are privileged under the medical studies there i'm certain that you will have questions but at least from my perspective there are just four points that i want to make a point number one has i believe that the record is fairly clear but what the court ran into was the statements in the case law they asked for the privilege to attach that the committee had to have already initiated and begun a review of this specific incident before any privilege can attack i think this is the only real issue here and i think that would be to no avail but the first quarter of trying to me is there this is of the committee because to say those are existence to q a process some other purpose if you look at the policy procedures as for example it might be legal counsel may look at that there are times where that would have to occur credentialing actions to try and protect  confidentiality privilege so there are times where you would you would have indication where it might also have another purpose but the case law is very clear then if it and the way the buyers are written are really precluded any of those reports from being released isn't that a little broad a little broader than the medical standards act intended oh no your honor i don't believe that it is fraud and broader than what the medical studies there intended the reason i say this is first of all they deal with the medical care in cory's and i think if you look at the vote of the categories that are set forth they all make sense for the medical stamp of it now is there some breast to them i believe knowledge that there really is but i will tell you that there should be some of good grass to that privilege if you're looking at a hospital and you're basically saying roach specifically says that there was not they were quest coming from a committee for the information and in our case we do have a clear documentation that this committee met me providing you with the nine hundred ninety nine you would not touch the administrator conversations with patients wife and about become defendant factory randi where they said there was no authorization a request by a committee you would not touch the complaint memo that went to the board and presumably the hornets at the bottom you see ours so they all the information is reviewed and i think the concern is i suspect when i read the cases when i hear the question it is that  there will be an abuse of the privilege and i have explained i mean what i teach my associates by phone the idea behind the medical study say is you don't want to have a this disappearing machine and by then i mean you don't want to defense the truth seeking process will privileges by their nature put some hindrance on the truth seeking process when i think the deposition of a point i i would be very happy and probably do a much better job of it instead of the posing to him for three years after have a full access the second thing i think you're asked second point i want to make is i think you're asking about views and again in fairness this is not abused i was kind of look for a piece of and if you look at the other material it's in there in cameras adventure you see they use here for new events this is one of the other three being reviewed all or even the lindsay case which is very recent this looks to me like a very big leap beyond that these use your original prepared in december of two thousand and thirteen they policy itself which deals with these q c ours which is a policy intent incident reporting these are inserted sorts these are cursory reports these are reports of witnesses not investigators for instance in the period case if i recall correctly there was a system in which the chairman of quality control they said they meant once or twice a week a month later and then seeks out the three nurses to record their recollections and is indeed a better report done two to three days after or the same day i would say that's probably correct but those are still that doesn't transform those witnesses to record the facts that they've seen or statements they've heard you know automatically somehow just because  an investigation you know would that then become for and my question is the second problem with my question is what's the difference between three people sitting in a room being a committee and being made aware you've got to have a whole committee meeting and it leaves language that suggested that and they have to do it with the specific incident but what happened in august the court said you know we have a different circumstance here and in a different to be a distinction without a difference it seems that there been some acceptance there if we have a situation where a person in the hospital i have certain information under the i go to a committee number and say recognizes is a different situation it makes sense it falls within the state that you