that gets into the gun right that didn't happen that day you know she makes a she makes a nine one call there's two very brief call she didn't even say who she is you identify yourself and yet police are able to ascertain exactly who it is the reason why of course they know so no mention that the guns had not been heard was one two was no mention that of the backpack and i'm sorry really was no mention that she actually had an active warrant out for her arrest this is more important just after officers are they are i mean certainly once she makes an island call then officers are there you know then it becomes important because you know once officers are there she's got a real risk that she could be arrested  and yet that's nowhere mentioned in the arrest i see the you know what why isn't that without force because they didn't know that she had a charge pending against stripper a false statement i'm sorry can you repeat that  i didn't understand the question why why isn't that irrelevant because the police didn't know that she had a charge against her for false statement it's important because she's going to have an extra motivation also no mention of perhaps the most important fact is that the actual substance of the false reporting charge itself involved james allen in this case detective it does because of the very least what it would have done is alerted commissioner moon that there was an issue regarding her making false statements again that's not what happened council counsel let me take this from a different angle suppose the magistrate was informed that there was a nine eleven call from a woman who falsely reported gunshots she tried to hide it backpack that had evidence of drug using and pretty drug dealing in it she was a little higher and she previously lied about allen and that's putting everything in the strongest light for your client right would there still be probable cause here no i don't think so because the sole witness in this case it's reporting gunshots and it's ramsey and there have to be some and yes that's what i said she had so and there has to be so the threshold question here is whether or not the district judge clearly erred in finding as a matter of fact that neither of you fired nor any of the detectives on the scene either recklessly  disregarded information material to want to haitian on every single point the judge found the officers credible and found that they'd neither deliberately nor recklessly omitting any information and the heart doesn't really do the trick here and that the information of all the officers test of the considered if i considered the information from all the officers then despite the view of the judge that everybody each individual officer told them the truth why wouldn't it matter to an issue in magistrate if he got information that the woman had tried to hide a backpack with had drug paraphernalia and dealing paraphernalia in it that she lied to the nine eleven dispatcher or or where they cough syrups less about gunshots that she'd lied before to get out in trouble why wouldn't that matter in the magistrate's evaluation well i'll certainly answer that question but there's a you don't have to get to that question unless you're prepared to find a district court made clear air in crediting the officers testimony that in fact they were unaware of that information now with respect no i don't i don't say so i think the problem with the statement you just made is the word day no one individual appears to have lied to the court now i understand that and just very quickly is we understand that the court found the best the a fine man did not know most of the facts about which you're talking conviction for nothing so the fact that she had a drug issue was no it's also relevant that every single officer who spoke with her i will see you don't excuse me the scale matters she might be the scale matter she might be allen's victim of the false statement charge well everyone involved here admitted in the district court that if they had known that they would have included that in the affidavit bets admitted that but the problem is the bets didn't know it and vander waste was never asked about it at the first hearing and if the second hearing when asked said i don't remember whether i told him that or not so the district court credited batson said he didn't know because ramsey recanted under pressure from alan that's what would have been disclosed in the affidavit that would have actually tended to mitigate the false statement charge could have explained away as it is now the knows that she has a pending charge for making a false claim for a public official has no idea what the circumstances are was what was that some established fact that that's why the that's what the false statement amounted to she was intimidated into ca that or is that just a theory this morning no that is what she told the detectives during her audiotape interview it's a pages are three one twelve to three fourteen that's what she told the officers when they're being told this this is what the officers were told the off the record shows that nobody at the time knew the actual circumstances of the false statement charge nobody had those records at the time they're applying for this affidavit they just don't know so the office can only relate a what they know and they're not at fault if someone gives them false information that's not the officers problem the officers can only be truthful with what information they have and in that circumstance magistrate would have had the false statement charge explained away it would have been a d v recant which everyone would have just sort of said oh ok i mean that's not an excuse you shouldn't falsely accuse someone for that but it does explain how about poster her credibility because she was taking the chance that she was going to be arrested and in fact she actually told the officers in her audiotape statement that one of the reasons why she had reported an earlier incident with allen  because she knew she had this outstanding warrant and she didn't want to get arrested but this time the incident was just too violent and she was prepared to take that risk so had that fact well i should back up that fact that this report found was can you know there's a problem for not disclosing that kind of interior and the neighbors don't really know it was too violent because if somebody had me scared for my life i don't think they'd go back to their house for a cell phone  saying what people know when and i just know quite well i guess what i say with know is that the officers only know what they see and are told and the officer saw was physical officers learned the identity of mr allen was the identity was the victim victim of the false statement the district court found as a matter of fact that in the set at the end of the second hearing that the detective did not in fact know that prior to executing warrant what but there's no evidence that he told us that's well that's i mean i think you know i raised the claim because there was an actual finding in you know he had zillions initial hearing that you know that he did discover that so i you know and then the second hearing that's correct in the in the first hearing the judge zilly found that minutes before he actually execute the one that he could find it so i included in the warrant but you know i can't find anything that that at any point that this is a case that actually involves mr allen as a listed victim i mean that's a big deal it shows that she lies about him and she lies about him and you know she of course minimized the reason why she was lying about him i mean that the it happens in false statement