convicted the conspiracy to distribute marijuana possession with intent to distribute subset of count marijuana i think the case presents issues of knowledge intent and actions and that the facts are somewhat analogous to a number of passenger doctoring type cases there's no doubt the offenses occurred but there is inadequate evidence to show a way to knowingly participated and i emphasize the word participation because i think this is the situation we really need to look at his actions it's much easier to describe what he didn't do than what he did but and not to you know repeat what's in the pleadings but he did never drove the load boat never rode in the load boat was never in the load boat it was arrested standing near it san diego where did he come from los angeles traveled down from los angeles the government while we're talking about what he did and didn't do lose the contention that he backed up the truck it in the storage lot but district judge having rejected the testimony of the cooperating codefendant found that that was not believable and that there was no proof beyond a reasonable doubt the way that participated on vance a couple of weeks earlier the district judge i think relied largely on the tape recorded statements that wade foolishly made from the jail but what does that leave us with i'd submit that at bat shows he had argued pull knowledge about what was going on i don't think knowledge alone is enough we've got to look also at what he did what are his actions what is his actual participation i can't help but look at this case and compare it to some of those passenger doctoring cases where we have  and the court says that is not enough like in the sanchez mada case for example but i agree with the assessment that those statements that he made from the jail are the most damaging but i don't think they go beyond arguably establishing knowledge knowledge was not enough in those other cases like sanchez model you know and frankly i don't think it's enough here with the void or or lack of other action on his part this whole we're freshest with put the exact language it's it's it's a very colorful language and i'd have to look up the exact language but the most incriminating language i think is when he's speaking with a female and he says words to the effect and the exact language is in the brief but the words be a fact you know i i did that stuff you know that stuff that we talked about previously i should have done something to that effect but the female says i told you not to do that  stuff and he says you can remember when i when i told you we was on the bed yeah the same stuff i told you not to do that stuff right i have a bad feeling about it you know when you t that you combine that with the fact that he came to san diego with the conspirators spent two nights in hotels with at least some other conspirators paid for by someone other than himself helped unload the boat was there when the boat came back and was very comfortable with the conspirators in the vicinity of the drugs they were very comfortable to have him standing around the boat yet all that conduct to the statements post arrest and it's hard to imagine that he didn't wasn't involved with all the respect i don't think he helped unload the boat there when it was all of those activities that your honor describes as him being present with these other people it doesn't show that he did anything everybody else had a role in the case whether it's to drive the truck towing the boat to drive the boat to to be on the boat to prepare the vehicles prepare the g p s everyone else did something affirmative but wait associating with them and he was there for some purpose i don't think the evidence went far enough to show his actions the proof beyond a reasonable doubt standard excuse me but writing as a passenger then that's not enough this case was a large scale conspiracy with different players with different roles and mr ways role actually is quite clear the government's in that he and mr bailey had the responsibility of driving the boat launch point driving the truck and trailer back in the lot and then bringing it back again the next day to pick up the boat it's very helpful to have two people when you're moving a truck and trailer that's indicated by the facts in the record that on page fifty one of the  and forth to get the trailer to hitch to the truck then he is seen on pages fifty one fifty seven sticking his head out the passenger side to watch as the trailer and boat is pulled to the gate now these things in and of themselves th to any any cruise on a boat someone needs to watch you make sure the boat is not getting hit but it's a role you also need if you're launching a boat to go get drugs and when you when you place that kind of participation with knowledge as the district court found you have enough window to make sure they don't hit the side of the gate or he just opened the gate or he just finished the boat to the trailer those justs are plenty under the case law once you have knowledge of the conspiracy and the government would submit that the tapes yes possibly you could have a different inference drawn from those but this trier of fact certainly drew a reasonable one and you could have perhaps different inference from his post arrest eight meant that he was just there because they wanted someone they could trust but certainly it's reasonable to draw the