have especially testimony given for years after the events surrounding this claim and that they are outraged hearing the petitioner testifies that she was at work on a wednesday and her you know the correct recordings of her statements and medical history is that she was lifting limits but i think it's significant and not just coincidental that that is exactly what i have witnessed this testimony i mean the women who witnesses are not employees of the hospital they voluntarily came to the hospital they were subpoenaed to testify but there are other documentary discrepanc short period of time she ends up in the emergency room and at that time she gives birth at least there are i think three different histories and that initial emergency room when one says may twenty that's not that there she testif that day she goes to work on saturdays she works her fall shift no problem sorry for it she doesn't seek any medical attention she's performing extensive physical duties how would you know would you respond to this argument that what you are arguing those two issues  well the way i would respond is to fall on you know on one hand you have what she testified of arbitration and then you look at everything else in the record humility to play how d that relate to what she's actually really forward what she's testifying for years down the road and arbitration and the sports not their sports not there with the witness testimony that's the part's not there from documentary evidence supports not there  just the cousins testimony it's the testimony of her supervisor you know who i think you know was unequivocal she didn't report this incident to me even though she claimed she had and it only makes sense that that was the in the chicago messenger pace there was other evidence documentary witness evidence that said no to the contrary this person got injured i think it's significant that there are all these days out there and you know she is there any evidence you know supporting now there is other than her testimony there is but is it reasonable when all this other evidence exists in the r case when they do they discredit these witnesses other than they say they didn't say well they are not believing all they said there was animosity but what is the  just just you know discount their testimony i don't think it's reasonable i think it's speculation so that's why we're here and you know i'm just in the mission to consider  whatever the cousins had to say about the subject the inconsistency is in terms of a day or two difference in the accident as well as the supervisor denying that the boy reported on the day of the ac the chicago messenger case as i indicated my pre i think it's dramatically different in worker's comp we place a lot of weight on that initial medical record and in this case that was the record of may twenty fifth two thousand and three and that record the employee here did give the history of the work accident in the chicago messenger case the employee did not give the history of a work accident and actually ended case to the medical provider there who actually saw him that his complaint started months before this work accident that the client in this medical record aside think history there's also information in this record that the ploy tells the e personnel that she in bided her boss and i'm not certain what that actually should have said that her back was uncomfortable and hurting now this is on the twenty fifth before even her supervisor acknowledges on the twenty seventh she did report it then she goes on to say patient was off on thursday called in on friday work on saturday so there was a little bit of a disconnect there but my client would have had to foresee that these cousins were going to come in august and say on saturday she injured herself yet she called in on that friday or called in sick because her back was hurting she would have had to foresee that these cousins