and i suppose i should say good morning two of the three of us are new to the courtroom this morning so good morning ration jury did not have to believe him or certainly rational jury couldn't believe the minor but oh it's these types of instances where it is closely balanced case where the jury determine who's the credible witness you know if he ever went to the other school if he ever went to the school he allegedly transferred to i believe if my memory serves me correctly that at some point when there was an issue that uncertain tire maximum sentence send them back and then tack more time on to maximum but there was no instruction that limited that evidence in any way correct no and why might that not to have been presented there is no objection judge at that point it was only brought it was that because during the course of presenting the evidence there wasn't an instruction or just because it wasn't convenient it was a ruse in passing this wasn't something that we were asking the fund to be convicted of it just went from the perspective of b of the young man no i was not but it is explained show the escalation throughout truck that this one from meeting at a train station smoking cigarettes to eventually driving her without a license to be truant from school a slow escalation racialized collation over the summer months until november when he's completely out of school but he's going home certain times during that period of time and staying with his father in seeing  the defendant during the day when ever it was convenient correct correct so he seemed to make a point that this was important that the managing train station and he offered their offer to the cigarettes is there something magical about that location or that's just the fact here in the trial he state to find delinquency or identify delinquency did the state ever define or otherwise perfect a definition of truancy individual's car he his family didn't know who he was a neighbor who was in a relative was in a family friend and just said this other stuff shows that the cigarette shows how they need some of the marijuana like explains how  but doesn't that school then to show more than just the relationship that shows that these were also offenses that could and under the circumstances maybe should have been charged in it the evidence could have been we met at the train station then he gave me his phone number then a couple months later we met again and of discussion then i called him back why is it so compelling to say it was he only called in and that's what it sounds like he only called him back because he was giving him cigarettes he called them back and thought because he offered you need jobs after his job wherever he was working and it and so he decided to take it because he didn't have  wasn't production her giving him other things were telling him to go to chicago or wherever he was going to get in rwanda so i mean that one is specially well after well they just told me to go what's what how nasty to me to find him guilty on that one charge conduct after the comment that you read in the record or from the record is there anything that says about the relationship between the parties and the ladies and gentlemen of the jury you can see that this relationship was initiated by mr gaskins and these are the points of initiation i know its relationship mentioned anywhere not to not to my recollection