torture commission so i'm not sure how much time you sort of need we would typically say fifteen or fifteen but i don't want to hamstring you but then again it's all in there so which are what are your thoughts i always  county jail to break out an individual by any edgar hole so actually on your way they were before they were stopped by the police they were the process of going ahead on a felony by breaking zenger wilson when he came back on to various appeals that took place i jackie wilson was convicted only of the killing of officer fayed and it was primarily based on the responsibility series of cases that have risen since then peels and so on and so forth which ultimately was before judge hooks in two thousand and eleven based on a turk referral and that is the tortur pending at that time and the turk in your recommendation said while there was evidence both passably proving jackie wilson's claim of torture and evidence he wanted a certain result ok and then you sell us something that you can get on the post invention statute which is a completely different statute with completely different language under completely different code section and to get the did you said you said that he could have suppressed the confession reversed a conviction on this we did know you you have a beef about it you disagree with you disagree with the bases upon which he did it but in your what you do is you take a look at the evidence the newly discovered evidence and you a substantially say ok have the trial court during the suppression hearing and this newly discovered evidence which more often than not is the pattern practice of the various individual supported by the church statute and then he put the burden on the state to prove that the statement was voluntary not that whether the individual you know we were going to position to refute the claim of torture and it wasn't a by about eight o'clock am by the time to jackie wilson was brock's to area two for questioning which was around ten am andrew wilson here already confessed to the crime and he admitted that he was the shooter  he wills it was the driver of the car moreover at the criminal trial your honor while andrew wilson testified about that being in that the two are the same officers that interviewed jack wilson which were and o here andrew wilson testified that he was treated well by those particular individuals back to snap to the group of people in the andrew wilson interpretation that apparently had beaten a confession out of was a result of torture how could you possibly not remember that there is no doubt that he was consistent throughout the early part of all of this the suppression hearing talking to his lawyer all of that the band slapped elbow soft and gun in his mouth slapped around both with open hands elbows ok so while he was suppose we handcuffed in a part of europe to push by the way had no rings well he's or i could say your honor is that if you take a look at this picture it doesn't look right anyone that has had a gun in his mouth hit with the phone book kicked in the line you are needed in if you take a look at the lineup picture which shows his hands it doesn't show that his hands were any way hurt ok and if you look at his statement your honor which is also obviously part of the record his statement  elbowing him from o'hara from mccann i and several other players in this whole thing and jackie wilson statement didn't name he said six or six or eight law officers were in the room with him he people who tend to be not guilty you want to give exposure statements thinking they're getting themselves off the hook can i understand you disagree with the judge and hooks the determinations on credibility and evidence ok but i still have a problem figuring out what your argument is as to what is the burden and what should have judged what should he have done in this case and he didn't do ok on education if you take a look at his decision severe torture that metal confession that was used to trial that gave rise to a king conviction so this wasn't severe enough now i'm what i'm saying is the judge didn't upright the church statute at all he probably granted jackie wilson's confess motion for some motion to suppress the confession that's that's not the turks sketch is it your position that they understand you don't think this happened by if in fact during this hearing the burden on us to show the poncho is the statement which is wrong but the whole decision has garnered the facts and argue the facts as if this was a postcondition case to be decided on the world to that in of itself is revers did that did the burden and shift to the state to prove that he wasn't tortured of course yes and how are they going to do that with all these people taking the th like they said before a tax credit one billion other things the judge in laos to do was cross examine jackie wilson with the statement ok which i said before it was exposed to tory and shows that death is voluntary that was one of the things judge did allow us to do it you know you take a look at the evidence about how jackie wilson completely come back with a different result is very different to say that the newly discovered evidence would have cost a trial court judge to do something differently a motion to suppress versus the issue of whether or not the individuals who were tortured those are respect for josh hooks nevertheless at some point during the trial based on what we believe is extrajudicial information one after the chicago police department went off there our office special prosecutor went off to the system states attorneys and so on and so forth which created a bias that caused him to decide the case based on evidence that went beyond the record and really meant well one of the things that happened during this was that the judge it's sad that he believed that all us was basically acting as attorneys for john persion all these other offices that were keys which good morning your honors i st want to set the stage this is the seminal case of police torture in this city and john birch of the men working under him those people self describe case we presented and the current head ache remarkably powerful and detailed record of newly discovered evidence evidence that supported jackie wilson's claim that he was entitled to a new trial and suppression of his confession which was the product of torture this evidence has been uncovered piece by piece in the face of the unrelenting official campaign to suppress it over the thirty five years since jackie wilson had his one and only hearing in ninety two and thirty five years after the court this court discussed and evaluated all of the evidence that was presented in a four day hearing that was presented in videotaped depositions that was presented in over sixty different it's one heck of a duty to set satisfying in our brief we cite that standard has to be up and completely unreasonable not based on the evidence an arbitrary i think because the court cases say and you can see from his  summary of that same evidence what he saw to be the most important aspects