actually in terms of the sum of money that was different the sum of money before the state court was an issue was about sixty eight thousand dollars but ultimately was determined before the urgency was ninety thousand dollars was miscategorized so the new evidence here was there's a twenty thousand dollars difference so let me back up a little bit and put some meat on that the testimony that came before the court in a criminal case was that my client as an employee so categorized drawing documents unilaterally had no authority from her employer is from god's will and to the tune of over several you're tired ver sixty thousand plus was categorized is this the stuff you're talking about he said yeah something along those lines thirty five hundred dollars and ultimately what came out through the air to see proceedings and part of it came under the criminal i'm sorry total of four employees so he was suspended for that and it was a clear finding and during the criminal trial what was evident is that there was a for sure to employees my client and another gentleman who was working for a part time basis who was who receive income in the form of salary and in the form of expenses the expenses would not be reimbursed was that she took the credit card for personal expenses and into a credit card was an office credit card use the for her own personal items and that was an authorize an independent contractor without withholding and she asks stephanie heat to be treated the same way so he then contacts with guys who were guys who gets back to her and they're all doing his like through some sort of messaging because she doesn't even work in the office except for maybe eventually opens up the statement for himself and he had never seen since two thousand until two thousand told seafoam of figures out how wrong this is been happening and what the amounts are and he was completely shocked but even then she has not even made any and are a couple showing of reasonable probability that if the tax returns had been subpoenaed by her trial counsel that she might have adequate it because it didn't come down to the tax returns income down relation  said regardless of who you believe that she took over five hundred dollars and that was all in the documents it was all in the printouts and the exhibits and the judge didn't really even have to resolve this sort of contest of credibility with one of them maybe that she could just keep not paying some of these taxes just because maybe she can afford that time there's evidence that she had them over there because of the create tree crash in your house and therefore she could stay in her house and then she could make mortgage payments and especially about whether because i was representing her with the mortgage company on that but all that means that she had some financial troubles so she's got all the motive then and then she realizes the parent made the opportunity to take some of this money but it's about hunting he was trying to hope we were that so she it was an answer for everything but i just didn't find great answers to be satisfactory and then that extra new information doesn't really change the fact that she never did provide explanations when she she thought she had a answer for everything and the judge wasn't buying it so it's seems like this new information to try to go after the credibility of mark or bozzio calling him an a or b c hearing officer like that somehow makes a differen studio and i think her husband might have been involved in some other business to she's been tailing all this like office the potus all the office law firm credit card and these supplies are not showing up at the law office they're not musical law office presumably i mean some of these things were like mischaracterized another employee's wages that's mine as expense reimbursement which was not taxable rather than income which was taxable and later corrected his bookkeeper he did do the same for two other two thousand and seven relative to my client maybe two hundred dollars eight thousand two hundred fifty two dollars income was incorrectly coded as an expense in two thousand and eight the number was fourteen instantaneously looked through his own misgivings or bad procedures to correct it all why did why in a way which are coming trial you know for there to be an error to see an investigation so i don't know the answer that question  the case this is a procedure an undertaking specifically relative to material testimony a trial so that this isn't just one person over here and it was this guy's a liar and somehow or other relates to th