syrians claim for asylum for the first of these three reasons as the immigration judge failed to make and expressed adverse credibility finding and the importance of that i will highlight further second the immigration judge applied and in christ legal standard when it determining whether miscarry and conduct was culpable to the extent that it could be deemed assistance in persecution finally the immigration judge improperly shifted the burden of proof t of proof to show that she did not assist in persecuting somebody else on a protected grounds she was working as a guard in a prison for where they had political prisoners and she conceded that she had walked at least one prisoner down to a location to be added in the quarter i forget which for political purposes now this far as i could tell from the record the only threat was to lose your job i would think if it bothered her to participate in torturing people on account of their political opinions she'd be delighted to lose your job go back to being a secretary like she was before she was prison guard or do something else prisoner to the isolator she did not know beforehand what was going to happen to that person like she did know that they did see people in this location yes your honor but i think it's a view that there are political prisoners that there were two political prisoners ones in order to enforce discipline that's part of keeping them in prison which itself would be persecution well first of all i think for it to be persecution the beating had to be on account of a protective groundswell of let's back up  those involved onto concentration camps and they specifically say that there must be more than just action then working as there is to be persecution and i understand that but if that's the flipside of this is that if she kept some person that was her job was to see that they stay there and present but there are there are two political prisoners there there's no evidence that they weren't  political prisoners there they're also upwards of three hundred prisoners there he wants and heard job was not to persecute any prisoner it was just to keep the peace what's the difference whether you beat them yourself her hand them over to somebody bigger and stronger to beat them well i don't think she knew that she was handing them over to someone bigger and stronger they can have little if she knew what was going on there at least what they call my solution the green isolation building she admitted that she knew several months into working there that the were prisoners between them she knew that one woman even killed she knew they came back and i think when i'm had to lay in bed for three days can get off but she does not know when she escorted these women to this place that that was happening to them while she  need particular woman she might say i don't know what's going to happen to you in there but you know what happened the other two gone in there was not an incidental person she was necessary to the whole process but if you evaluate her conduct over the whole the fact that she refused to do prisoners that she herself was beaten threatened and raped and eventually force and for instance looking at they say active personal involvement is necessary in their membership in the persecutory group such as this prison as to the question you were asking earlier is not enough but that doesn't help the medication plan which is really interesting past but she did not go to the press she did not quit her job i can't see where she did a thing except talk about what she was going to do that she didn't do she went to her supervisor when that did not work she went to that she took prisons she tried to go to the press and the chief of prisons prevented them from speaking to her and then she was beaten in her home and so i think it's anderson annabelle that she after that decided that it was not in her best interest to voice her opinion of this anymore and then she eventually had to flee the country persecuted for the very thing that she is being said here to have perpetrated not for any old reason and for i think if you look at the case law and you know that you write her conduct individually and on  other than that which you can well i think in the beginning she refused to be the prisoners right she also complained to the fellow officers and she was told to be quiet when a more severe incident occurred and one of the jurors was science because she don't lose her job and i think  nine i thought what happened was fishy claim to be slow on the uptake about what was happening to the prisoners and then when she expressed her happiness with it she was told she should shut up burchill lose her dr so she showed up in order to keep her job and it was long afterward where she started threatening could go above people's heads and go to the press that she got after threats to her safety as opposed to her job serious that's her safety began when one of the prisoners was killed and then they made it look like it was a suicide and i think if i have a job doing something criminal and somebody says you better shut up about  you're going to get fired i would think my reaction would be  i don't the fact that she kept her job for a specific amount of time and didn't automatically quit when this began happening i don't think that goes towards whether she was an assistant and the sister in persecution kills people because they have the wrong political thing and let's suppose the persecutor recruits a charming young lady to bring them to where it's convenient to kill them for the charming young lady recruits the person with the wrong political opinion brings them to the apartment of the ideological killer and that knocks on the door deliver some and leaves if i understand your argument right the troubling young woman would not be persecuted the charming young woman would not be a persecutor if she did not know what her actions were doing if she did not know that she was taking political people based on their political demands to be and did not know when she escorted these prisoners what was going to happen to them and moreover if there's no evidence and even a single instance where someone was beaten because of their political beliefs and even though it completely reprehensible they have to have been persecuted persecution it's only on account of a protected ground and there's no evidence here that that ever occurred to you meaning that if somebody is kept in prison because of their political beliefs you look at for instance it's a similar situation where there is a member of the lobby in political police whose purpose is to round up communists and communist sympathizers and jewish people on behalf of the nazi party to investigate them to see what their sympathies are and eventually put them in what the petitioner that case called a terminal prison he investigated people on these grounds and admitted to slapping them and that was found not to meet persecution because there was no evidence that he slept in the cause of their political beliefs even though most expert testimony in that case good afternoon your honest my name is carol flattery represent the respond yes i agree with the sympathies that your honour's have expressed in this review the evidence of this is very admitted in this case that she escorted prisoners many times to the isolated unit don't know if he would take that position that was the case that i mean i'd want to see what the board said about that first that would that would be the government's position and not what i say in this case there was the additional factor in addition to her guarding political prisoners and keeping them from keeping them in prison which i do agree is problematic but i am not going to say that what the government's position on that would be but here we did have aggravating factors that she knew political prisoners were being eased and she but she took a position and if she didn't know that was going to happen she took the position that in any individual instance she did not have any prior knowledge of why that individual is going to isolate this however i don't think she can hide behind her you know willful failure to ask what was going on with with any particular person or she knew that there was a substantial likelihood that person or she was taking isolated it would be seen and she has something in the record about other users yes that's true there were she kind there were other uses and that she often took the prisoners there and saw that it was an investigator to meet with them or relatives to meet with them without to that wasn't always the case that they or sometimes be in she might be next to this case is that in that case it wasn't clear that any of the people that he investigated or that he started investigations about were were being investigated for or eventually persecuted for their political opinions as opposed to they said there was no evidence of any single instance where one of the latino cases actually was a political opinion case as opposed to just a criminal case that's how i i v task in this case there are images that there were  being being yes yes i think they would ease their conscience would require them to to quit it's a voluntary position she could get she obviously had another job at one point she could no evidence she could've gotten another job to go that far i would think there'd be lots of person over that don't directly escort somebody down the hall to be isolated yeah that's true too i mean like they said in the header inc ok someone who cuts the hair of prisoners wouldn't necessarily be and found out his sister persecutions was certainly there was the other jobs at the prison it would again depend on the factual situations of each particular position and the functions of the  acts carried out by the person and there was some discussion in the record about whether she'd be teach yourself could you focus on that if you could by come by complaining about the treatment of the prisoners is that what you mean she she did complained and that's when she claimed she was assaulted beaten and raped by that individual she does say now that between june of one thousand nine hundred ninety and the middle of two thousand that she was trying to help out the prisoners by prisoners to get them to act but they did nothing and a whole year went by so we're not talking so even the limited efforts that she did were ineffective she can meanwhile she continued to escort prisoners to the isolated unit where she knew kidnapped and forced to join the guerilla movement team was only there for a brief period of time and then he fled as soon as because you know i fear for his life fears she was involved in the prison and  forcing people to this isolating him for two years as units have pointed out it was a it was a job that she was being paid for she could have quit or leave any time no one forcing her to be there she was being rewarded financially for the  was doing and she continued to escort prisoners even after she knew that they were going to that some of them were being beaten at where she at the places use escorting them to feel and she waited for almost a evidence i mean there's no explanation for why it would have taken it her years to realize that wasn't going anywhere i just want to also point out to the court that we didn't raise this in our brief but that the petitioner to not