that he was relying on and also he discussed in a very clear wearing work he thought the proper standards were and if you live at  case certainly shouldn't be higher than they should be in a rd stage p c and in fact that was the analogy that gibson made and that's the analogy that the court accepted the case also indicate than it did the st time around and once he determined that by a preponderance of the evidence then he went on to very carefully do what a trial judge is is this to do in a motion to suppress he went through the three reference to who and i as i started to say christians reference is not to the statute itself it's to the website it's still a turk website the turk is not the legislator so  take it upon itself to grant the motion to suppress it did make some very strong statements if you see at the end said given the th amendment given the fact that there is no evidence here that the state could put on in our view it seems unbelievable to us the baker to meet their burden on a motion to suppress that's right at the end of the world decision but in fact it didn't take it upon itself to grant the motion for suppress which judge course did was because he felt w i would think so if the judge grants a rd stage hearing that you get a new trial or you get whatever relief in this case because it's a bottle a confession then what you're dealing with is a motion to suppress you could get a p c on another basis and then you get a new trial it might not have the suppression issue in it but out but then if you grant if that p c were granted i suppose if the state didn't appeal then you go right to the trial if the state appealed the p c then that this court would rule whether the granting was appropriate or not and if it did right it would go back for the trial but that what we were trying here was whether this confession should come into evidence and whether the bill was it was likely that if it were at a new motion to suppress that the outcome would be different but your honour's even if you don't accept the an atlas yes that judge crooks did in his st thing which you have a record here that supports a finding by a preponderance of the evidence that jackie wilson was torture there's no question that you can decide back yourself if you decide that the standard that you think is appropriate is the standard that they're proposing rather than the standard the judge hopes you use that being the world standard as the st year because if you look at this entire one hundred and nineteen page opinion and then you go you look back at the evidence that supports this opinion and all of these facts you can certainly say that even if judge courts took the wrong approach and that he is his belief that a rd stage p c is the equivalent about the standard it wasn't dealing with the stand it was dealing with collateral estoppel and christian also was relying simply on the website it wasn't relying on the turks statures you can't find in the church standard than a regular p c rd stage evidentiary hearing butt as i just said if you don't agree with me then i think that you can certainly affirm on any ground in the ground would be that there was a evidence with you and i will highlight something st of all he looked at jackie wilson stressed him and he saw that in the main it was consistent that in the main it was consistent and he looked at the things that weren't consistent and he nineteen where we're painting on a canvas of thirty five years of evidence of a pattern and practice of electric shock a pattern and practice of birch coming into rooms coming in to get into wilson's room and bringing ben to be a fantastic story it's not a fantastic story now it's proven it's part of the end of this in this case and barack is how he looked at that and why wasn't birch identified be a fact and back remarkably was said by hand to wilson back in our case a nine hundred and eighty eight and i was able to find that deposition and bring that as part of the evidence so jackie had told his brother jackie said he told playing and then the st time after the hearing in eighty two we had a chance to test it you have to remember he didn't have any occasion to say anything from  eighty two on the record in til two thousand and eleven when he testified in a case called logan where he was a witness and then he introduced for the st time on the record purge and the elector show and think about what burgess zemo as he was a lieutenant he didn't do the interrogations he by his own testimony would stand by the door he would monitor and he even said it wasn't frothing andrew wil to get jack to design a confession that made him accountable because they it wasn't he said it was in the tree and script it was in the train script that jackie said he still moving for five days they terrorize the black community looking for these men they hope people out of their houses they tortured and burned was in charge of this and two of his race and that their tires were all hair and mccann and they pulled spirit in the opinion itself you have to read that opinion and you tell me where the you think the judge works with d the file and with it or you could say anything other then we prove by a preponderance of evidence that jack this this woman was terrified to come in she didn't want to talk she came to my office she was angry at me that i knew about her but she told the truth she told the truth to the federal judge hooks carefully looked at the evidence and if you see it pages i think c o c three thousand and sixty six perhaps to the next four or five pages i believe it says notwithstanding the status of any other post conviction proceedings relating to petitioner if the court finds in favor of the petitioner it shall enter an appropriate order to respect to the judgment in the former proceedings so if it makes no sense i don't i think to send it back to him to do it again i mean he did it and he did it on this th was so discredited and both by the police board that being ohara and by judge lefkow at the federal court that she would even admit his prior testimony they have nothing big hartnett the court recor works how he clear fully did the two part analysis and i suppose if you think that the website cited and big earlier christian case should control to see that because it's a civil state criminal cases you prove by beyond a reasonable doubt civil cases if you have the bird proof by the powers of the evidence of the fact that the statute doesn't say anything about doesn't mean  findings of facts were based on a standard of the world standard after many of those findings of facts he would state in a conclusion paragraph that had judge crawling no misinformation he may have had a different result on the motion to suppress not not on whether the torture but on the motion to suppress on and so the whole hoax decision is based on the world standard simply did a primus hey sure he looked through this case the wrong lens we didn't mean it that we tried this case based on the world standard not only did we not try the case based on the world standard it came up way after the fact