diagram was used in part by this long expert he's a reconstructionist named mr calhoun and what mr calhoun did was he went out to that scene on several occasions at nighttime and in the daytime filmed took measurements in an effort to reconstruct what must have happened on the night question and more specifically your honour's focus was to identify police officers who worked at the seeing on june third two thousand and one really issue you've got to deal with it seems to me is whether of sterling has qualified immunity to shoot at the time he  as to the credibility of the officers he will tell you that at the time he takes the shot without in terms of credibility the jury story so i think that right the jury will decide  conclude that it was not objective only reasonable having just heard on the radio that he shot to get try to take him out with that rifle if you take a look at  ok so they're over there and now there's disparity as to what they say they think they say at the time that officer sterling hears them radio reports were being fired upon they say that at that point in time they heard my clients come out he's saying fall guarantees to them he's saying i told you whatever to stay out here and they say he chambers around which would not occur because there's a out half an hour earlier which would have already voted that way off and then they say once they heard that she would bring of the round and there's some disparity between those two officers if they turn and run and jump into their kids because they're jumping into th the credibility of the testimony of the after but the key here is what sterling understood it was what was the jacket reasonable to him that's right even if the other two officers are just lying through their teeth the question is what understand what was what was healing and then that's what i would draw your honor to this the excerpt page forty because you'll see sterling is going to be at the bottom of the diagram he's right he's in a position called be m y client is up above that position down the driveway he's in position h so we have sterling and officers all back in b and we have a long in position  sterling regardless of what he hears over his radio just has got a clear view of mr long he's not only got a clear view of mr long he's got a clear view of fifteen feet on both sides of mr law so he can having shot people earlier in the day doesn't give you the right to kill an individual or to resort to deadly force it's only when that individual is pointing out life with somebody and somehow posing an immediate threat i don't officer has the right to  but let's let's say for a moment that whether or not the other two officers allegedly went into the ditch or telling the truth or not if you're anything in the record for the record so that suggests that sterling did not him take the rifle up into a shooting position and it appeared to backfire which would suggest he had shot the rifle right he says he even heard the bullet ok so under the circumstances where's the lack of reasonable there would have been a sound of the sound of the bullet going off heard by many many other people no private people heard that sound not know no shell casing was found from and his partner our expert went out to say of his partner's saying you know i went when my client goes across the driveway over to where these marina and canal office is that this officer did all they could saying they go out he goes out of our view our expert goes to that very site and says i can possibly from the spot that they were on from the garage roof across the street down the driveway being one foot apart and the inability to see that you went back should be able to speak is something from which i believe a negative inference can be drawn if you don't want to see it and that's the same kind of attitude that was shown by officer bernstein who if you take a look at this diagram is over on the back side of the property he's heated position number three he should be able to see the entire incident and he doesn't see anything until after a long shot and it's laying there groaning on the ground but he should be able to see as our expert said having gone out there both day and night under all conditions he should have been able to see long over in the position of h he could in fact see the head from the position over here it was nation eat so there's more than just officer sterling saying when he saw the fact that gif he saw what he saw there had to have been a shell casing people had to have heard this is like for fifty one in the morning you know so let's look at what troubles me  not in front of the jury we have to simply take the statements as they argue either not at least at this stage well i think i would question that your honor and the case i would draw your attention to is date scott versus henry only surviving witness and what goes on to say is that the court must ensure that the officer is not taking advantage of the situation knowing that there's nobody else except him him to identify what's going on and he specifically sa what you must do the court may not simply take what they say as self serving document self serving statements but that they actually have to look to see if the officer story is internally consistent and also consistent with the rest of the seven two thousand and one and that report he's actually got my client walking along way from the scene where he's allegedly just taken that shot so no longer is there an immediate threat he's walking away from that  scene in fact my expert is able to quantify having gone out there to exactly pinpoint where mr long would have been shot that at the time mr longer shot he had one hundred twenty degrees away from the seat the question becomes is there an immediate threat to any of the officers of the time officer sterling takes a shot if he's thirty degrees away from sterling and he's one hundred twenty degrees away from the bush keeps going away from the scene and that most recent supreme court case that came down in two thousand and seven that talks in terms of an officer shooting someone that they're fleeing away or all of the cases once the danger of the immediate danger has passed and there's you have reason to and this is worth not of the map and then he asks us to interpret what these recycles say but in the light of what might or might not have been able to be survey and if it turns out the rifle was found right next to him that something would might lead one to believe that that probably happened if that was the correct there's a record show whether the rifle had been fired  some kind of political report was done some kind of review did was any report done that shows up in the record that indicates whether that rifle was fired  the two other officers were in the ditch four minutes earlier he said there's no evidence that the rifle was fired later what what inferences are we entitled to draw from that if any i think when you took so if the gun if the gun did not indicate that it had been discharged then officer strongly would have to be lying i suppose best way to put it right whether or not a constitutional violation took place that's another issue is letting it be a square but in terms of whether or not the shot did it doesn't matter for those purposes w and immediate threat to his fellow officers is it your contention that if we draw an inference that he was lying and is sterling was lying about having seen long shoot the gun that he was holding and that it goes back to the other point that is made in the record that these folks were in the ditch four minutes before and then that also there is some improbability in that account as well but whether or not we were sterling could not have seen that shot and could not have heard it shot if it's the two officers were in the ditch four minutes earlier if they were radio then and said we've been shot at and yet know that in the cold analysis of looking back at this point it doesn't make a lot of stuff that's just terms of its details here he is the guy's got a gun he's shot two people before he's yelling obscenities at everybody we're supposed to look at it from the terms of this pressure cooker if you get this report he's not obligated to sit there and analyze whether this makes any sense you could shoot him is that right well it's not that he doesn't analyze it but you know he's looking at