had made the defense had made a trial was that even though there was numerous witnesses that said that mr bills had complained of pain and even though they were independent when this is that the jury had found credible the problem was the reason why the officers did hear him complain but they chose to ignore him was because this was a type of way to force some sort of compliance they were trying to coerce consent to search to get into that residence because they know that they didn't have search warrant for the residence they didn't have exigent circumstances or probable cause to get into the residence and so the the by prevents us from even mentioning that search any time we tried to get into the search the judge a give you that but on the second prong if so i says to those who are investigating an execution style triple homicide that occurred just the previous week the murder weapon had not been recovered the officer officer confronted with these circumstances that the detention of bills in handcuffs for one hour was a model well first you know tell me what cases would say that you know that's starting with us to be sharp something with this newscast some kind of you know sexy facts in terms that doesn't make it we're not talking about attention on a chocolate dean or something along those lines and we're talking about something that's pretty fast moving we're talking about all  contours of the right not it's the case where you've had this exact fact because obviously that's not what the test is for the qualified immunity it's whether based on the content where the contours of the right have been developed and i normal but the point here is that you have so from the very beginning there's a there they think that there we might be but we also might have the brother so what you're looking at is the reason for the stop you have to look at in in the vehicle in order to stop and now detain mr bill any further they have got to and we're completing that we're allowing them to make a mistaken identity allow now to at least do a little bit of questioning who are you where do you know would do a check on him they did that records check in which was current perm that mr bill had no criminal record that that completely had eleven o two am he wasn't released until eleven fifty seven so what you have is you have a list in spain once you've got the mistaken identity it is unreasonable for the officers to detain them any longer this is what the cases and unless during that investigation those officers find additional facts was an incredibly serious offense i don't think anyone can really dispute that mr goelz just have relationships that would allow him to get on the phone and go call someone or you know allow you know someone to come to the scene or compromise the officer safety as they were secure and then i mean can they consider those i mean can those be factored into the not why you don't use let him go and leave all the officers on the scene you know let him go call is disturbed let him go call the suspect let him go do any of that they've that hasn't yet because of the sack they've already done the investigation they've asked the preliminary questions now the only information the officer got from him where you mean they actually after they entered the car i mean i'm sorry the hall and let's see i'm not sure exactly what i can tell you i can remove the first entry i know that the house with clear it's the both the sons were removed by eleven thirty four and i radioed that the house is cleared the search is negative they wait another twenty plus minutes before they released him he still being detained during that time and so there is no justification even if the court was to say ok they're justified up through this through the search which i don't believe that they were but even if the court was to find that there's another twenty minutes where the officers are just sitting around waiting for a canine unit and and again one of the problems about law professors license attorneys a judge has struggled over what it means in a given fact better officers don't have this type of training but what they do have is a concern that any time that the in pain but they also found as a fact that he was held much too long would they have been allowed to find in his favor or not in other words what is this a new theory of liability that they were not allowed to consider separately my understanding of the way that it was posed by plaintiffs counsel was you may find for my client based on excessive force theory under graham which is causing you may find for my client based on the length of time that he was ejected for the beyond the arguments of counsel what did the instructions to the jury say on this question they were great and they were just straight graham instructions i think they were nicer to battery structures just the straight graham facts getting all inferences in favor of the plank if you know what was going on for that our and what is your best argument that a reasonable officer under these circumstances would think  enough of them their officers wait for an overwhelming show of force so hopefully the person behind the door won't use force at all the realize it hope with no give up and nobody gets for so they call they wait for enough officers t involved in this man trying to based on what they used on the family relationship based on number two the fact that when they call mr bills that mr alvarez is home and they say we're coming and i guess my concern is that period of time between when they find that he has told the truth they find his sons in the house and that's saying well i think that's right it's between them and when they let him go that r three sixty three and three sixty four and three seventy seven three three seventy nine in which the court specifically we were definitely not allowed to argue the time in which she was detained was excessive as a second with respect to having versus the united states decided in one nine hundred eighty one and the other court cautioned about down that that is the issue and that case was whether you could get into a home with an arrest warrant a home of a third party with an arrest warrant but the court cautioned that they would allow that the police could then what they could go into the homes of relatives and acquaintances based on the mere fact that they were related in the court and that was enough i think to put them also i know there's no hostage situation there was nothing in the record if you listen to that were never concerned with those children's safety and besides it in terms of whether they were being held hostage and they were removed from that they got out of the house you have the twenty minutes where we definitely know they're not being held hostage and that the terry stop in the question of the terry stops where this issue comes about the handcuffing that is where those individuals themselves are there's a reasonable suspicion that they're in gauged in criminal activity during that time perry