this case like bill mention different than olson which the district court relied on olson there was a complaint but the defendants there investigated it and were able to rely on a credibility determination of that point because of their inmate there expressed concern about the did you call it eradicated and fear of being stabbed that's a lot different than saying my cellmate acting crazy in terms if the question is where the threats or saw the contents of a threat to the brain injury that horse all suffered and also lacked any indication of when this threat would be carried out here by contrast we have mr limerick warning repeatedly that cellmate is making me feel unsafe my soulmate is acting crazy he's acting unstable i need to be moved immediately something else i think is important to factor that this should consider in the district court did not consider the urgency of you know substance i think that by the words of the label self as well as defendant walker's explanation of what that meaning meant to her nd he warned them that he was unsafe he warned them through all of the facts and so on it's own that might not be enough but taken together with the fact that he's requesting repeatedly to meet with the very people who are there to ensure base tell us time and psychologists that he's doing it repeatedly three times in two days that he's saying i feel unsafe which defendant walker and her decorations that that alone would be enough for me to move him that would merit some type of follow up farmer says you just have to suck up a reasonable response if that's if what you're saying is right th we should assume that the that the guards in the facility know the facts and they know the circumstances in the context i think the pair with care designation hurts him because the pair with care doesn't nation as i read it came about because on july th two thousand and sixteen he became so upset when was when his telephone call got disconnected that he was throwing a chair and pounding on tables and windows and what have you respect we are i think that's an incorrect reading of the record the peer with care status predated that everything under foreign versus run and looking at everything we have to say that there was an excessive risk that was ignored that there was a substantial risk and we look at the statements that actually reached the defendant the statement of mr librax saying that  he was afraid he did not feel safe he never said that he didn't feel safe because of mcneill he never said that and i know that the response i think i'll raise is well if the circumstances permitted that in two that were observed by the defendant no other there were any bad interactions reported by mr look back and so again we have to look at all the circumstances of those four days leading up to this  certainly there were certain statements that missile of braddock had such as that he thought mcmillan was acting crazy but i think the district court judge peterson's explanation for that is that while he was annoyed with him that his behavior was annoying acting crazy can mean a lot of different alluded to it without saying without saying ricardo directly but i just want to bring the court's attention back to that case which is still good president even after sin and portia another point i want to make about stand for shot you can give us versus mclachlan these are all cases involving gaining situations you would not expect the level of detail or the nature of the threat to be as clear in a case involving gang retaliation we don't have that here so i think that's a circumstances simply were not enough to establish a violation when i meet let me tell you where the what concerns me a bit here and that is that i worry that we're we're imposing a burden much because the comment here that made me really is acting crazy i think the only the only thing it can possibly mean is some sort of expression of concern by librax about his own personal safety and the reason i he's talking to himself all night long and so you know what what more do what do we need him to say that he's acting crazy and i think he's i think he might shank me you know i think i mean that we're not looking for certain magic words here but look at the flip side of the coin if this court countenances this is being satisfactory then all inmates need to say is i felt unsafe and my my my stomach was acting crazy  the defendants knew and so again not not a complex situation and if you look at his declaration even accepting what's stated in the declaration doesn't meet the standard under this court nor under farm interpretation there is finally the question i'd like to post your honour's is what additional information would be needed to make this a mission from morning to trigger deliberate indifference as far as i can tell the only additional information m