example at fourth thirty three i believe twelve seventy nine where it says take each tractor independently don't weigh one factor or the other we take many weather departure pre book worse in terms that you've got substantial sexual contact with not you know not sort of not just a minor but a very young minor from the ages of six to eleven twelve in a position a step father in a position of trust it's repeated it's substantial it's not just the touching and it you also have in the p s r that apparently there's indications that he has molested other children family members so you've got you know you've got everything from over a long period of time particularly vulnerable victims positions of trust you know and so you've got danger to society  because we're talking about you know we're not talking about a seventeen year old girl we're not talking about someone you know that type of situation we're talking about very young children it's not it's under the statutory anaximander so from that standpoint it's not statutor illegal and you know obviously in state courts people are getting you know i mean full consecutive sentences over one hundred years for these types of things the guidelines being advisory wasn't the purpose of the guidelines more along the lines of to deal with statutory rape or situations that we're not necessarily your typical pedophile well i think the guidelines were made a why they're taking a different position and ninety seven you know ninety seven month sentence which is almost double the time that he received the guidelines have taken into account these type of behaviors under to a three point one force or any threatening behavior and so the guidelines that taken all of this into account here's a person as both the government in this track and in state who had very little criminal history in the last ten years very much  what we don't usually see in these type of cases of a pedophile who has been charged and convicted before you have a man with substance abuse problem and the what the court did was weigh one factor they weighed thirty to look at all the factors where does it say that one can't trump another say like you really are sorry but you're really sorry for you know you took early responsibility your very start but it's an incredibly serious crime why why start with the guidelines whether you can infer that it's as wayne guidelines a little more or not that's up to the courts inference but the guidelines really take into account these factors the government c multiple factors for each and every incident it did not we need took responsibility for this we pled to this case and therefore we believe that the reasonable sentence would have been within the guidelines we would submit the i think that is significant against my position i fortunately i have to concede that the case that came down friday university among united states versus mohamed talks about i criminal sense so of course we have a criminal history of art we have you know the fact that there is a are some statements that he did well last when he was i maybe twenty years before but in the if i may just a address that for briefly these are heinous acts even if it happens once it's a heinous act and because of that the guidelines again take that into consideration they even amended the guidelines  would have had to follow in any way you want to judge i just briefly want to mention mohamed because i think there's something interesting in that six anything to do with a six point one note enough to a three point one the rapist statue the sexual assault statute does not have this provision in the commentary the only provision it has is under commentary no steps which talks about if there are multiple that the victim not have to testify in a trial and be further victimized and still for purposes of pleading and give a new low and got one recommendation that in the view of the government was the greater good rather than victim and having her come to trial and have to testify simply because the defendant did not get a low end recommendation from the government that was the reasoning of the government what was that was that part of his play negotiation that you would montana in indian country there are a lot of jury trials and so this was one of the reasons why we were able in part to negotiate a low end recommendation but that still doesn't take away from the