thank you your honor is central issue in this case is whether an interpreter may be held responsible for the subject matter of his interpretation or of the nature of the environment in which his interpretation found to have participated in interrogation whether there was a prior questioning you know prior to that so what you know them bring brought into this room i think we don't know but at this stage torture was used by the group in government of actually inflicting any form of torture any way shape or manner on any individual any kind in crew he did has repeatedly held that he was merely an interpreter and during interrogation when  felt that someone could not answer a question properly due to the methods used by the group in government he was told to actually reprimanded to be quiet as he would simply deter future but as i understand the princip i would disagree your honor given the technology that exists today you do not need an interpreter to be present in the environment in order to offer interpretation i have been in proceedings many times where inter her is available by phone what if mr miranda was available by phone at that point participating in interrogation what if mr miranda is available by intercom on in from a separate room in the read them retroactively participated in the interpretation going one step further what if you simply interpreted an audiotape of the proceedings would he then participated in the interrogation packages that he was present he was in the ice the fact that he was physically present is not is not consequential i think has his role is the same whether he is physically present whether he's available by intercom whether he's on speakerphone his  role is his only reason for being is to translate from one language to the other the exact nature and the manner in which he does it in consequential that's all he's doing well now i have i gather from what you're that you can see that in the total picture there was there was thirst if you should the issue is whether or not you're quiet as an interpreter participated in that that's correct you honor and you say that mere presence is not enough and we all know that's true even in the commission of crimes but three major factor in this case that strikes me is the girl ration question there you can see that there was persecution going on in this setting by the peruvian government yes now how long did it go on the record show us how and well but the i'm focused on how the duration of what is labelled as persecution we know that was that that was not a single incident that was an ongoing pattern that he was interpreted i mean he was not given he was he was given messages by phone or by anonymous letters stating to be at a certain place at a certain time to translate from cut you off to spanish and vice versa that's all the instructions he was the things that he was viewing that the proving authorities could inflict on another person and he was also in fear that that same thing could happen to him so he did continue in his legitimate rol throughout your endurance there are police officers in our own police departments who can speak english and spanish if they'd be found guilty of interrogation if they're merely acting in interpreter while another police officer very long calendar thank you in this case yes and what happened here was the immigration judge defines otherwise participated as what this person did which is showing up for instance persecute tory and torture interrogations two or three times a month for six years and never saying no he may not have turned the knob but it was around you are you basically saying this maybe you'd like to hear examples but nonetheless you're taking an office  the only question is was didn't meet the definition of otherwise participated in the persecution of others is that a reasonable reading of the statutes to say yes showing up one hundred fifty to two hundred not used to harm anyone probably to make way that's a benign purpose there was no persecute tory motive in that act it was purely cutting hair that a rental on the other hand  issue but went back two or three times a month for six years to watch these people being tortured that is good and participated there is no that is not an on this reading