business holding signs chanting slogans and displaying a van wrapped in graphics and text also ending the message that mr david committed fraud and theft there's no doubt that mr disperse them the matter fact is that look these protesters have every right where they are mr david himself interacted with chester's on the st day asking them what they were doing and reported and they didn't make any threatening pins on foreign contributions have been upheld because that goes to the core of our electoral process it is not the courts and never said in those cases foreigners have no st amendment interests but they said it is there is a correct not just to harass on your honor actually believe that the better reading of the statute is that the private investigator exclusion is or any unlawful activity in private investigators integrity of threat and of the healthiest statute to come under stocking is a threat at any times it does not have to specifically be a threat to injure or inflict bodily injury and you can see that in a district court's decision on the reading the instruction instruction requires the jury was instructed requires the jury find that the plaintiff was faced with reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of immediate family that's the instruction there was no instruction or any suggestion to the jury that there could be a threat to continue activities without any reference to your safety so that's just wrong the jury was instructed in the exception for surveillance only and putting down activity to obtain evidence of suspected illegal activity or other misconduct suspected violation of  st amendment applies to non u s citizen nonresidents foreign nationals acting outside the united states with no ties or connections to the united states counsel suggested rd she has a significant voluntary connection with the united states to voluntarily establish this connection during her four years at stanford pursuing the she voluntarily departed recently present the results of research the united states as even him we only hope that abraham has sufficient voluntary connection such that she has the right to assert claims under the st of this court was very clear that you are if you have the right enforce their rights individually and as members of the american public and a certain none on the part of the invited alien dr mandela has made plain if they say only because he's symbolic of the problem so the c seeking to other people holding up signs you should know there is a process in your area yes you're the record does not reveal any person who requested wanted this speech  right to receive speech there is no party here who is suing to receive this speech this is a claim by the because all those from outside the united states claiming that the st amendment gives them a right to force their speech on the david there's nobody else before the court here and there is no evidence there was never any evidence suggest there was anybody who requested this speech or wanted to hear it if there was any value to the speech of course was completely false this was simply as i laid out in detail in  help you you know i will not rest my team is going to track you down in l a regardless of where you are and the context of these is that they are said directly after this experience in which mrs david had they are going to expose you wherever you go you made it personal i will show you i'm not going to put up a happy try to dish out to my brother's getting your hyena to scream at the l a police like she did yesterday is not going to stop me and sent a person to follow his wife and their children to school and to sit outside the school watching them taking pictures was called mr david he ran to the scene pulled out his phone and tried to picture this the brakes mr david fell off the car with the windshield wiper still in his hand that he had been holding onto that was the context that mr david knew about because i was in there hired agents in this specific activity they were escalate from what he did in sydney because he's not going to clean up unlike his two brothers in that email and that email was sent immediately after the incident in front of the davis house in los angeles i threatened to expose you while at the same time sending physical agents to follow stock harass and to terrify your wife and child by sending teams of men we're talking twenty men in cars get in this e mail needs to be understood in the context of those two temper ideas activities which were ongoing when he said it as well as the prior activities in city and the question was for the jury the jury was ask argument is never been made to my knowledge it was not made in this case believe it was waived the only comment that was ever made at trial was one bit common st kerry signs this by trial counsel ellen's carrying signs and leaf lay is classic st amendment activity it was never an argument made or even hinted at trial there was anything unconstitutional about this action or that the reach of the statues threat definition and there's only a single email there so none of that calls into question all of the other protection activity that's at issue here so at a bare minimum even if you were to find a better activity we're not constitutionally protected you would