minutes fifteen minutes for you fifteen minutes for you and you may save up from your fifteen any portion you wish for a response i think you can safely assume that we've read your recent we're familiar with the facts o changed son and they were at the closest three feet from one another and then but but the witness did say that he was anxious and fearful for his safety because the suspect was holding a screwdriver  so he turned around and ran away and we would argue that that was not a good opportunity for him to see the suspect because his direction i actually had a conversation with may according to the i just a few words were exchang pants about five eleven although the author changed testimony about the height and said i think it one point six feet and then six one and the strike shirt with but it was going down he said it was a polish he didn't explain the suspects age or weight any kind of sting wishing characteristics of his face like a star or his and he had a facial hair when in fact mr williams was fifty two years wasn't wearing a black baseball hat or dark pants or carrying a dark back he was not holding anything he was wearing light khaki pants a tan straw hat so the only the only detail was the striped shirt and the you know he was in an alley at three in the morning so we'd say that sick the identification procedures here were highly suggestive in that in addition to the  one makes a difference when you add that word but we can say that any identification made by this witness was did not have an independent basis separate from this highly suggestive a great his identification  hearing is usually necessary when the facts are flushed out about whether there is an independent basis we argue here there were enough facts on the record there are enough facts on the record for this court to determine that end of no independent   testimony once he the witness at trial testified and once the officers version of events changed dramatically a trial about what happened and we would we argue that defense counsel was in effect to for failing to reopen that however the issue is preserved so that this court can review all the facts presented by it to all the circuit court judges in this case when reviewing this issue it reviewing both issues because defense counsel filed a motion for a new trial real edge in this issue and also preserve the issue when the evidence was presented at trial i really knew in the motion the motion to exclude and objecting  as for the a given the corrupting a fact of the suggest of rape and the method by which the officer showed it the state cannot prove that the identification was based soley on mr bines memory of the incident be virtually impossible for a witness to later be able to recall or identify a person on a completely independent basis from this highly suggestive array and for that reason we so  k i think i understand that that because of the highly suggestive nature of the array the way in which it was presented in a highly suggestive manner to the witness and the witnesses inability to recall certain details of the disc of the description of the offender at trial and the now matching portions of the description of the finder but i interrupt you question what body do you propose that now this is a this was a and so there's no there's no time pressure they could call the police the chicago police department which they eventually did and they got involved in the case the chicago police could come in and help them with a light wind up that they didn't have people to  to stand for a life line up there in a busy medical district area with a hospital right across to actually in the same building they could have called in people to do a live lineup they could call chicago police and say hey deal prior booking photo mr williams and he is refusing to cooperate that would have been on mr williams but in this case it's the police because they physically moved his head into the picture so that inferred to the witness that this was the suspect they would have done that to a volunteer about three or four feet they had a conversation where a victim asked what are you doing in my car defendant responded my friend told me to wait at this car and then the victim said no that's my car and one would assume a being awkward pause took place after that but so basically it was done after that conversation to take place and let me ask you this after the conversation how long was it before the been sooner than that so the also right to the platform and saw the defendant within ten minutes of the victim going down a police station saying someone broke into my car but that but the man who defended in this case was wearing  because the certainly not but the fact that he had that was a different color and the pants were a different color i don't i mean those certainly go to the accuracy of the description but i don't think they're any paying of the pigmy site around the defendants that the officers had called the defendants had up because the defendant would not look at the camera if the defendant did not look at the camera he no one could make out his face from the right well let me ask you this what about  any arrest situation expediency is preferred because there is always the chance that maybe they arrested the rock person and maybe the victim was there death by someone else can clear that up and get the person who was wrongly arrested on the way as soon as possible i think any defendant when they're recip would prefer the battery of expediency over being held the girl power later getting out what they prefer like you have to take another hour or two to get me lin say i do not and furthermore there is a great deal pension attention paid to the kind of to yasser but the defendants the senate has no one to blame for his appearance he had some he had maybe a misdemeanor battery back in his past he was fifty three or fifty three years old the judge pointed out that he had a pretty decent family background  he pointed out that he had spent much of his adult life in prison and that's all well and good the release of their the wrong person but then there's also the objective of having a fresh identification whether actors and whether there's an independent basis is the length of time between the crime itself and get on the case of so clearly a fresh identification is favored stated before that they talk there is talk of you know it's a busy area they could have found other african american males but the question keep in mind that this is a hospital and the police are working at an office in the hospital this is where the people it and he also said that he says he after viewing the array and identifying mr williams he was shown the proceeds of the burglary which reaffirms his belief that that was the man that that had committed the crime so you would argue that given the taint involved in the photo  the case will be taken under advi