sixteen year old native american child in a manner which deprived him of access to counsel to meaningful principle advice and which suggested him to one of the most cruel mean to instruct you but i think it's very important that we need to get beyond the facts of the case because they are horrible they are horrible and yet that doesn't suit you so we have many more the question of whether you has to do with whether or not he was afforded the protections of eighteen u s c fifty thirty three the juvenile delinquency act which requires that parents be notified of the arrest of heard the phrase you know when i get an attorney offered in anything other than what we might call gangsta speak and in fact special agent kirk who conducted the interrogation said that he took that to be a gang related mood of speech though if you think about it in that context it's not somebody coming in saying very politely you know when do i get an attorney it's coming in with this against the attitude that pervades in here what your rights are and this will this will tell you everything you want yes your honor and he provided a learning disabled sixteen year old native american with a written explanation of his rights did not explain them orally to him had his father sign off as a witness prior to presenting them to mr or singer johnny worthing or signature and merely said to him just sign here his father was there his father discussion he and agent kirk had had a discussion in spanish which johnny or skinner does not understand and that can't be a meaningful consultation with the pair and it simply had when we get into the facts of the trial or the facts of the events the father had wrecked a car on the way to where they carjacked these two guys out of the lake at a bootlegging party taking their car tied them up right and everybody started heading off again tending to kyron off into the forest and did not accompany the people to the scene where the homicides to please to he did have very different interests and every interest in distancing himself from the homicide culpability it's done every day in trials as this court well knows that the defense is i wasn't culpable the fellow sitting over there is the culpable one and that's the conflict of interest that's why we have different counsel if this court look at the mutilated courses is clearly a course of atmosphere not dispelled by anything other then putting him in the company of the agent that had done that to him and all of the statements concerning his involvement in the shooting case which is i believe before this court under zero three one zero five zero zero came as a result of the interrogation that immediately followed that contains crimes that are not acknowledged of all in federal court so all of these all of the acts that he could have been charged with murder the tribal law he could have been charged with under federal law yes you are and if i have any time left it looks like  before he knows about the proceeding this is not a and he is quite first time to the system and he did not say as it's abundantly clear in the case law that he did not say i want a lawyer he did not say anything that could be misconstrued in that matter for a conclusion he did not make the statement the case law he said he has to say something that can be reasonably construed as an invocation of counsel one could infer that he knew and chose not to say i want one now he was read his rights asked do you wish to he evidence no indication of a need to corps to a need to set up to loose in the time of the juvenile it was an unfortunate scene as the court below noted created by the defendant it was necessary that he be out there because they were argue about the the actions of the agent upon being confronted with the decapitated course of a nine year old what his reaction should have been how he should have handled it but in the totality of the circumstances the other agent came over removed him from the location put him away from the agent agent kirk also interested in discussing for his rights there was another criminal investigator during the taking of the statement and the court did note that where it isn't a record that duncan also went over and he described no no tears no shaking no nervousness and he got it written statement about the grandmother and granddaughter case finally you're hon officers the federal officers in conjunction with the federal prosecutor had determined at that point because this case presented a unique situation we had statements by people that crimes had occurred including murder normally you have to have a body of determination of death other than natural but the bottom line is under the case under dos under percy as no actual collaboration be prosecuted for the felonies in the state and you know tribal in tribal court i mean it's not they only have misdemeanor authority for such things as aggravated battery robbery things like that but only the mystery level right now there's no evidence of actual collaboration was while there was discussion on the facts of the case and what to do that there was no actual collaboration to deprive anyone of the standing of the federal court that's when i heard it ask you about the difference between the churches the court said there was insufficient eviden obtain federal search for arrest warrants but there was sufficient evidence to obtain the arrest warrant some credible and they jointly made that decision and i was asking you what the difference were in the church in this sort of problem and i will keep it short let me address two particular points one has to do with allred and mr kirby has suggested that it was the price repeated question in alvarez that distinguishes it from the instant case if you look text of the decision in alvarez they reproduced the transcript of the interview the only reason that question was repeated three time was because first the agent says pardon me when arrest these people on the federal or on the problem warrants instead of the feds agent duncan testified and said page two or three of my volume one of the excerpts of record that the intent was to get them into custody and interview them that's why they wanted to get the tribal warrants and i would urge court to find that every fact they have the missing people the blood in the truck the statement of the  it turned out to be a codefendant all of which was sufficient to get either a federal or a tribal warrant and the only only conclusion the only reasonable conclusion that this court should reach is that the reason they went tribal was because they knew that they would have a greater opportunity to interrogate johnny worsening or if he was being held under a tribal warrant and was not afforded the protections that he would have been had he been arrested on a federal warrant you know what the charges were and the