detectives tell a nineteen year old who has been asked to come down to the station was brought down to the station by two homicide detectives look we think you're lying and he says well what will i do what will i get if i tell the truth and they said don't gain your freedom and then he said can i get my car back too and they said yes now as i indicated in my opening brief i listed the various comments that were made by the two detectives throughout the interrogation and one thing that i didn't really highlight in my opening brief is that prior to this comment on the strength of on regarding his car there were pages and pages of transcripts regarding this car he was very concerned about it and the relevance of that that is when we it's i mean it's just it's ridiculous to say that you need a car to have a clear conscience and mr in tongues concern about his car about the physical reality of getting his car that go along with getting freedom that makes it very clear what the police detectives meant and what mr in the vong reasonably interpreted and inferred from their comments furthermore he had made the p d denials prior to this  promise of his freedom he had he had denied being present at the scene he denied knowing anything about this he denied understanding even when his car had been impounded and the police detectives were getting very frustrated with this and that is when the a police detective to say oh i didn't mean your freedom as in webster's dictionary definition of freedom which is the first page of my reply brief i meant that you have a clear conscience well what do you need your car for to have a clear conscience get this car my understanding in the exact same it's the next sentence he kristen zeani said you get your freedom can i get the car too and he said absolutely now if kristen siani truly met at that point in the to quote b s he i don't need to quote him literally here well i'm not going to play games with you i'm not going to lie to you you're going to get your freedom now but you know unless we're going to change the meaning of freedom according to what's just dictionary freedom means equality or state  being questioned about a homicide he doesn't care about my freedom for the next month they did say you're going home today no matter what is it realistic for anybody to believe that he's going to be home free forever he's go complete past that seems to me pretty unlikely but i don't think that's the appropriate question here the question is the police's conduct and did they improperly induce a confession based on their lights and to say why only your first statements matt you're never going to get charged for this once you tell us that you killed this guy you're off the hook for ever and that seems to me to be an implausible interpretation well i actually i disagree respectfully again i think that i think that to allow the police to engage in this kind of conduct saying i'm not going to lie to you i'm not going to b s you i'm going to tell you the truth i'm not going to play games with you and i think that's critical and then to say oh but you know they consistently said i can't make it any clearer than that you'll gain your freedom now i think that say look in your freedom today they're talking about a homicide investigation they also intersperse these promises and i think this is also critical judge clifton as far as we're not talking about today we're talking about you know you tell us the truth and if you tell us the truth you're going to gain your freedom if you don't you're going to go to prison for a very long time with the  that was would be more than sufficient to convict him as well that's certainly what the deputy attorney general argued but in fact there was the testimony upon who was who had gotten the deal and in fact as it turns out it was his gun and there was evidence at trial that he had like repeatedly to the police there was no physical evidence of mr in the bunk at the scene other than his statement and pons and then there was the testimony that was impeached by the female that was with him and i forgotten her statement about you again your freedom preceded the explanation to create a man's conscience would be clear as opposed to walking away but there had been a considerable amount of differing going on between the officers and mr into long before that was present but he didn't do the shooting in the evidence like you're arguing less the deferred of the state court standard and more like an independent determination of voluntariness which we pan to me as a matter of bickering with the officers and pushing them and entrancing with them and trying to find out what they knew and how much wiggle room he had in terms of whether he could explain  in the evidence and the state's evidence separate from his his claims was overwhelming that he was the instigator that without him without the car kicking incident the shooting would not have occurred it was overwhelming that the man who was killed had nothing to do with the