he is applying for withholding of removal and withholding under the un convention against torture this is a case where he was kidnapped beaten and threatened with death shortly after he him that cartel had a uncle and or mr mess go ahead and uncle and cousin that were that were members of the cartel and the issue in this case is whether there is a nexus between the harm that as our expert witness testified if you're not a member of the cartel and you're a relative and you don't want to join you have information that is of interest could be of interest to the police to another cartel or to the u s government and so you're unwilling this noise give me forgive me but this is really hard to get from the briefing is the is the is the in is the reason you're in danger time's ticking right this is what i understand and this is what effective to help get you to what troubling me at least they said he didn't want to he didn't want to join he resisted he refused right that's not good enough and an icicle law right right but he's got relatives in there and they know who he is and he knows who they are and then they say you're either with us or against us so despite his statement i just want to live my life i just want to have a peaceful existence i told my mom i wouldn't do this they know who he is and he knows who they are and it seems to me that's the gist of it was a family group that we're talking about i'm trying to give you every opportunity yes yes it's the fact that he's got well first of all his cousin had had contact and he'd only been in mexico for two weeks and his cousin whom we didn't know very well somehow already knew he was there and there's the incident in the market we got that and then and then just two minutes later five men that are older men that are part of the car social perception of the writer he hasn't declared in opposition to the gang is the point but but but but they perceive him to be an enemy that's that i understand from your theory right yes so tell me can you help me out with the on account of nexus are they coming  because of his family status are they coming after him because he's refusing to join well they're coming after him because it's a mixed mode of it's mixed mode because it's of withholding case and part of it is or of course is that he's refusing to join but the other part other part of it is this is because he's a family member and there's circumstantial evidence of that and that's the intensity at which they pursued him they number one they but wait a minute on that point  understand the first couple of incidents but then he went to live with an uncle also a family member on a ranch for a couple of months i think he didn't have incidents so when you answered that callahans question that's what i need help with that whole sequence yeah now there he didn't he didn't leave  whether someone and someone can i would submit that someone could not live in definitely in that in that he basically imprisoned himself he refused to leave the farm and that way he was he was safe now whether he could the thing is that whether he could live with his uncle again like that and then live like that indefinitely i think that's that's an assumption that can't be made the thing is that he was he never left the farm he was in a rural environment whether someone could exist exists that way and definitely i would say you know it well ok but is that is that's that but the i j found that he can safely relocate to another part in mexico so we can't just speculate about that whether that would be good or not what do you have you well we're our expert in kidded talked about dozens of people that had been removed that were in fact killed and they were they didn't necessarily return to the part of the country where there they had been you know initially threatened and and he had privy to that to the corruption of  intended to bring him back to to the cartel in in some more mature con so i'm still working on this question of social group because we don't have a social group at the moment identical to the one that you're proposing what's the closest analogy to a social group we have recognised family would be family and the reason why i didn't and that nobody in his family's been persecuted he's the only one identifiable as someone with an immutable characteristic he's a family he's safe a relative he can change that and there persecuting him because he refuses to join them which is faith which is a threat to their integrity because he can provide information on what's going on in the cartel just by his of his closeness is a relative and also it's not in the morph a screw up it's a it's particularities he's a relative and again as he's socially visible not not on site visibility i know but but but social perception case and the cases that were cited by the government because in those cases there was no threat of imminent death in this case mr a message was doesn't fight i thought i was going to die a knife was put in my throat and this was after a severe beating do with the government acquiescence requirement and cannot relocate requirement ok with government acquiescence we've got we've got the fact that the police refused to help him just i mean there was the incident where he was actually kidnapped from the police his aunt contacted the police she was told be quiet don't you know we don't want to hear your complaints you're threatening yourself by even complaining so we've got acquiescence there and then as far as relocating again he had gone to t wanna and was kidnapped there as well the only time when he was safe was when he isolated himself on a farm and fused to go off the farm  and as i said are we have a dream of finding by the be that he can relocate now the b i a didn't go into that that's that's one thing that's that's the other thing too and that's one reason why didn't that press the issue at length because that doing ok relocation may