how did it specifically i thank her performance in defending him but can you point to in the record with respect to that issue your honor when she went up and told the court after mr vargas outburst in front of the jury which the sheriff said wasn't working and then when she said she would feel ok well the judge asked him can you nevertheless continue representing him and she said oh yeah no problem but they go back down after the judge has already examine say there's no question about what happened in the facts so what do we look for when we try to decide on a deal whether some relief is his due because of that what do what's the question we must this that i uing it must have affected her performance i think that has to be the inference you're arguing how do we separate them from the outburst if you engage in in front of the jury where he had to be physically i guess restrained or removed first we have the issue of the fact that he said and he told the judge the police officers beat me and planted evidence on me and she is refusing now only to investigate that even file just to you know get the records of the police officers he wanted and california law makes it easy and you have such limited time and when you make a point to think about it discuss it just a little bit the evidence that they planted on them or the clothes that police who later upon him and said that he had that this was the guy so there is some confusion and even the defense attorney argued during an cross examine the witnesses as to the unreliability of the i would sit down if occasion which brings me to the other point about why he was so prejudiced about what happened in her refusal to investigate his claims of innocence because that she did was she just made up the defense in closing argument on either the police's version of that car correct what is version of the facts was correct that they planned the evidence on him and they beat him but there was absolutely no evidence before the jury that to support the closing argument that she gave that she wanted to sort of have a cake and eat it too which is that he just happened to be walking but i'm still waiting for an answer to my question oh i'm sorry but the question was how do we separate the prejudice from his outburst versus your claim of prejudice from the fact that the attorneys which here i got side track your honor i apologize we can't separate it because you can imagine how upset and enraged a defendant would be starting you know going into this trial with repeated w that fear is an unwelcome but often present companion in trials particularly involving crimes of violence the question i'm struggling with is how did this it attitude of fear that you say the defense counsel very adversely affect her performance as a defense lawyer in representing your client before the jury that her performance was not based upon an adequate investigation and that the defendant was an understandably upset the court of appeal agreed that there was no other evidence in the record that he was otherwise a threat a physical threat to anybody else and that when this happened under those facts of this particular case she had a duty to seek to be removed at that point because of respondent and in this case the petitioner has not related by clear and convincing evidence the factual findings made by the state courts and then we adopted by the district court the best petition you can ask is for this court to just draw contrary she did a great job she eagerly defended this man against a mountain incriminating evidence she made objections to cross examine witnesses she it's clear that she spoke to him at some point and throughout the trial she asked for a counsel to two defense counsel who thinks he's innocent who think likes him and thinks he's nice actually able he defended him there's no evidence to the contrary and her fear she repeatedly assured the court that her fear never hampered her evidence of that i think that's that fear of of one's crying is something that public all public defenders experience insurance some point and and she even said after you see that she's rearranged her fear was gone she was no longer afraid and if that's all it takes is moving snow six inches away at a crowded table then i don't think if it was very great to begin with she took reasonable precautions and she had reasonable concerns but i don't believe there's anything there is any evidence that she thought her job would be compromised her professional reputation i