very often but given the fact bound nature of reasonableness increase of this kind given the kind of sequential events that transpired here it would be actual chase because the chase as i mentioned has certain sequences to it and certain locations where beds occurred so that would be hopeful to be it any did not see the crash you can see for maybe a second or two on the seven twenty five big vehicle which is coming up to the scene you can fish on the left hand side you can see the reaches into that first mr blaine as some of the response of he reaches in and then it seems that mr blake comes to mind he seemed to mr plans making movements he's not complying with the commands and then mr bland threatens factually goot to the factual disputes is the district group made pays stood in the way for granting qualified immunity here and that is that at this point with the alley they reasonably believed at this point and throughout this entire time that mr planned was armed they also knew him to be very dangerous at this point considering between the flight and here garner establishes that a law enforcement officer cannot cannot use deadly force against a suspect who is believed to be unarmed and non dangerous and fleeing on foot here very different circumstances respectfully these or officers that are located surrounding the corps at night very well noise i cannot i don't know with the state troopers were asked in their statements with the car moving the ball at least one of the newer officer said he thought the car moved the car was jumping whether the car was launched back really or behind the car and they it's their perspective that the car side and it shows the alley in a chrysler almost right up against each other that's what the officer saw because you had some of the officers approaching from the right side some of the two from right let me stop you right there on the drill issue of what the officers threat i'll say this one of the factors to consider another factor is that he's yelling i'm upset it is going to kill you repeatedly well i think if you look at the totality of the situation and consider what these officers said they relied upon and whether that even occurred to determine whether or not there are factual issues here because this is a service that anything of the record that contradicts that he is yelling let's to kill the officers there's not part of the case this is an issue for the jury because it's not like i'm just pointing to the aspect of the vehicle and saying well taken this by itself this vehicle couldn't move you have the scaffolding stuck to believe the wheel which is they are we also had at no point during this entire pursued did a gunshot ever come from mr grant's vehicle but when you start looking at why did the officers do with they do i think you can consider  with things torso and his head out you have another officer saying he still in around moving round inside the vehicle then you have these other officers saying his focus be on the guess of these very in the car is that all three of these things at the same time i think you the significance of that is that the troopers and the newer officers carry the same kind of the same weapon bread but they carry different calibers only the durable the circe had forty caliber six hours where the sta clearly that the new officers were doing that because of the different caliber in the weapons that were used car well it isn't a bar in the car i think this is not what we have here what we have here is a fact that mr bland was related to the owners of the vehicle and recognized the vehicle and retrieve the vehicle and it's clear without e evidence for work with me that indicated it and we agree one thing the state troopers used nine millimeter and police officers used forty caliber but the evidence  memorandum or supplemental submission son that is supplemental addition to