fact they told the on the warrant they suggest they're concerned about gang people letting other people know if they're given time they're trying to do coordinated warrants that a number of different places and they're concerned that if they give very much time writer acres somebody's going to get on the line and call the other places or call or friends they can hide evidence and they're also concerned that roderick is a gang member and there have been two murders in the murders have hung out at this house directly after the murders apparently and they hang the gang members hang out there a lot at that house that's what their evidence is and their concern and that's why they asked the trial court to be able to serve the magistrate to be able to serve this thing in the early morning hours but still dark and they're worried about that and the question is did they have a reasonable suspicion that it might be dangerous or futile you know not enough it is not the question additional advantage in our doing this that will help he groggery from being considered a rock think but that's not the route that's not the reason they said they were going to do it they said they wanted to go there get their guns gang paraphernalia and the time they commit a burglary earlier on how well robert the gang member sure is a gang member baden had his moniker they've got a gang file on him at the police station apparently so it's not too much question i mean you can question off but i don't want to and i don't want to cut my colleagues talk for questions on this but i do have i need to ask you a couple questions about when they're in the house and the two individuals that are h paths that for two hours i want to ask you what is what is the evidence in your favor in terms of during that two hours that they were denied use of that they just say they were handcuffed for two hours while they were doing a search or whatever but in terms of your evidence that was said mr pawle in the tackle rationed i asked for my heart medication and i was told no or tell me specifically w not allowed to leave the living room in the next sentence as on two separate occasions i requested to you the bathroom with the would let me leave the living room but it doesn't say this things it was a three hour episode it doesn't say whether she asked two times for two hours and fifty five minutes into the event or at the beginning of the event or when she asked to use the bathroom we don't know if she was actually denied access to the bathroom for five minutes or for three hours is that the right  occasions how far into this ninety to ninety minute a three hour period well obviously there would be some i know that your your contention is that that's not a problem here that that but obviously there would be some situation perhaps there was someone that needs medication that you would have to concede that if the police continue to allow that to keep that person and kathy when they were in some sort of medical distress or if they said something if i don't take my medication right now you know i have to take it right now i'm going to have a heart attack or i'm going to do this and if the place were completely indifferent to that situation that would you know that would have to be adequate to go to trial on i just think they are inadequate to overturn a district court's ruling i don't think we do it to know anyway i mean you have to look at it that way the evidence that's before you i don't think in those declarations is adequate and that's using the bathroom and the medication right and you have to say well they didn't say when they asked but i suppose if they fifteen or twenty minutes into the thing i said you know i really have to use the bathroom and then since and the same with the medication isn't it suppose he said fifteen minutes when does this thing when you know i really need to take my heart medication the police said we didn't need to take it because now we're now it's gone on another thirty forty minutes or another hour i think if there were evidence of  tribal issue i just don't think he's a prism if you said i asked take my heart medication and they said no you can't take your heart medication so let's say they to death thirty minutes into the thing i don't know ten minutes into the saying pick your time i don't care with the tim but they just say no you can't take your heart medication yet that's a good idea perform a ground writhing i mean what is he up to do you want to take his heart medication and they're just sort of arbitrarily saying no you can't take it isn't it slightly unreasonable i what would happen if i don't get mine medication and in fact i did suffer this injury listening to an alleged any of those what happens a person doesn't take their meds on time i mean a lot of time nothing happens right then nothing happens for a day maybe he just didn't have no damages your honor well we're not talking damages we're talking about whether the opposite whether there's been a constitutional violation who carries their damages if there was a constitutional violation the damages are a dollar right  yes ok so we don't care about damages so he said and she's we asked to use the bathroom and they said no you can't use the bathroom blacked out again how many times i thought house well hours i mean when you say when if you like it better that happens at the end of the two hours at the beginning the two hours which which do you like better well as the judgment is indicated if this happened to are the fifty five minutes into the searched the bathroom to make sure there's no guns or anything else to know that they don't with the people get access to so i really think so i agree with you that they didn't specify what time this happened we don't know if they had to wait three hours to the bathroom or three minutes to use the bathroom but if we draw the differences in favor of of them i mean if we if we construe this in the light most favorable to them how would you interpret for about three hours i was not a row allowed to leave the living room are two separate occasions i asked to use the bathroom if we're going to take it in the light most favorable to them let me think were limited to revealing the evidence that they produced produced evidence of that to let me ask you about the what happened to robert to the officers took him from his home down to the police station how long was it was he there provide the place he allowed them to come to his house and hang out right after the murders and talk about things while things are a little did he invite them over sedimentation or call him up and say come over what did he do to we don't know that you know that i was just looking from the standard probable cause for the police officers i mean they were at his house but i'm having a hard time putting my finger on what he did do to invite them there as opposed to they just showed up he didn't know that that knowledge wasn't part of their problem cause calculus but they didn't know that this happened and they didn't know he was associated with this gang they did know that he had been arrested in a previous burglary when the gang members and all the time to finish the search they didn't know that he had gang paraphernalia letters from the prison from another gang member the station i think they found both handguns and long guns in the house they didn't know yet whether any of those had been volved in each of those two murders that they were actually investigating five murders with the two that were in the warrant and it wasn't for some time to the good ballistics to clear those target of crimes and had all this evidence of his involvement with this game it was committing a murder down the street court has some of the questions i don't thank you thank you very much this is what we