not be the same as going into hiding it in this case it is going into hiding because you see he's not leaving the farm we've taken your over let's hear from the government but we will give you a chance to respond thank you very much because he had relatives in the car why isn't that inclusive evidence that the assaults were on account of family his proposed group because the assaults were not on account of the family they say they recognize that he was a member of one of the the board said even if that is the reason that they targeted him for recruitment that's not the reason that they actually harmed him i don't know how to get away from the case of it if you're refusing to join isn't enough because every time you're approach with your family or not every time you're approach and decline now you know who they are and they know who you are and so it seems to me that you're always going to be in that situation where there's a family there or not that's why the on account of is you know difficult of course there's a lower standard for nex and lower standard doesn't really apply because it's it wasn't on account of any protective ground it was simply the gang members attempting the cartel attempting to widen their ranks through through he's right opposing counsel has this point that what matters is whether the persecutors perceive that you've expressed opposition if we were talking about a political a political statement or a religious group for example and they have said you're either with us or against us so even though he's protested i just want to be left out of this i don't want any part of this kind of gang involvement what about that but he hasn't pointed to any other members in his group no other family member has been persecuted because of refusing to  to to submit to the recruitment efforts all of us that theory is being persecuted because they are my relatives which is why they're always going to be able to find me and they know that i know who they are so i'm a liability to them and to the extent that i continue to refuse i continue to be a liability as i'm going to be targeted that's his theory what do you think about that but that isn't the proposed social group that he that he proposed is prequel social group family was in there he did keep lopping off the other into the cen right so that but the core i'm not rewriting it for him i am exercising portions that i think appropriately object to a circular but his core reason is i'm family so they can find me and that may be the case and they did find him according to the board the board the agency's decisions here said even assuming that they did target him because he is he has family members in the cartel the fact remains in the seminal fact is the persecution wasn't the harm wasn't on account of that family membership it was because he refused to join the cartel and so that i think is hard to get away from given that this court's law is very very settled that this is not a basis for a particular amount to torture his brief to the board basically said they threatened to kill me and that was that was sufficient for toward him they did kidnap him yes but that again that b not under the case like your honor and certainly the record doesn't compel the conclusion that it does and in fact in baria sources holder has to his primary argument is that he believed that he would be he believed he was going to die and that was this court said that isn't enough to rise to the level of torture and so here even though there was a threat to his life he believed he was going to die i don't think the record compels the conclusion that the board was wrong when it concluded that that and his kidnapping than one of them rather want to relocation how would you respond on those two point if the court disagrees with the the torture determination that has to be remanded for the board to conduct the other  such as acquiescence and relocation because the board noted in the footnote that it specifically wasn't going to because it resolved the issues here on nexus and quantum of harm it wasn't going to address those other it those other remaining issues i repeat myself on some matters but the the government of course indicates that he was he was recruited basically as that they just wondered if they wanted to increase their membership he was a healthy young male that type of thing and i submit that the the intensity of the recruitment efforts are circumstantial evidence strong circumstantial evidence that it was the family relationship and the concern that he wasn't going to join that was motive that was motivating at least in part his persecutors they had they had after they contacted him they kidnapped him near his home how they knew that he was out shopping on that particular day that they must have had him under surveillance he was kidnapped later and t juana and then again he was when he was first contacted by the cartel he had only been in the country for two weeks the only people that would have known that he was even there were family members and somehow the word got out to his cousin ivan real solace that he was there i've been contacts him asim they hang out which and then right after that he says no i'm working two minutes later the cartel members are confronting him you either join us or we consider you're against us and then his troubles began at that point regarding the issue of torture the the government is is ignoring the mental component they say he was the knife was put to mr vest was throat but he wasn't cut the mental anguish that he went through there is is just as relevant to torture as physical harm and the definition of torture includes extreme physical and mental  y and that's your two minutes if you'd like to sum up in a sentence or two i have nothing further to say thank you very much for your attention ok thinking think both sides for their helpful arguments gonzales vs barr submitted for decision