simmons was unable to get in documentation did not create any documentation and therefore he provided us for his office all talk nation he could get or created and there wasn't eighty three to keep him preserve records right there be justification for not doing so but the justification has the objectively reasonable here he had the room there are and and and so what's his justification for not keeping records i was duped that's not a justification that's a conclusion reasonable under the circumstances the key element here and and what the facts are not income statements his own tax return is show huge losses because he did not get income did not maintain the finances nor did he won the bank accounts if we had backed counsel's name we easily would have to curate them and give them to the u s trustees office but that's the issue the bank accounts were not in his name so if it wanted to personal accounts for the living expenses the deeds they have that the mortgages they have that the things that are not given which is the basis but destroyed is the vent holes and what have happened to the circumstances you don't keep the water in a building you can be shut down but when you say you couldn't get documents because you had no access to them couldn't get them in didn't create them how do you decide this charge with an ability without the ability going to stand in take evidence question the and you didn't and i don't think it's necessary and the reason is because if you're going to trial and we need to overcome the standard if a judge often you bring him in to testify before some eternal purposes to comply with certain requirements of the code which include the full disclosure of financial condition under the code he has to show that he had books and records from which his business transactions and financial condition can be ascertained and he has to provide a satisfactory explanation for the loss of his assets and as guided by the time ca put handle of this court it's clear that for an explanation to be satisfactory it has to be corroborated by documents in such a way as to eliminate any need for speculation as to what happened to those assets these bookkeeping requirements are important because they help to protect the integrity of the bankruptcy system without these requirements it's simply too easy for assets to disappear from the possessions before he files for material fact that he was somehow able to keep these records and he did not meet this burden of proof because he needed to show under under president from this court and the supreme court he needed to show substantively over the evidence the primary bankruptcy proceeding i i have reason to believe that they will show the very facts that you say i should produce but which i cannot produce know he could have submitted those as exhibits to testify to show that he had attempted and failed to try and get records requested by the united states trustee he did not taste in fact the record actually is devoid of  any support for the statement in his brief that he had no involvement whatsoever with the management of the property and that he could not get access to records because his deposition testimony he actually testified that he was able to get rent rolls for some of the properties when you purchased them he testified that he was able to get from time to time bank statements and quarterly reports from his property manager is reflecting what has been collect testified that he from time to time was given the rental proceeds with the statement of expenses that he needed to pay from those proceeds in addition he testified there were at least ten instances in which he  during his deposition testimony mr sims listed from memory all twenty seven property said he owned details about their street address their financial status and other physical properties this is not the knowledge of somebody who simply signed on the dotted line this is knowledge of somebody who is actively interested in his investment properties even his affidavit has no specific reference to an attempt that was rejected to get the records and his statement that he said he did not handle the properties just not actually state that he had no involvement whatsoever with the properties nothing in the affidavit or the evidence supports his argument in his brief that there was no possible way that he could have access to these also show that many documents were given to trustees office i believe the top of those boxes of them this shows that he made every effort but could not yet the things we're talking about i don't understand what you mean my