appeal of adele determination and it is my hope that there in this proceeding this court will be left with a definite and firm conviction that in the state has been committed on the issue of whether this insane that we should be detained or gra in the lower court we respectfully submit that the court eroni asleep decided legal perspective and a factual perspective several things that impact this analysis and should i hope lead this court with that impression the court iranian's we held that the newly discovered evidence provided by the government in the last two months was of no value and  essentially were in the same position we were when we made our initial bell application we disagree and we think that the facts speak for themselves this was a flawed assessment of this newly discovered of and so the embracing of the government's view that this evidence is nothing more than an attack on this to be ruled this credibility is wrong on its face we received w wrong as the court is aware miss incidentally is charged with murder for hire on the one hundred and fifty eight dollars which specifically requires as an element remuneration the government's claim is that mrs cinelli with through seven thousand dollars from her bank in february gave it to mr the ruba who then bought gold worth less than seven thousand dollars and turn the gold over to a hit man all of this of course being a fiction because it never existed in our initial balance acacia which is very different from what we have here we cited what we had and what we had not only was a two year course of action by mr the ruber literally to morality in conjunction with other people who are associated with her ex husband this to carballo we cited for example a text that was more general in nature to which i wish i had the money right now to come over and give you a really do but i don't and i have to suffer it for the poor decisions that i've made please don't judge me now that indicated to us and we proffer to the court that that's the rule but by the way in april of two thousand and ninety a couple of weeks before he went to the federal authorities and three months after it all began according to him that is a general statement i owe you money i wish i had when the government turned over the rubies phone leo to the extent that he be confronted with it when the test you know i'm missing something or something to the contrary but it is absolute brady material that should have been turned over immediately but it absolutely negates the element of got it in our view the court also stated that the weight of the evidence was not the only thing that the court was considering and yet when you look at the other factors and three thousand one hundred and forty two you look at her personal history a twelve year veteran of the police department with no history of violence lifelong community ties a belt package of over a one million dollars secured by property living with her father who is a retired lieutenant in the n y p d there is a change in circumstances concerning the weight of the evidence that should be considered if she didn't pay him to hire a hit man and then this affects the entire analysis with respect to danger if she didn't pay him for a hit man and she did not attorneys we have not been able to visit with her we finally after a month arranged a video conference last week the video feed did not work but even if we had video conferences for thirty minutes our ability to meet face to face w we view these text then your honour's there's so much context here it's not just a matter of picking out good text and presenting them to the jury this is a story that went on for over two years our ability to prepare is completely suspended and when the can then it is over we then will be meeting with her and will need additional time so there'll be an additional delay to trial and also we have to remember judge fierstein basically things stand in line u nderstandably there are many other cases and a backlog that has been created but we did not precipitate this difference with regard to our ability to prepare had we had this evidence in june when it was promised we would have spent nine months reviewing it and perhaps perhaps a different argument could be made we now have been told that the b o p s two to a twenty four hour lockdown i have a police officer in the midst of this crisis and all that's going on in the wake of the boy's murder in b l t will be looked at shall we say negatively again under complete lockdown i submit respectfully that there is a mistake that was made here mrs for that we should be granted found insufficient based on all the facts and circumstances to justify pretrial release moreover the district court properly found that the n b c modified operations are reasonable and like the pandemic and that the defendant has no trial date or other circumstance that would make her uniquely impacted by those modified operation the denial of her th amendment claim was also not a clear error with respect to the evidence that the defendant claims gutted the murder its assessment of the evidence regarding the intended murder none of which is placed in dispute by this motion it's not disputed that the defendant was recorded on multiple occasions pulling we talking about having two people murdered one of whom was a fourteen year old but the defendant appears on video deleting incriminating evidence which itself is a charge defense here it's not disputed that the defendant was recorded discussing her alibi discussing ways to make the murder of her husband look like a robbery gone bad or that in april the twenty one team the defendant was researching online of the death of her husband with impacted standing to receive a portion of her pension in their divorce in other words your honour's the distrust of the district court evidence from which to conclude that even if the defendant disputed the payment piece she still dangerous and importantly for present purposes your honour's the district court considered evidence of payment that's not at all addressed let alone disputed by the defendant's current motion on direct the court to cage nineteen of the government's appendix which is a transcript of the june th twenty thousand and twelve motion argument where counsel for the government specifically noted the video recording captured the defendant through the audio and video recordings for self in connection with the initial bail motion those recordings contain other evidence that had nothing to do with the seven thousand dollars that the defendant seeks to put in dispute here in a recording from  quote doesn't he know saturday you're getting all d your money again the district court had an evidence from which to conclude that the defendant understood money would be exchanged for the commission of the murder and the handful of text messages relied upon by the does not suffice to materially alter that conclusion that this record consider all the evidence together and found that on balance the evidence of dangerousness weighed in favor of detention unless the court has any remaining questions me i can certainly ok iran is let's be clear the conversations that are cited by the government are not as put forward and actually if you listen to the conversations they clearly show the opposite do room there is walking around the house talking every time he talks about money there's one instance where he's talking about hey this guy wants additional three thousand dollars the fact of the matter is this incidentally says nothing this is an instance where mr incidentally if the government were correct in its assertions would be saying what are you talking about i gave you seven one thousand dollars for this guy there is absolutely none of that your honour's what happened here you have conversations between the roomba and cincinnati that are orchestrated by the rube after two years of his doing everything he can to ruin her own along with her ex husband and along with the other people involved here the final conversation the one the government doesn't speak about is the one that really tells the story here and the one that really shows that this is nothing but words of somebody who has been manipulated and angered for two years what happens is they stage the murder the type is walk into the house with a photograph and basically say that your husband has been murdered m sson cinelli begins crying hysterically the detectives lean at that point the rule that takes a chance with his final salvo and it is at this point that miss incidentally would be expected would be expected to seal her fate he turns to her and says why do you crying you knew this was going to happen and she's crying hysterically and repeatedly says to him i never believe you always to me repeatedly saying that to him what happened here was yes you have conversations she is clearly angry but in the final analysis if you look at all of the text messages if you look at the fact that he literally gives her own list of his debts think about it this is february march and april if these two individuals are conspiring to murder two people why would he be  constantly please let me back into the house i know i owe you money i will pay this is not what would be going on if in fact valerie cincinnati had any intention of having anybody killed or paying him to have anybody killed there are so many of these and then two weeks before he goes to the federal authorities because she has absolutely kicked him out of the house which also is so in congress to all of this century text which specifically says i know i owe you seven thousand dollars for the gold coins and parent that a cli gold coins that he bought with this seven thousand dollars after months before taking money from her and buying gold coins he paid her back this time and then he was accused of stealing a fifty thousand dollars diamond from the same person that he bought the gold coins from there are angry words here we have said that from the very beginning but never once said we imply or acknowledge in any way shape or form a seven thousand dollars payment for a hitman and the rulebook constantly repeatedly time and time again makes very clear that the money that she withdrew from the bank in february and gave him was to buy gold coins aside from the fact that the entire story is is just it makes no sense that that a hitman would want gold instead of the money and  want it for less there's no question that this was a long and it does impact danger because what it means is that these this case is about words it is about a reword without any intention without any intent to harm anybody valerie cincinnati never threatened either of these victims and never reached out to either of these victims this is the ruber orchestrating these conversations there is no murder for hire here and