process he addressed the issue and he said normally i would all argue all the facts and compare them to the evidence but in this case city where good is so severely underdeveloped and there is such such a lack of  a full and fair hearing and there was no attorney and the judge took the testimony on fairly soon to that point he said if there isn't even anything really to address at this point but of course he was he was saying that the board addressed it in the in their in their final decision yeah i think the board when it came to credibility only upheld the upheld the the on what happened and the request for anyone to visit all live together i mean i think that to to present a process argument is linked together in many respects the failure  a continuance to the attorney the failure to change faneuil the failure to develop the record on the part of the judge who was pro se the failure of the judge to allow him to have counsel prepared by a friend in the detention center then she gave him then she said that he had to go forward and she gave him a short period of time to go forward on the individual calendar hearing york karen tours on the promise that he would live with them in new york and it took about a month for him for them to actually post the bond they posted the bond he moved to new york and he was given something different really the case was closed to be moved from the not an order from the detained calendar to the non detained calendar so he was given something he was given administrative forms to fill out for the changes then you it was like a clerical transfer and then ministry of transfer within ten days of getting to new york he sent in those forms asking for the case to be changed to new york where he lived and  government received those forms because they filed a non opposition to the change of venue however for some unknown reason the immigration court will return to sender and sent it back to the california and in fact he even asked for that lawyer on the day of the individual when he went back to the detention center where it was mistakenly calendared and the judge said no that you can have them boy or that lawyer is just for your bunch hearing and in new york he had not yet hired a lawyer because he just got there and the case was supposed to be recounted from as to calendar hearing and then an individual hearing so that he would have had many many months to prepare his his case and he had no idea any needed to have a lawyer to tell him what documents he needed to get he had no idea what documents he needed to get he needed a lawyer to counsel him to put flew but he flew nonetheless to to to the detention center and when he was supposed to be in a none detained setting without a lawyer without any documents to show up in court based on a non him up position agreement by the government when he got to court the judge simply decided to go forward because as she says she wanted she had the time slot the hour now has time slot made available and the government will their agreement to the change of venue so that was fine and was just left alone with that cattle so he kept begging for counsel he was left without his identity documents he was forced to pull it and he was left without his cooperative documents without witnesses without an attorney to represent him and he was forced to pull some documents out of his bag as to his identity that weren't even who we viewed him that had  question that i never got the answer to a bar opening brief and where the adverse credibility determination was discuss took into account didn't make a separate finding on why there would be torture in this case that they didn't take into account the country conditions in this case  counsel that's so fundamentally a violation of due process and you don't have to specifically set forth with the prejudices because it's so obvious furthermore there are other cases i er prejudice in the absence of any specific allegation as to what evidence the decision or would have presented at even provided the opportunity to present the evidence is that your arguments yes forward anyway however genetics and in his brief he basically admitted that there was a lack of nexus solos of jerry different situations in this case i think the prejudice is obvious you didn't have his lawyer and he didn't have any of his dad's men said he didn't have at issue with regard to the credibility issue as we argue in our o b breve gore find that it was not adequately challenge on appeal the opening brief before and the united states should abide by that agreement and the united states reneged on that agreement i have a hard time understanding how that doesn't taint this proceeding and then you have on top of that the petitioner mentioning multiple times that he's not feeling well so you know again i'm just looking at everything in th you think it's ok for the government to sign a written agreement not opposing a continuance and then change its mind in the here and now well your honor if we look at what's going your question here in that hearing before the council even talked about their position on that because the immigration judge is aware of the position initially the immigration judge ask  a lot of his answer or not were not responsive and or confused and i just felt like i'm not sure this guy really understands it's not sophisticated the scope of what's being now particularly when it seems reasonable to for him to believe that there was going to be a continuance and you know asks multiple times on says i don't feel well so i don't know just as a trial judge when someone says i don't feel well all the red flags go off and i immediately well and well i've got a duty to inquire further about this this isn't just a pro forma thing when you're dealing with some person so i i asked you whether it was acceptable for one thing for me so you know he filed his the motion to change venue all the government received apparently they were gratian court returned it to him aware at least of the possibility of a blow down we hear that he wants to go to you or and get a work permit as the immigration judge surmises on one well get a work permit save money and then hire a lawyer he saw the man in the matter again and he transferred back to your and he was forced to go ahead you read the transcript it's really not it's not satisfying enough that bad out there is an emergency an emotional pride about death but again we don't really know what he's going through because there's no have to david after that to tell us what is suggest one may be fairly clear what that same immigration judges expectations were you don't think you might have been surprised when the government filed in opposition and then the government you know you like well i'm not feeling well your honor and then the judge says this is not a difficult question to answer why are you having difficulty he answered about why you converted and then the judge says the re people you know a lot of religious organizations provide community services they are embedded in all sorts of community functions medical care all these things i mean to say unsophisticated person without all of i'm like i don't find that to be you know a strange thing for someone to say you're still needed doing everything he said which was actually consistent with his isolated nine and this credible c r in terms of the identity document in terms of the st stage in his mother's name that was there was a one document a birth certificate which he admitted was wrong he pulled out of his it was obtained after he left the country and he pulled it out of his bag and he said it was wrong his national id card is suppose corked is eyesight eighty nine is credible feel all had consistent interim ation this was one and and none fully translated document that she's referring to that's due to that and relates to the mother's name and his name the mother's name might have been a nickname