a certain amount of taxes would do right that's correct ok so so let me let me ask you that we we all can agree that question is if we were to interpret the the language of the pardon in the manner in which you suggest that would be a  serious windfall to mr cowen then a detriment to the government of a virgin island help me through how that wouldn't be so well absolutely not because the government has the right for interrupting but i just want to make really clear it's it's not your position and i want to know what your position is your position that the pardon excuses the underlying liability got into your position that the underlying liability still ignore him it just cannot be held to be paid through gets criminal restitution order the person doesn't pay taxes you know the mental state usually have to be pretty high up the chain to kind of say you didn't pay taxes and it's criminal that has to be willful intentional fraudulent negligence or if there's a little more give on that and that's kind of reserved to the civil system and so what happened here is your client was in that criminal space for not paying taxes received a pardon from the criminal suspects but but but you you just admitted i think i heard you that your client owns in that civil space for the tax liability the question is just does your client then have the burden of complying post liability should be determined in the civil context not arguing that there was not an underlying as well if you're not arguing that there's a little if you're not arguing about  differently if it's a criminal contact then if it's simple content it's like it's like going it's like saying i need a loan today if you need a loan could a you might agree to worse terms than if you say i need a loan sometime next three years where you can shop for a better interest rate get a repayment terms all the fathers have you can still negotiate the best you can for a loan today and you can still negotiate the best you can think for a loan in the next three years but well god bless them how good a negotiator you are you might not get the same that there might be some question i believe you're talking about well you know i think a particular deduction here that's open to question and but but here's what i don't understand without law it doesn't change based on context that doesn't the question come down to whether or not this agreement that you reached that was memorialized in the judgment survives the pardon or whether the agreement was merged into the judgment so that when the judgment is pardoned then then then the agreement gone with it and then it's subject to renegotiation if it's part of that if the agreement already separate then it's probably going to survive that even a mitigate the consequences of that being said mike leavitt i mean you've probably got you probably have an argument that doesn't call into question the entire integrity of the criminal justice system you you  the question is you know did the restitution component of that agreement survive or not to what was the part did the pardon go to be the fence or just the peanut of parts of the concern or  have to agree does he want to leave or anything else like that where you say hey this is this is what we agree and even courts can accept that so so i guess my question is your plea agreement was w what you're so so if i'm hearing what you're saying is the reason that the agreement doesn't survive in it because the agreement was only limited to what the parties would pitch to the district court for purposes of sentencing once that p the relative ease of negotiating in the civil context compared to the criminal conduct they can't escape that figure at least in a civil context he might be able to escape the payment timeframe or i don't think i've never heard of someone agreeing to criminal penalties for failure to make a civil to pay on a civil judgment that might be a few bankruptcy code to go that we get away with that but but but the thought would be good even if he can't escape the amount and if he's locked into that amount by stop all this not agreement he still would derive benefit from the pardon by having an enforcement mechanism i would imagine in making his plea in front of the in the court that he was sworn in and stated somewhere along the line that is please willing in knowing and that the facts asserted in the charges are true including the amount of money that he owes and now you're saying that you you want to go back in and really to get a the amount that he swore was actually true is it your position factual basis and some just say what are the elements are those proven and so it's so huge variety in my experience is that how destructive handle eleven plea change a plea hearing aid he say pardon have had some effect and so they're probably terms that are in the plea agreement that that the pardon had effect on any time now the question before us is you know certainly some part of the plea agreement had to they're just you know we get it down we have to we have some degree of automation somehow and we know that that the amount to live with that being supposed let's say that the criminal restitution order came out and said yeah how about one hundred one hundred dollars and that your position that that would mean that he that your client only ever had to pay that or would he also have civil exposure to the full amount if we had a different kind of different to pay that let's just say the civil authority for whatever reason maybe you can if i did think he owes more even if he owed that amount they could still attempt in there is simple effort to get that additional amount from him they may not succeed if our justice system works and delivers on objective truth but you aren't saying that that he is sentenced and a condition of probation barred that the subsequent civil criminal involved if you really can't take the position that we owe anything because if this language is supposed to again this language when it says there is no more punishment to extract the only argument for you to make from that is we're and it goes to the scope of pardon power under virgin island who would be the governor of the virgin islands have the power to buy him up her do one individual you you have no cap fidelity and can can can can he do that i mean you might want to think you're not going to be punished for not paying your taxes by going to jail become out there may not be much movement on that amount and then you renegotiate a penalty or a payment schedule and then the consequences for not paying are not criminal they might be leaning they might be you know  all that money you are she going to fire up the civil process and get try to get the exact same amount if not more if you don't have the ability as a condition of probation to have the call and go to civil recourse to get them out no compromise if you can you their green we can do it you know you know they say the easy way or we're working with the hard way but you don't have to renegotiate them out you can you have a product by which you can do everything you can and this is not this is not perfect ok this is not a perfect hypothetical but i want to it's going to tell me plotlines about how you how you analyze the law let's just say that there is there is a person who's convicted of vandalism they restitution case by the end of the year you will pay the full amount of those broken windows and let you say that before that day come there was a part did that mean that the shop owner payment or something else like that he's not he's not in the criminal justice system for doing so he could get back to questions could the governor of the virgin islands with that intention could he have a way to point if the governor of the virgin islands said you know i want to get you out of i want to get you out of that that that's the vier and i'm using the tragic events not truly but rhetorically that's severe payment schedule i want to pardon you so that so that we can just go and get the families on your property and garnish your wages and do whatever else like this is what in the power of the gun the pardon power of the governor of virgin islands just to take off the table this criminal restitution not vindicate this tax liability through the criminal through this criminal action and i pardon you for that it doesn't say we will not be indicate this act liability for ever and all come from circumstances if we will not seek redress or to vindicate this cack liability through the criminal process you are here by pardon does he does he have the power to do that is recognized he doesn't have the power to sue a spontaneous distinguish the underlying liability the is look i mean you might be looking for the long thing isn't it have the right thing to look for a limitation on the pardon power i mean i'm i mean is eat anything about the pardon power so limited that it would pour vent the governor of the virgin islands from saying we won't pursue this law ability much like the vandalism example you know we we won't make you pay it big part of the criminal process you know i mean it but just out of freedom what to do what makes those conditions punitive in court is the fact that there's criminal consequences for not complying with those and so  bit isn't it not the fact of the tax liability that makes it punitive but the fact that missing the payment schedule subjection to criminal penalties isn't that what makes it punitive and that that underlying punitive and that that can be redress through the civil process but the pardon takes off the table the criminal part procedure to make judgement entered for enforcing that otherwise independent obligation civil or administrative capacity we can obviously take care of if there are a must there's an objection by my colleagues i think it would behoove all of us to have an opportunity to see the game see