who accused her stepfather of molestation under some somewhat peculiar circumstance where her parents were a very bitter custody battle and only upon prompting from two friends a church who in a conversation confessed that they had been molested to change oh decided that she too had been molested and accused her stepfather of the same and within what seemed like i think may not be precise but very like within an hour or two the police were involved and the grandmother knew and the uncle who was the police offer knew and you know petitioner had been charges very serious crime so the question in the case is whether or not the prosecution's comments improper comments during closing argument fundamentally infected the trial the fairness of the what is required so the focus on the credibility is really about analyzing the prejudice in the trial and how close the case was i think fundamentally in this case doe or believes the defendant but isn't that a jury question the jury was able to hear both parties testify and listen to all the evidence why isn't that a jury question of course as the jury question the issue is just whether during closing argument the improper comments made to improperly vouch for jane doe and to discredit the defendant at the time whether that those constitutional errors titian what specifically was the language that you say  because there there are so many dodgy normally means where the government is putting its imprimatur its approval on the witness's testimony and i'm i'm looking for work what it is that you suggest meets specifically the prosecution says tells the jury during closing argument hey this was a thirteen year old girl she could talk about things that people have studied for years and the debate for years and so he's expressing his personal opinion and that she is extremely thoughtful and did he say i think i think she's extremely pot full in that sentence he doesn't i mean he says i think it's he says he says she talks about things that people have been studying for years and debate and then later on he says i'm telling you this little girl believed it important to keep in mind when counsel suggests and then he sort of stops because the only thing he did at this point is suggests he's a liar and then he goes on to say jane doe believed it important and moreover it's basically suggests that her faith in god and religion shows that she is not a liar and that that is his personal belief because he's saying i'm telling you this little girl believed it important overbet them there but there are so many instances of it and maybe those aren't the best examples and i also think it's important to focus on the misconduct that was found by the california court of appeal so there is you know that there is misconduct that the court of appeal never identified its constitutional error and then there's the conduct that the court the that was the extent of the prosecutors here during closing how would that constitute a sufficient basis in and of itself to find prejudice to your client commit these charges he said no and then the prosecutor argues that somehow he didn't say because he didn't say i didn't do these charges know isn't sufficient that is a mischaracterization of evidence because it previous corpus all of this trial took place in the state court so we are now dealing with a double differential standard are we no actually i think this is what the most interesting questions that the case presents which is how  legal standards are for the constitutional error versus the prejudice and parsing those issues out i think is probably the most significant part of the case and so in all cases you're parse out prostitution error fundamentally render the trial unfair whether that's const element in proving constitutional error or whether or not that goes to prejudice and the reason that ends up being significant is because of the double deference required under the a t p a as expressed in harrington versus richter where you have the no fair minded jurist standard which is you know very tough standard to meet and so whether or not that's you know under harrington and under white vs what all we see that that very high standard only applies to constitutional error and not to prejudice case hopefully out of the ninth circuit that supports your interpretation of the vouching issue of the vouching issue i assume the douching issue is you this is the principle argument you're making here welcome back to justice plaisance point also we have we have a conceded error so i think you can win on that alone and i think you do have to look at a community of late but  the best cases collectively are smith sanchez and weatherstone i would say with us is the most compelling in all of those are all actually drug trafficking cases and what's so significant about them is that what they say is where there is any kind of crime and not in those cases smith and weatherston it's saying sanchez it's a different type of prosecutorial misconduct but all of them very clearly say that the prosecution just made one improper comment during closing and those cases were reversed because the case rested on the credibility of one main witness thank you cast your time has expired you will hear from the absolutely nothing appropriate but what about when he said i'm i'm telling you the girl little girl believed her quote her faith was important to keep that in mind when counsel to suggest because the only thing you did at this point is suggest she's a liar how is that not tying and credibility to face the prosecutor didn't are to her that she should be able what was the purpose of him saying i'm telling you this why would it be appropriate for the prosecutor to say i'm push your response to opposing counsel's position that the prosecutor mischaracterized the evidence by calling into question whether or not the defendant had actually denied committing a crime argument about how little the kelso opposing counsel suggested the testimony of the of this witness was crucial was there other evidence with respect testified that when they searched the strips computer that all of the pornographic sites information pictures had been deleted from but that expert was someone had gone through the experts again and deleted things because