exercised sufficient control over his girlfriend metronome master off such that he enlisted her assistance in storing firearms in her bedroom and both of and she testified that he was there and he helped you know exactly in fact she said the contrary thing with respect to the case itself and that then marsh camps two thousand and one firearms issue she said that she thought she had was not true and that certainly was not reflected in either opening or closing argument by the government either that characterization in fact what she said was that all those acknowledgment hurt and wronged and trade and any knowledge some attempts along the way to maintain contact with her crable what she said was that she was coming forth to tell the truth so you characterize or testifying as the woman wronged in the sense that that the jury might have thought she was testifying  retaliation for the fact that he ran off to washington with another woman will certainly that came out did not like that certainly did and i think that the defense attorney had or also listed her of knowledge meant that she might have very well established that she wanted to quote jerry kirk at trial ok so i no i don't think that the court ever viewed her nor did the government happen but but in any event don't we have to view the evidence and the inferences to be drawn there from in the light most favorable to the prosecution ruling as to what purpose for what purpose the evidence coming from the testimony would be coming out of their relationship and he said it was coming in to demonstrate to him for doing he would be hiding that you don't you're not answer my question and i'm trying to understand what the judge said like meant when he said what you just quoted and that sounds to me although he didn't use the term like he's talking about admitting a really bad guy in many  ways i would not agree with that statement because the the issue is whether i'm not getting to the relevant question i just want to know whether it was there was a lot of otherwise extraneous material there and found having treated prove a constructive possession to date as this was the government had to prove that he could exercise control and dominion over those in order to do so that it was fair for the jury t in again i just go back to that old in order to prove but his defense is that he could impact control over the the government had to paint the picture that he did have control over these weapons and it was through her and it was because of all of the facts part of their relationship which was your real life good witness she was your honor that the government  testify when she testified for example that she had slept on these mattresses with guns stuffed in between the mattresses it sort of brings the real fairy tale in mind about the princess sleeping on the with the between the mattresses i mean did the jury basically disbelieve that portion of her testimony because it would have been impossible to have been sleeping on the bed without knowing that there were lumps caused by guns underneath the ma well i wasn't part of the jury judge and let me ask questions different way when when when you presented that evidence did you present it in a way to suggest to the jury that that couldn't have been true that she must have known there were weapons there if she was sleeping on top of  but the government's theory of the case was that he had through his relationship with her through his through his abuse of her both physically and emotionally through the control of her credit cards and bank accounts and everything else through his power over her he had the power to exercise control over these weapons whether and it wasn't as you pointed out that she hid them for him and was that they were her weapon and it wasn't that they were her well including on page twenty five a huge list about what was wrong confused if you weren't relying on it in order to show that she was he was using her to hide the weapons for him what is the probative value of this evidence that outweighs its prejudicial  defense was attempting to keep out all of this evidence of their relationship on the one hand on the other hand they were bringing in all of this evidence of the atmosphere in the house and the government could not have put on