attorney was compelled and very silly to write out the memorandum which he did in terms of disposing of the cases palami if you question on that you may be right i don't know i mean and that's part of the problem i don't know  because neither neither one of you obviously developed the record in the district court with reference to garside since it didn't exist correct not surprisingly so what's your officer pepper sprayed does he have a duty to say ok here's the official if you want to make a complaint here's how to make a complaint or anything in the in the manner that that would tell him that that's his responsibility well the distinction here was  officer has said he believes the scrutiny and then being treated differently because in the past he's been willing to be a whistle made statements seriously believe that it would be black or white washed and so he made the effort through a different direction so that would be covered up and i think based upon that i mean that's part of the argument that they made for garcia said it is that you know there is no public action there's no movement on the part of my client to go to the newspaper and so what we're focusing on was this court struck decision and you know as versus did was which was another first amendment cases dealing with the judging in north las vegas who would not allow the opposition's within that the court people who worked as court workers who have not supported his campaign judges are elected there in las vegas that he wouldn't allow them to go to any type of seminars and once again the arguments were made that was the clerk allowed other people to come who had not been supporters of the judge and the arguments were made the same kind of arguments well you know it's a situation where there's no public statements there's spraying individuals i mean if i mean i just want to interrupt you but to get a focus here the speech that you claim is protected by the first amendment is the exchange between your client but to say he don't know whether it's true he doesn't make a representation of fact he just says to the inmate make a report to this guy on the other shift now that doesn't tell the public much it doesn't tell anybody much about what might be wrong and so it's even a dispute of fact as to whether or not he ever made the complaint am i right mr writer testified that he did make the complaint this the inmate or not isn't but there was there were three arguments made and one of them is prior of course part of our study are all through all three of the arguments from a party or city but one is the speech that you're talking about the second base i just want to make sure i have three times he says anything about this first is the enemy correct the third is to the when he's interviewed correct and the one in the middle is when he's in the break room or something he says oh i say the guy's life so therefore i bought myself a rolex watch correct but none none of these times does he go to authorities and say i saw the aftermath of this i think this is something that should be explaining that he thought he did something good and therefore he got himself a rolex watch that's correct but he acknowledged when there was a discussion that in fact he was the one that put the inmate up to go ahead and filing the charges  or the fact that the nurse say for example i walked away and he said you know i had to give us the p r because these nurses never do i think that would be the kind of discussion that maybe might raise its level of interest but the fact is that no in fact it's one of the things that we noted protect but but even if the court would say well we think that might be strange because there's a acknowledge the obligation to report wrongdoing at the very most what you could say is that's what he was doing telling someone to go get  clearly didn't have any type of probable cause shows that in fact that the internal affairs investigation was was not just it wasn't based upon anything a police officer would normally do in terms of looking at facts to make a determination to file charges that it came out of the same fact pattern that we talked about previously about in the lunchroom and kelly at that point in time with in conjunction with the other officers than file the internal affairs complaint you know counsel has directed this to footnote on page twelve of