and really when you think of the equities of the situation if the verdict comes in a minute after the verdict and the defendant's on the line for all those future damages and injuries that never will occur as well as the pa ads can occur within minutes so if the jury believes that that are you ready we're kind of thinking about you know should we call who should call do you want to call but the cook the point was could good judgement for you or against you it goes to the judge for a decision just like it goes to a jury for a decision and there is no you can see any radical reason to distinguish between a bench trial and injury trial for that reason there's no there's no jury the fact finder has got a great number of things to look at in this case would serve as a good example if this case was a bench trial and this case had finished and it went to the court i don't know many judges who would say i know exactly what they want to do one every point f so i understand why you can't tell the jury that jury didn't know that it do you think that the jury do you think that if you had if this were a bench trial and you told the judge that for some reason would be treated differently and i don't know right we treat one one differently than the other turn out as well as they hoped to not only want to take it away and to do that they want the court to draw between bench and jury trials it does not need to be drawn so for those reasons we asked the court from thank  exactly what chris was position is i didn't hear him and ask you to enter judgment no proton and december third and he did that's what those cases would seem to say that's what they lead you to impinged trial but again there's no conceivable way that could happen eerie basis in terms of i say shit like you're not really contesting the elements of damage that that went into seven million dollars is the exception not except the emotional distress right you know they distribute we've discussed that we certainly are contesting the joy jefferson's right to pursue and recover was passed there was no contesting it so she had the right to do that the survival like gave her those scars as of action would like to thank you for your arguments in your briefs this matter is going to be taken under advisement and there's going to be a brief  eighty seven ninety one through ninety two now but when you get there the passage mean leg any impeachment is where he asked the question and did you get the answers he only asked the first half re asked the question and that's he me clear that there are certain statements i refused to acknowledge certain statements i will in this occasion the prosecutor use that phrase do you recall p s this question in disco biscuits the people concede as they and again this issue was not preserved because it was not in the motion for the trial that was litigated below so a defendant has to demonstrate that the error was plain the fact that we're having a conversation about whether or not this was the best phrasing of the question to the shooting this is part of the investigatory process the officers are out there looking for people you have to tie the relevancy of these people you know the identification to be actual people had there just been a picture of say  claim to this before if it has not demonstrated that otherwise admissible piece of evidence like this can help speed the first letter for the analogy but counsel is drawn to the police reports used in britain is fundamentally different because it's a writing yes we'll see hundreds of federal race every week and then it circles of our exes the whole time i've been here i've never seen a live hand parading in and you know over the the head  somebody there that really struck me as the theory distinct and very unusual and my guess is that the state that i have with we've got something golden here you know we can use this and we did it in research effectively question for us is whether net that's not a slippery slope i mean what happens when the police department to say what we got away with it and coriander someone just do this for everybody get the the federal a witness to start writing on the corners and in the that and the cops then give that to the state's attorney and in the states for me shows it to the jury and they sort of make their case indirectly with you know that markers so it that's put in here put a number of subjects first of all is that i station when they were discussing his will who knows what may be his suit in our case maybe his involvement in this case that only knows and the jury now see something hear something on the stand and they see something that's a picture how is  dark you do see at one point the conversation about the gunshots these days they wear baggy pants they tend to say down that's probably what he had on the time isn't it so this isn't something that was put on just an attempt to make a stronger more compelling  responsive to the evidence that he did and again this has to come in either through plain words to defend its burden to demonstrate one of the first from the get this is closely balanced in its people's position that there's ample evidence that wasn't much for your arguments and your wonderful briefs we've enjoyed both and we will take this case hundred