i've never seen my own us attorneys present anything that isn't true in the law for an argument routinely doesn't have any other voice in me and i'm all she's got so i came to stand here before you in this great court is powerful court but when you feel the sentence is substantively or procedurally and reasonable read here as feeling unfair given all of the surrounding and attendant facts and circumstances as greater than necessary to accomplish these goals functions and purposes of sentencing and and give a just sentence i guess that's why i'm here to stand up and use a cell their guidelines arguments presented in the brief but then that's just what they are at the end of the days are guidelines arguments there your visor e only in the it is to include upon whom the sentence falls tammy's a submissive docile compliant cowering child whose idea in a morbidly obese diseased body of nearly fifty because there's questions about you know this want on for a long time wells i mean there are real victims here at real child victims yes or we're going to ban the consequences of that for a life time clearest yes they in this is i mean this is not just dirty pictures i'm in this is well you want to hear you're not i consider her a child as well and i consider her a victim of who i see is the real monster in this case well he got i guess in terms of you hundreds a longer hundreds of years but again i mean we weren't there and we haven't seen her as you haven't as the district court did but the district court considered all these arguments and have an opportunity to observe your client i hope so i hope so for was there anything is there anything that indicates more dood know if there there was this sense i had that it was like a mathematical thing rather than individual sentencing it was this huge thing for the monster and then the other team he got forty and then we got thirty years something felt like a mathematical formula rather than individual consideration of all the factors that were present and set forth surrounding the circumstance and me ask you this mr wells because i think this is the bottom line issue and you understand where and when appellate court we don't look at what we would have done if we were in the judge's shoes that what we have said is this is the compare a case we do not consider what weight we would ourselves have given a particular factor where either we consider whether the factor as explained by the district court can bear assigned to it under the tally the circumstances and what the district court judge said when he imposed the sentence he specifically referenced the victimisation the number of times that your client participate is just so often noted in victimizing this child which was over three years at least eleven occasions actual sexual abuse of a child between ages five and eight so the bottom line question is can the weight assigned to that which was thirty years  notwithstanding your many getting issues with i think thirty years is necessary to reflect the harm that you've done to this child why is that and that something that the  that's the bottom line a slight emendation the way i experienced in presenting tammy as in my experience with her that she was a victim of seaway and who she is tami wasn't someone who could say when it's the only one here for the victims and even for tammy who could say when this was over was se way that's the nature of things here and when you filter that through the idea of substantive on reasonable notice that's why i come to you of the united states and i also prosecuted this case below along with usa lisa fletcher mr wells presented essentially an identical argument to the district court the district court was able to view both miss also the images and the videos of her abusing the three the victim in this case more dupers not a good trial and exactly honor and the same evidence that is the basis of that sentence here was also evidence against mr c way who went to trial mr wells didn't touch on the guidelines arguments that he made in his brief but i would like to because i would encourage the court to take this opportunity to establish a per se rule that when there is sexual penetration of a prepared s and child as there was here that the the enhancement for sadistic and violent conduct should be applied it was applied appropriately here  applied appropriately in every case in which there is a sexual penetration of a child this young and establishing a rule like that will avoid the type of arguments that we have in the brief here were rude to baiting the relative circumference of an adult penis or finger or any type of object that an abuser sees fit to stick into a child and it was not only the image of tamil a mere penetrating the victim here that warranted the application of this enhanced meant but also the images of her subjecting the victim to humiliation and mental cruelty among other things a video of timmy lemaire ordering the child to perform oral sex on a cliff seaway supported her position i think we've already covered the substance of the sentence here the thirty year sentence was far below the guidelines and it falls easily within the range of permissible decisions of other  cases of child exploitation among others the cases cited in the government's brief brown where the defendant received a sixty year sentence mccoy where the defendant receives an eighteen year sentence for child exploitation crimes that were