there's another part of the case that bothers me and i'd like you to i'd like to tell you what's on my mind so that you can educate me on the one hand it seems like an rica's rebus is very strong for you and a lot of your of the government's argument i imagine is likely to be about distinguishing henriques rebus so you might want to address why he can't be distinguished on the other  and there's a kind of inherent problem with the argument that bothers me and i don't know quite how to deal with it and that is that people who testify against gatherings whether it's the th street gang  el salvador or whether it's the mafia or other gangs in the united states it's always a scary business because they sometimes get killed it's in the united states if it's a big enough case to attract federal money we've got an elaborate and fantastically expensive witness protection program and you're obviously right they didn't and el salvador what they had was cops protecting him till he testified and then he was on his own and why would you have and the nephew is who cut off his fingers who's in colorado it sounds like they can probably even reach to the united that decided that that person with eligible for asylum they met their criteria had to be in a particular social group and they were persecuted on account of their witness testimony that's precisely what happened they are in this case and he persecution that took place after he testified when the record is how he was harmed after he tested yes your honor and the record and the administrative record i thought to forty five he testified that after he was robbed and and during trial gang members were quote looking for me every day to kill me and that is how he said during tr during those months he was subjected to a credible and outstanding death threat he knew that this gang would kill him if he stayed just a friend to the immigration judge that that's precisely why he left and th got shot and when his son got shot that's correct their honor and you're pointing to those pattern where every single time jr reports to police and they investigate and even convect members of this gang he  subject to another incident of horrible and escalating violence that one council he was not after he testified the nd time and that is correct your honor he didn't suffer physical harm because he managed to survive for a mere a two months before he realized he needed to flee and the law does not require him to stay and house salvatore for long enough to get killed just to prove that he has ak risk of getting killed and this court has said so significant question what happened other than his subjective fear during the two months following the withdrawal of police protection your honor and here like i violence of some sort or anything during the few months following the withdrawal of protection i'm not following up on to a draw it's a question yes your honor he didn't testify that nothing happened during that time he assistance to him it is i have reasonable to us that that threat no longer existed after trial this man had lived in el salvador for over fifty years and the judge in the trial told him to to get out of there and this is the salvadoran government not the one thing the danger that he faced and that they could not protect him in el salvador and telling him to flee and i see that i'm far over eight minutes your honor if there are no further questions i would like to pending his testimony they don't want to lose the case they protect the witness so he testifies but a witness protection program such as we have in the united states protects a witness for the rest of his life subsequent to his testimony two that nothing nothing physically happened so far and during that period you're talking about nothing happened to him only two months ago here it was even projected was two months before he left or a d maybe maybe not but i want to make sure i'm you and i on the same page and you're answering my question was up until two months guess for any reasonable person in his situation and reasonable fear is the bottom line criterion i guess is this hat trick credible sometimes people just have an argument and somebody says i'm going to kill you and they know he's not going to kill on the other hand some time somebody says we're going to kill you and they've already killed their son and they've already shot him and they've already chopped off his fingers once the police say ok we're done with your testimony you're on your own why shouldn't he be reasonably thinking they told me they're going to kill me i believe those guys if i can beat him point it out your honor the leaders call out threats while they were in prison and members who are out of prison carry them out that can be done in any country but it is important to realize that this threat would coming after protection during that one year period before he was relocated so just so i understand the record the one year period before the protection started and a two year two month period after the testimony there was no  considered the danger to him from school the nineteen why would you know your honor that the government had been considering potential only temporary conditional release for people who are under considering doesn't mean a darn thing considering you know the congressman writes back to lose constituent has written a letter that he's not going to do any attention to thank you for your views i will consider them carefully so you're saying that they're  police you know i'm not speaking for my colleagues on this point was not conferred about this case before argument but i will say that it may make a real difference to me in terms of whether or not i would be willing to remain around  government st i'd like to briefly clarify the two months before jr fled el salvador and as my co counsel began to mention in the face of the overwhelming evidence in their record it's a considering the fact that it's a small place as you know that protection is incorrect jr testified that gang members were looking for him up until at least ally two thousand and seventeen to kill him and in this court desk threats and simply threats of death that are credible and willingness to testify and then the next is only requires that one central reason for the applicant's persecution and once his membership in a particular social group and so we believe the death threat on account of his membership i'm satisfied that burden but you're not suggesting that we make that finding are you no your honor however the record as developed only answers that question and the o correct your honor that the agency did not explicitly make finding however we believe on the record as developed they had every opportunity to was a possible on this record for the agency if they got the case back on remand to say no no no this guy's problem is not caused by his testimony in court in open court against his gang it's caused because another branch of the family nephews branch maybe is father's brother father in law's brother or something like that so one of the farm and he had no right to that farm could be if the agency did that then the gang membership would drop out as the nexus with the record enable them to do that and is that an unexplored question  students who got a very lovely job with me in new york much it's always a great help to record when we are pro bono counsel or here didn't probe on a council helping us out i would also complement the government but that's a different form of government complement because the government getting paid to do this and you are not so we think both sides will for the much in this case the case is now submit thank you thank you