way that this was done by the district court was to curst find that the cases were related and then to apply to departures was wrong and that combination of the court should reverse and send it back now what there's a core good in finding that there was a relationship between the speeches we  yes my understanding is that that all of the the defendants have finished serving their sentences and have been released and at least one of them has been deported as i understand it so have all of them now been deported i can't i can't answer  as i read those guidelines she's going to be able to get within about two levels of where she i wanted to go and so as a practical matter she could do pretty much the same thing you know me and you know two levels situation with where do i have her realize that manipulating the guidelines again it's not something that in this case that's that she should do in order to get that down to such an incredibly low level that let me go if you don't need to come up with some fictional idea that these are poor people from a poor country and that they somehow got suckered into taking four thousand pounds of cocaine out on a boat in the open ocean it which is exactly what  out into the ocean and that's clearly not the situation and furthermore as it is this court these cases are an awesome war and leave it's very clear that the exact you can't even if they were similar s three year period supervised release that they come back again if they arrested for doing it again or if they simply reiterate illegally after being deported that's exactly how they could be given conclude that the case or controversy requirement is satisfied by general assertions or inferences in the course of their activities response will be prosecuted for violating valid criminal laws we assume the respondents will conduct their activities within the law and so why prosecution and conviction in this case is the court's already pointed out they have an order far from this country and forcibly removed they have been told that they can i come back but there's no way they can come back i think they have in fact in the forty time i care what you say about the fact that they're not here and if we were looking at this on a very famous corpus i would agree with you that we don't have jurisdiction because they're gone but it seems to me that where they are still subject to conduct but if they do then they are going to their punishment will be reinstated as a result of the period of supervised really yeah i think that's an interesting point again this  that the this case is something that we don't have the thing in and then in the current analysis it may have been altered forever so this isn't a case that we necessarily need to use to educate judges or anybody else because we're special in a is that death in the grand scheme of things these were the these were leaves people who are minimally involved we don't disagree with that in fact we agree they are minimally involved but that doesn't mean that their behavior within their responsibility where they haven't it was if they were just part of a grand scheme of things and their and their behavior was part and parcel it was necessary for the completion of the events now with regard to the  record that we have before us if i were defense counsel i could have argued the like out of this case because there was one hundred sixty five pounds of cocaine found floating in the debris field nobody on that other boat was see their hands on it or even close to it so if you're going to charge people with a conspiracy to possess or possession you've got to show that they somehow can't confirm at least constructive possession and that would be extremely difficult in a case