state's attorney statements that provided a sufficient basis to find that she had an inherent conflict of interest whenever an investigating police involved shootings which in this case were yes which also provided independent basis for a special  that they either didn't want to change the existing or all right bye bye changing the sandwich or that they were actually trying to make sure it was tailor that it was there were less opportunities for people who try to seek special  if that makes  that there is a value may third value referring to a cd rom i carry assumes that the clerk's office had transmitted the physical cd round to the court apparently it has not we we've experienced some issues with h is that the new attorneys of the office examine the case in total and then when they are twenty seven through they met with mr farmer two and found him that the decision sanat bring charges would be reaffirms that the for the same basis you did not g possible crime not merely murder but if you know is it miss where even potentially in this where and then factor in potential defenses that we would expect would be made in an ordinary case in trying to assess that medically heard of proving a case beyond a reasonable doubt allegations in the response but also the status of the law and what he specifically said when looking at the statute and looking to see if you've satisfied it and found that she did go to the count that the petitioner to that and the reason why is because there notion and it is your honor mentioned the legislative history in the midst of this very broad criminal justice bill there was a discussion about amending section one thousand eight and there was a big staff people versus max people versus weeks after us cases talk about this appearance of impropriety standard but not a single case would ever found a violation of lane is the only case that says that and so it was very much an outlier in some of the states f recollection of the legislative history is that he's not talking about this particular change so the special prosecutor said you were distraught about is the ability every individual is make mr farmer to bring a petition because prior to the change in the members of people who feel that they've been harmed in some way to bring these petitions and if there isn't right is no notice we did not object to mr frum or standing in any way in this case because we understood that the state of the law had changed the basis to find a conflict of interest to remove the attorney general is limited is very limited to two situations where the attorney general is a party to to the minute is personally interested in it  prosecutor into the special prosecutor statute which i think it should be because when you look at the special prosecutor statute and when you look at the special attorney general statute there's haven't really been great and lot said and the attorney general by the constituted by his or her constitutional set of facts if you put a different name on that i'm out this of the body that's prosecuting him and one of the doctrines of statutory construction is that you should not create absurd results respect for the if that were to be the case i believe it would create an absurd result