young ladies and the picture was taken the court must accept all allegations of material fact as true this is a motion to the states so all of the material facts must be accepted as true and what are the material facts the position as a worldwide celebrity we state that he has donated this time and established a reputation and then we close with respect to the damages that evil knievel has been notified by several of those parker agents they do not of the honorable district court judge a statement that temper mistaken age can be a compliment it's not a compliment and montana and even more to let is that it's not a compliment to your corporate backers you've  prostitute's convention made absolutely certain that there was not going to be any conflict i'd have to be the chairman of the bill of rights committee of that constitutional convention and we made it absolutely certain if anything we expanded upon that right under the constitution of the united states of america we still have libel and slander every fifth guaranteed under our constitution as a relative rights and obligations and our resident obligation not  reply brief there are number of federal cases in which libel and slander cases were pursued if we follow the argument from the gentleman for e s p n that that means under federal law under our united states constitution you can say whatever you want to fight an individual and there's no restriction of on free speech i need not use the argument that we used in law school you can go into private see a different and holler fire there are a number of things that you can't do and one of the things that you crystal are entitled to a day in court before a jury of twelve good and true men and women and if they laugh they win their tickets and if they don't last that evil crystal or entitle  that's a little bit different what reasonable person we have here a situation where e s p n pitches the show to an audience is that anybody who they can anticipate a member of that audience is that your scope of who is reasonable or is it anyone who steals the photograph my question is if the publisher target who may not be part of the targeted audience for example i can see here that this target audience is to a young group a hip group a group that used the slave right and maybe the possibility is that a question of the publisher is exempt if he targets the right people and all of them would not reasonably believe this to be true or suppose the dark hits one of those take a look at this do they say that any other person of those sixteen fl he's guilty of a crime because i look at pimp in the dictionary and it doesn't say anything about being anything other than the procureur or a prostitute that is a criminal corporate employ doesn't that imply given all reasonable and that those corporate employees and employers were reasonable in doing so and reasonably believe that knievel has been notified by several of these corporations that they do not want to continue with them as a personality connected with their product because of the accusation contained in the libelous and malicious photograph which maybe ninety percent of the people in america would laugh this off but if ten percent of america went take this seriously it doesn't because not necessarily or i think it would depend in that case i mean there's absolutely no one is going to believe that to be cruel i don't think i mean it's almost in terms of inconceivable that anybody would you know harbor suspicion that was true that may be the case although of course  whether the trial judge looked at a broad enough context not simply the possible slaney viewers of e s p n that your client targeted this program for gallery and then each picture clicked after the other you can't pull one of the photo gallery one of the photos you know on the left and then because we did put that we put what the web site was and have it work into the record and able to consider that context and for some of the questions your honor race for example if there were other pictures and photos if this picture has appeared in the middle of the series of journalistic statements about people committing crimes then it looks like a defamation case but clearly that's not the correct standard i guess and the most important thing here is that it's a question of law as a threshold matter and whether or not the fact that some actual damage has been ale