care to hear i think it's up to you ok well the judge i guess i'll start with to me the most interesting issue which is the idea and the government's failure over the course of at least twenty two detainees i can go visit on weekends i go visit after hours and as a solo practitioner that's what i did most of my class so you wanted him to be transferred i wanted him to be transferred into federal custody as required in order to facilitate attorney client communication judge in my motion to the district court i said yeah you can't run you can't run hot and cold on their ass judge i i don't think that i am i was in fact i decision to dismiss indictment without prejudice what judge i would say that in in my mind i guess one judge kane didn't really address that argument that i made so i don't know exactly what it is it's thought it was but my argument to him at that time was that had a district judge abuses discretion decides to dismiss without prejudice because very serious crimes have been committed which  of you appeal here attacking one after another after another of decisions that are basically consigned to the discretion of the district court and this is was not going to interrupt any kind of receipt of rehabilitation services if it wasn't going to be disruptive in terms of anybody's in terms of anybody's and circumstances and so one of the factors is the seriousness of the offense which i wait for the other two factors are these the circumstances of the violation which in my mind in dismissing without prejudice you really are tired hands of marshal service in the courts because analysis of provision in the statute is to preserve flexibility in a case like this without imposing custody unless and until there's an order sending him to state custody and that was not done here so i review here is for abuse of discretion right yes wrong the other issue that we have that the way of authority is yes me on the issue but i think that the plain language of the statute weighs in favor of me on this issue but we would be going against a great number of circuits and the  try to maintain or you already practice cross the country with respect to these these kinds of things and not having a patchwork and not again the you know the circuits  i don't know how much but it would be a shame to have this same issue come up again since now you are in a good position to tell them the problems that arise we're we're happy to spread the message with respect to a couple of the was the voice on the other end of the call but he had previously falsely accused someone you had mr davis who was like a coconspirator who said that my client had this jailhouse confession right for trial but that's it coconspirators i asked them have you ever met this fierce to know anything about it well said no no no so while the trial itself was five days so what are you complaining about judge you complaining about evidence you said the government says there's a lot of evidence but and then i thought that's what you were saying i'm saying that's a pretty hard argument to make so maybe you're not made that right i know that i'm not challenging the legal sufficiency of the ok but saying that harmless text messages until it seems to me you have to have something that connects possible falsity in the world of text messages to the text messages here so that's why i was suggesting if he asked the officers so that you would make that bridge so beyond a reasonable doubt that the that these messages are what the government says and i want to ask the f b i s tech person about this issue but judge game said no i couldn't do a demonstration and so that's how