will begin with the first case united states versus burke mr hall she must have incredibly bad luck i mean she was living at a place three different times when intentional fires were set twice in the same place i'll agree with that judge but what i want to risk it to the is looking at this evidence was within its purview to construe the evidence to find that she was involved in the conspiracy particularly considering her involvement with the documents and other thanks if she was a normal person i would agree with the lower point one zero percent of the population that means not me nine percent one of the population has a better mental capacity of her hour than you and to the whole panel she didn't know or couldn't disparate occurrences that then brought in my client if you look at the overt acts that are alleged in the indictment there are four overt acts that are actually alleged with respect my client occur over the course of four months he then is brought into a conspiracy that allegedly lasted for i think fourteen years by the time it reached trial that behavior in four months and in particular want to turn the court's attention to the way this was pled as opposed to what was actually proven  the owner incurs certain debts which may result in liens against the property in question in order to have this debt forgiven and retain possession of the residence the owner files a bankruptcy petition it falsely claims that his or her primary residence is the newly purchased residence when he or she truly lives elsewhere and it goes on in this scheme describing this complex series of of you know qualifying a straw purchase or burning a home setting up false de my client was largely convicted based upon a trailer fire that happened in southwest georgia there was no mortgage there was no debt there was no one there was no proof that the either my client or the or that mr walker actually set the trailer on fire in fact the evidence that it even the overt acts which constitutes the majority of the evidence relied upon by the government at trial was not even as alleged in the indictment they stated that they that he purchased the trailer for twelve hundred dollars the evidence that was a stablished a tryout was that walker purchased the trailer for twelve hundred dollars didn't he purchased and has g e stamps that was used in further knowledge of the broader conspiracy and we submit that it's much like in chandler someone being used to present a fault a fraudulent lee obtained something is that as for the jury to decide i think i think that that is a fair issue for the for the jury to decide your honor but what i would also say in the context of this case where we were in trial from that became a big deal that it did it did become a big deal your honor it is especially the way free versions of the of the stamp deal when he bought it for the club when he bought it for newman or whatever his name was the third one he didn't buy it off so he knew what the significance of the stamp was i think that's an inference that can be made i also think that our presentation or our presentation of argument relating to that was severely tainted by the fact that you have  special agent who knows better and who purposely raises the ire of the polygraph examination during his testimony and one would get it's but isn't there at another dimension to the relationship darryl burke to walker because he works for walker he works in this renovation company and the renovation company is supplying the insurance companies with repair estimates and ordered to support the claims and that's a lengthy this is his cousin and it was working with his cousin we used to work company all we wanted to make them close but you know working for your cousin and getting a paycheck from him does not demonstrate that he knew the north side home was an ongoing criminal enterprise but then in two thousand and seven there's a search warrant executed in his place and it does seem peculiar some of the documents that are found there i mean for example why would he have business cards for feral women who handle charlie's insurance claim after the two thousand and two banville out fire or richard wallace's business card to handle dixon's insurance claim after the  and to a certain extent you have to just understand these folks also you have to look at the fact that you have a special agent sprouse who literally presented fa testimony about where the documents came from he literally had to recant his testimony on the stand we had no independent way of being able to tell which document came from where and during the trial i mean it was it was a huge moment in the courtroom to see him to establish that he had to he had to admit that his testimony about intimate documents being at one house versus another was actually faults and so i submit to the court respectfully in a case where the evidence of my client's participation in an overall conspiracy largely consisted of legal acts purely legal acts in when the the evidence what little evidence is admitted into being tainted by reference to a polygraph examination we submit some of the evidence was obtained during the custodial interrogation and then the evidence of been jamin norwood in his conviction for arson there can be no more damning evidence in a conspiracy case where the jury is literally instructed that each conspiratory is is liable for the actions of another when an unindicted coconspirators evidence of his prior conviction for arson admitted i submit to the court well that was it actually admitted wasn't it the case that the judge gave a curative instruction saying there's no evidence of any kind of conviction of norwood for arson but we don't we don't contend for the united states the jury got it right in this case when it convicted darryl burke of conspiracy to commit mail fraud and surely a conspiracy to commit mail fraud arson and false declarations before court own call not a cousin not that it matter significantly agreed to create to accomplish a common scheme to buy low cost properties take out insurance on these properties damages for those properties by arson and then submit the claims for the losses and when the insurance companies didn't pay albert walker surely burke would pursue the insurance companies in court i can tell by the court's questions that are very familiar with the facts and you understand that for example when it came darryl burke that he very much was involved in the property a baggs ferry road where elbert walker bought the trailer for twelve hundred dollars kerry white a darryl turk at took at the insurance on the property claim that it was worth sixty five hundred dollars and when the fire occurred to ten thousand dollars on that property and that is very significant evidence of his knowledge and involvement in  conspiracy and the the same time to make a pitch macintyre who's actually living in the trailers making payments to walker and so so there was a lot of inner co dependence on these people that came through in the evidence and that the jury viewed and understood and even more so with regard to surely burke who was involved in as you pointed out three suspicious fires  leading to beyond the possibility that a mere coincidence and her knowledge of her her denial of previous losses in our insurance claims her to ing these losses knowing very full well that she did not have a right to the insurance was solid evidence of her involvement in the arson the mail fraud and all of the and the  declarations before the court which was fully supported by the evidence i see the court has no questions and i know that i can tell that you're very familiar with the facts so there's no point me continuing to point these out we would simply ask that and if the court has no questions i will return my time to the court and simply ask that the government or that the convictions be affirmed in her mental state counsel for the government said she knew food way or knowing full well that is not true she had a forty i q there was testimony that she was easily confused easily let alone  r and i think you would see that the transcript and we argued to during and to the judge that she just did not have the intellectual capacity to be involved in this conspiracy especially arsole it didn't plead insanity defense no we did not it she didn't know the difference between right and wrong we completely eliminated that office door that was not part of our defense it went down to that narrow focus jury heard the evidence on the point and sort of some what happened as a direct jury heard the evidence on the point they heard  and she was involved with that she didn't know who was instead to flee set and look at the space of time ninety seven out a way out to two thousand and eight that's a long period of time for a person who's easily confused and doesn't understand what's going on in  walker certainly his relationship is something that the jury could absolutely take into consideration i don't i don't dispute that issue he made application for insurance coverage and th falsely stated the purchase price for the trail of sixty five hundred dollars no evidence was ever presented that my client purchased it there's no way of telling whether or not there was an intervening transaction that occurred in the meantime separately the testimony from the insurance agent was that she actually went out and visualize the property that she filled it out and that they had an express form in order for this type of interest to be insured she actually viewed it submitted it to the insurance company it went through underwriting that he made a fraudulent claim for insurance proceeds the evidence was that he literally reported that it was a fire of suspicious origin that  so i submit that under the law that the larger context of the case law that the court has before it on the danger of a stablish in a conviction especially one that that isn't this broad of a conspiracy that's alleged based upon purely legal acts and i then asked the court to look at what evidence that was obtained and present it concerning my client and the taint that