didn't know what they were at risk of answering even if given another opportunity to draft that complaint i don't know how i would how i would avoid using the names the  g just establish that you are not appealing the district court's decision regarding done that you're only appealing the decision regarding my son is that correct  first when i when i read the complaint the suggestion there is that mason could have done a better job of investigating i don't see any affirmative acts on her part like we would see in a case where an investigator includes false information in an affidavit in support of an arrest warrant or intentionally misrepresent facts or  think that reads way too much into that case especially in the year two thousand and fifteen when all this happened every day every minute every hour long forcing officers are conducting investigations online that's where that's where things complaint that that was considered you know any more facts than then are in these complaints or is it the extent to which is this all the information you have so even if you change the name name and phone number to query but maybe it just is why at this stage it's so important to get to discovery your chance your question is a pleading or merits issue i i think the exactly one time by name and it says that she is an investigator of the district attorney's office she was sued under color of her activities were committed to color of law and that she was sued for individual past and that is it otherwise there were allegations the judge judge story read the lawsuit the same way it was this was a lost about the district attorney or the assistant district attorneys that pities and found that all of those activities prosecutor life that is if you were to ask what is the central holding of the order it is that and to now hear that that is not being appealed those findings are not being a different for law enforcement officers than it is for prosecutors and why wouldn't a potential reading of this complaint be that since this was a cold case and there really wasn't a law enforcement officer that was bringing it to the state attorney that mason was in effect acting as on force one officer acting as an investigator and that the standards that would apply to activity can valving defang case in the same office for the same potential prosecution for judge story legitimately i think on the whole you know buckley which said basically you don't divide based upon the individual you look at the fun that and again i went there that's not sort of the chronology of my argument but i went there because that isn't something i've been waiting to hear is a bonafide statement of affirmation that dunn truly is effectively dismissed and the allegations of error with respect to the judge's order about dunn have been abandoned and if they have been abandoned that means that the court's conclusions with respect to that have been in effect a farmer and i think my client gets the benefit of that your hon look at that proposed amended complaint and took a look and see if it would survive a motion to dismiss and found that it would not i think that is the nd bite of the apple and i think that when the court of states with the nd bout of the apple but is not correct the original deficiencies i bar non lawyer having an obligation to intervene to stop that sort of activity and if there is i have certainly not seen that authority i believe that jones versus canon something leaves the door open that in the police officer context at least at least point and again which kind of reinforces the notion going back to judge stories order that this was a felt the six simple favorite especially claim in fact i believe the court is somewhat dismissive of the complaint as it applies to my client simply saying that none of the allegations really made manifest that just forget again you know you've gone through what this can't be in your view in terms of the causes of action that wouldn't apply i'm reminded of jail for something that was very serious they didn't do based on and allegedly shot the investigation is there just your are you just saying that there is no remedy in a case like this does just it's just the way it goes it's interesting i'm suggesting number one but with respect to the remedy that was  y that that because of the nature particularly of the communities that are afforded public officials it happens quite often that either the allegations are simply not specific enough or there is a qualified immunity or  individuals have been harmed perhaps being spent time in jail but it is not warranted but i also expect as the but from a bigger public policy issues these immunities have since what is the greater evil here and of course the greater evil is with respect to allowing a prosecutor and by extension an investigator involved in that office being subject to personal liability for these issues is the notion of a chilling effect with respect to the  is very clear that this is a a lawsuit based upon omissions as opposed to affirmative actions and that of course is the way i read it as well and so it is remarkable th simply can't we test your allegations in your appellate brief it is a tale of three different losses see original lawsuits the amended lawsuit and now the recasts lawsuit as set forth in the appellate briefings and does that what effect does that have on as well as question whether there might be opportunity for further amendment the without rebuttal yes thank you judge the older i get the better i think our complaints are the more experience i have yet the more they are challenged i find myself constantly defending the complaints we are contesting the logic of the order from start to finish from page one to page fifteen i'm not pursuing a i'm not pursuing this done so i that's why i said if the court were to reverse the you know the logic of the reason of judge story in full remand i don't know what that does to to miss donne in the way the order but i we are not saying that the rationale of the holding of this order is valid thirteen where it said what is made explicit and jones is that a participant in the arrest even if not the arresting officer may be liable if you knew the arrest lacked any constitutional basis and yet participated in some way so that's that's what i well i would i would name the individuals by name and then i would add further information that's we could gather on what mr mason did in the way of investigating to take her further and in closing you know please give us a chance to fix the complaint yes we will we will add more to it this young man it's not a complaint but he's the universe to the potential defendants of who caused it but it was a terrible thing and there has to be a remedy so i appreciate the court's time thank you counsel completes our docket this morning jim so this court will be in recess until nine o'clock tomorrow morning thank you