everybody i suggest you kind of was in the city or ties to the city or as any contact with the city would know that no i just like rocks means crack cocaine that's that's what's done that's what they call it to everybody calls it out in again and i don't want to this whole i don't know you know and like i said i think power is nothing that in a decision in power the deals with what exactly were the circumstances of the arrest and kobe say you have to have the specific intent to commit this crime they got near the corner of twenty nine hundred which i believe is the francisco intersection they saw three they saw and heard three people and one yelling brothers browse the arresting officer who immediately alighted from the vehicle and officer now cause he had i don't have fifteen years of experience and have conducted as he said hundreds of narcotics arrests but he understood was that in this situation when these people worse and they were all arrested when they were standing out there yelling pros prowse to passing cars and passengers they were soliciting caroline this the standard for this is simply whether that was raised here a reasonable belief he didn't have to know testified that this was a high crime area and that he had personal knowledge that drugs were being sold in this particular area on this particular on those questions now those questions have it came up at the suppression hearing the that the officers belief was reasonable more likely than not it's not the same standard of proof and this is something that i think gets confused in the briefs as that he actually committed the crime that we have to s value but we have to do it through every single officer and determine whether under the circumstances he properly thought it was more likely than not that they were selling heroin or selling out comics to be more doesn't say you need a combination you could have any one of these things to do it so the officer whose ears we must hear this through heard as your honor stated earlier helen helen essentially that's how he translated now maybe and these people were standing out there screaming at cars and buses i don't know i don't think that there was much ambiguity in that at all and if there was it certainly didn't rise it didn't make what he did dealers and prostitutes and states that if an actual actually completed the illegal business which he solicited there would be no need to charge him with the ordinance the time to act under power which i believe cited a case called lewis was when he  same thing i mean if the officer would have to drive by and see you and hear you scream me i mean this is three people standing on a corner screaming there is some context to this and we have to do it from that context and we have to  here of i guess through the officers years this isn't a purely academic exercise and that's always been the standard on motions to suppress i believe the on the alice case that provides the entire framework for analyzing motions to suppress acknowledges that even talks about the importance of recognizing the officers privileged position as it were to understand what's going on and that his expertise or her expertise is not something that can