mere ambiguity or internal inconsistency in the jury instructions is not sufficient there must actually be a reasonable likelihood whether the instruction evaluated as a whole could have misled the juror and not just the degree murder and criminal conspiracy were not compromised and so any ambiguity that might exist would be only relevant to accomplice liability so because of that one can look at the entire jury instruction and say that there was no reasonable possibility that the jurors would have been misled we can infer this from concern a little back and restate that the question is whether looking at the verdict there is any reasonable possibility that the jurors misled and here i would submit to the court there is not because we can look at the facts of the case which make it very clear that this defendant muthiah son was a primary driver of the event this is not like smith versus one where it wasn't clear who shot whom or who did what here we know that matthias was the one who brought himself and his coconspirator richard darman into the victim's apartment he was the one who knew the victim and this case was very quick to meet to find as many possible errors as there were as evidenced by the dicta that there were also other errors that were waived and not ever presented to the district court but i'm going to go ahead and throw them and a paragraph at the end anyway so i instructions they applied in this case and in this case matthias this case we can because of their subsequent verdict as to the criminal conspiracy to commit first degree murder that doesn't doesn't francis stand by the proposition we're  limit it very specifically to the facts of this case because i can easily imagine a hypothetical where it would be reasonable and would best serve the interests of justice for this court to go ahead and hear the cross however to reach that point you would have to change essentially every one of that is the one thing in which i think that this case does present a fair question if i could change the hypothetical it up a little bit let us say that there was an actual starting to marriage to matthias this causes quite and let us say that it was presented to the state yes the conspiracy connection doesn't render the multiple errors harmless for several reasons the first reason is because the conspiracy instruction itself was corrupted because the trial court began by result on appeal in pennsylvania because there were some pennsylvania cases on the campus liability areas that went the other way but those cases are actually significantly distinguishable on in daniel's in state which are cases where right on the common look at the evidence and they said the evidence was not conclusive second claim dealt with the due process clean and fresh degree murder and the court combined that with the general clean but nothing was raised to say ok we've got our construe this is ineffective assistance for failure to raise the frustrati completely irreconcilable and mutually contradictory or where as here there is a possibility of reading them to be can grow one another not support that at all as i mentioned during my first argument he was the one who would lead them into the area but also he did attempt to shoot eric richardson in a vital part of the body and he failed only because richardson was able to wrestle his hand away whereupon the guy a still shot him several times in the legs and parks and he had over mr richardson had to flee desperately out of the apartment not knowing if his friend was alive or dead to get help so the evidence does clearly show that they intended not have been able to tell joseph to al but for matthias getting him into the apartment and introducing him to richardson who knew mathias but did not know drama except baby by sight and by his street name it was because he knew mathias that he loved the men and brought them up and it was my eyes who said are you ready and pulled his gun out first after which john and pulled his gun out and began shooting mr drew well then they fled together so the the circumstances i think it is very clear that the murder of the victim who actually died would not have happened but for matthias cordoning planning and basically taking the lead role in the whole thing but quite meeting planning is different than having  robbery he started shooting first he wanted to kill the victim in this fr