error it was harmless but pena didn't get it into the location of the gun he admitted he had the gun in a safe in his girlfriend's apartment where he often state he gave the police the combination to the safe and he admitted only the gun force argued here as to the name and sex of the registered owner must be understand a principle cited in my brief construed against the defendant the officer said he had no idea if the owner of the car was male or female he did not know this to be a female name he had to look at point out you know in my brief that there are different spellings of the word just sell who knows which is correct one is just a court reporter spelling there is no indication spelled out for the defendant in stating the name he tells tells it differently but i point out you know there was a football player for the pittsburgh steelers named lynn swann that's a guy there's an actor named leslie nielsen who's male i have a cousin aimlessly who's a female i was getting at the risk out earlier that the officer had a reason to stop the vehicle in essence he conceded this issue then she made an argument that the officer made a new stop once that event gave him an identification which argument is not made on appeal the instant claim thus not have stopped the judge said he believed the officer if he found the reason for the officer to have known this was a female name the officer had a reasonable suspicion here under the law cited in my brief on the facts that the owner slashed driver the vehicle was unlicensed ergo this is a good stop esp the policy reasons i just simply you know to discard the presumption that the owner of the vehicle is its driver with all due respect i think that's an argument made more properly to the supreme court not an intermediate appellate court usually speaking the driver is the owner so there's no big policy reason that regard there's no evidence that this is a significant problem or even a problem at all and there's no evidence that the officer has word of unlicensed on him and he's also he's a cop so he's got to turn the lights on he's got a concentrated pull on the person over it seems just absolutely credible to me that often he wouldn't know now in your case it depends if did this could well have been a different case if the officer said you know i knew you know based on the knowledge of the parties or i knew the purported owner ges out whatever it is i was last name was and i knew that was not there wasn't any need for example to explain that this district was on parole was it you need to explain it here thirty separately small bags of cannabis presumably would have been available for sale there wasn't any is its driver what we would argue here is that the essential problem is that there wasn't in this particular case it wasn't any effort made by this police officer that he terminal whether or