this case the district court never offer and the stuff circumstances and even on appeal the government hasn't offered any such circumstance that would justify using the summary can have procedures for you to be requirement which they've offered no justification for satisfying but more importantly this isn't a case where everything that happened that was relevant to the summary content happened in front of the court true  without ms glasser defense counsel ever being able to cross examine them on what they saw or what they told the judge the government's and then the stack of documents including things like bank records f b i three o two reports e bay auction documents chance to make it make our record on the summary contempt issue and we appreciate that but we in the end ms glass never did get a full hearing and by that i mean a hearing where the judge and the government comes in and hearing like anything close to that the other problem trying to convert what happened in those subsequent hearings and interpret them as a rule forty two a hearing that ultimately the written findings submitted by judge carter on december sixteenth were far more expansive then his original statement under some or first as to why his whole new summary contempt on december between december first and december fourteenth we're actually addressing those other issues and he said the judge that i'm holding the summary content based on what you said about the license in the registration but i'm also very undoubtedly you're privy to some of the facts anyway if put of a hypothetical if you came to the conclusion that she had a lot of assets what would your obligation be of december first two thousand and three also the government raised an issue about her statements regarding that she did not purchase this car and the court found that this was another potentially absurd issue with which she would be back with her during attention soon enough however there are some we contend cases involving his refusal to respond to the district court and that a very can in this case the district court had a duty to inquire whether this defendant continued to be eligible for the end of this hearing i'm going to charge you with contempt for the following reasons you didn't answer expressly to answer why question we can't proceed this way i can't make a decision about representational as you answer the questions therefore you're obstructing  question but more than that state the attention sensual facts constituting the charge of criminal contempt and describe it as such and that's what i'm trying to find where is that notice i think number one i can cite to the record as to the court's oral statements regarding the car licensing and registration issue as well as possibly the third issue about using their own funds to purchase a car but in addition under the case law as i said again the notice is in the simple notice and you have to be aware that you could be held in criminal contempt not an issue here and the basic charge is basically so that you can offer an explanation to explain or mitigate your punishment in addition it's been held that  summary contempt conviction will give you one criminal history point that they could affect or sentence in any other future proceeding so i think that alone demonstrates that she deserves or they court or the government has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt