or adverse credibility finding the first issue relates to and this is that they are ninety five the nine hundred ninety two rescheduled election both national and local and the are just concerned as to respond petitioners testimony as to who in fact voted in that election on direct petitioner according to the i j a testified that from his party quote everyone voted all over india in this particular election on cross examination petitioner though corrected himself characterize it as correct in his testimony but given the fact that we have to find that no reasonable fact finder could have found otherwise can't it also be susceptible of just the opposite best it's minimal impeachment and it doesn't go to the heart of his claim the claim that he was in fact arrested because of his political involvement with the calling all mine that he was physically mistreated by the police on two occasions to second issue that the i j a i fear to concentrate on as the basis for her adverse credibility finding was a gathering that petitioner testified on direct exam he was involved and to commemorate the golden temple massacre that i believe occurred in one thousand nine hundred four and this planning meeting according to the petitioner occurred in injured the answer those questions is yes it's of interest to note that the material aspects of his claim that he was politically involved that he was arrested tortured and was injured and cross regarding his arrest and his treatment was without hesitation without pause and was very long in detail that is the heart of where the material aspect of his client that we believe should be focused upon and not assumptions or answers were without yes it's been my experience that one of the biggest problems with the cold record is that we don't measure the time between when the question was asked and when they went to supplies the answers to the i jase typically were after party leadership and not the rank and file members should have been after party leadership and not after a ranking member such as petitioners we would submit that that speculation is the police motives as to why they might have arrested him rather than going after rank and  why not this gathering was planned for one thousand nine hundred five there's no evidence either way in the record and it's a let me go back to something else that you said you indicated that you know jay had mentioned there was some concern based on a break that had occurred during the testimony where he went out conferred with somebody in the hall then came back and gave perhaps a slightly different version correct is that improper for the fact finder clear that these instances are extremely rare and pretty much unknown outside the point and as the state department reports you're relying on in the record i think a part of the state department report that you are relying on in the record and person who genuinely have a basis to make this claim they would know two things we should look for two things one is they will know about that nine hundred ninety one election that was imported and it was actually held in one thousand nine hundred two they would know about the boy impossibility is here just on the basis he has not grown his here since he came to the united states because he has great hair and he doesn't want to show this it's not all the red flags that the state department identified are raised in this case so in the it was mentioned and they went by and large peacefully and certainly there was no problem in delhi and again he is one of seven or eight people this is his group so he is asking us to believe that he was tortured mercilessly as a result was afraid that people started recognizing him he doesn't claim to have been a national leader in fact he claims he was punished because he wasn't how could anyone recognized him on a farm so they moved around from place to place for a while and then we have the old you know everybody still looking for me but nothing's treatment they might have kept records but the point is it's not entirely we don't have to just believe that i think we should credit him for trying to document it but in this case they don't help his claim and his dad also does the same thing well this is what happened when i went you want to very briefly to address a couple of  testimony answer documentary evidence evidence rather that because of his political pinion and involvement with a colleague on mon he ran into problems with what with respect to the documents that were produced in hundred seven admittedly they were taken after the fact of his arrest and his experiences but i believe that's president in this court that they that and i j should not wholesale disregard documents that were not obtained near