similar said to be held responsible if they are acting in concert with others who are in in that they are participating jointly  depend on the extensive the alcohol provided whether or not the person providing alcohol was actively consuming alcohol with the person driving the vehicle in this instance what we have is we have  alcohol and cocaine together they and it's the latest in the complaint that they consumed alcohol cocaine to the point where mr hitti the other defendant was cigarette around everybody was actively smoking marijuana they smoked marijuana to the point that they were cleared big to drive across the center line and as is often the case in these tragic situations kill two family defendant to tina to operate the twenty nine foot cigarette boat and an area called pits he'd lay part of the chain which is the smallest late on a chain as speed in excess of forty miles an hour that are due to nugent operation would you agree with that yes so but but here you're saying she did more than just supply the ople drugs she specifically did curse him to go faster in a dangerous area which is direct participation as opposed to some passive participation by the order of passion will that's exactly right in addition to and when she was encouraging him it was while he was in pain and state of were other people with water including the bit that's correct did she have to know that the young man was directly in the course of this boat i don't believe that she has to have direct knowledge that there was a impending tragedy about to occur i think the eight seventy six simply says if you are encouraging someone to drive here there are twenty nine foot cigarette while there they are without all the cocaine and  rule was that's exactly that's exactly the course the other problem with the cigarette bunnies do they really go less than forty miles an hour well that's it it's an additional question if that's even appropriate certainly circumstances which eight seventy six implores us to to examine that any activity that has been conducted in the relationship between the person that you are alleging was in concert with the other moral support or encouragement to the tour fiends that is what places her in equal standing but you know moral support and encouragement i think are two different really two different things moral support in the afternoon and there's you know although i know there's been a lot of argument about it within the chain management the secret police are definitely allowing they are that in any way impact yes if she doesn't know what she's saying i think it just further supporters a circumstance where section eight seventy six liability should apply i don't think that she is less  because she is so intoxicated or impaired i think that would just not a good sense in terms of public policy for the state of illinois that your defense could be well i was so drunk or so high that i really didn't understand what i was doing information i would agree they allege specific facts about maybe she provided alcohol she provided drugs there's no dispute there my point is those allegations can't consider those allegations because of the analysis in sheena once those allegations of providing alcohol or drugs are strapped what if left her conclusions they don't actually say she tells them to go fast she firmly encouraged i don't know what that means is that when she or we have two defendants who have no interest to preserve and so if we say that at this stage of the proceedings there are no set of facts that can establish this we are effectively limiting who can bring these litigation onto any complaint anywhere anytime as a passenger in the car passenger provided substantial assistance and tell the car go faster regardless of whether that's true or not in the context of i previously had these already look to police reports i assume they've already talked to police officers they've already talked to people with the scene and so you would then be arguing with me you think had they had every knowledge of that because he did all of these things so opportunities to plead facts and sell a very clearly that he believes those are conclusions they have the opportunity they have multiple opportunities to plead those facts and they did not because they do not have  and i think in that sense the score is faced with us with a unique matter in that sense but insanity the course description of the facts spelled out exactly what that did the allegations in the complaint go faster is that substantial state speed in excess of forty miles an hour i mean i just i don't understand what more we are required to do with this stage of a civil and you do have an allegation about drive recklessly but then you