not being totally at one truthful well according to these witnesses this was a planned killing one way was someone who was known to them it was there the planning he drove one of the getaway cars things things of that nature and they play some of the same his affidavit says no i have an alibi i wasn't anywhere near that scene they say i was there they're committing perjury now when a jury is evaluating the credibility of witnesses certainly evidence that they are lying they are lying partly about the presence of someone they know is a factor that will color of the weight that the jury is going to attach to their testimony elsewhere a jury would be inclined i would suggest your right to look at that evidence that you know he's lying that i don't cross them all stage two of the state move to dismiss that's an important factor here because what we're looking at at stage till the rules of calm which tell us that we have to assume as crude oil wells needed facts in the post conviction petition that are adequately supported by court house either i'm going to call you never call the other two witnesses alexander and get albums said stated that they tried contacting trial counsel several times they left messages for him that told they want to talk to him as that he never responded to their eye contact he never called them never spoke they wanted to court house he didn't he didn't even investigate their testimony only knew about the phone the defendant certainly the defendant whether or not you're going to protest again at least i don't mean to interrupt you they have a think it back about the record did he find an alibi because that's the compounding problem and that that makes the problem even worse the ineffectiveness even worse according to the witnesses that indeed it did talk to one of them and their family members but there's so many cases about using family members as alibi with this is that how you open up yourself to a day to a jury thinking oh less of a reason when you have three witnesses to assume that they're all going to commit perjury and lie because this is their brother or this is a relative or this is so you could tell them that the state was not aware of these witnesses they were just oh we know that that's not my question my question you saying that the state was not aware of these witnesses these alibi witnesses just to the best of my knowledge they were unaware of that what i what i can say is that they were not disclosed if you look at the argument of motion to dismiss here the project addressed that ultimately i think and i want to address two cases tate and king both cases out of this court because they're i think very closely on point here take it was another murder case there were there was a post conviction petition filed supported by  counsel was in effect what we're asking you to do is look at what's going on look at what's been present and give him his tape or give him the opportunity to present his evidence perhaps object cross examination let's find out the reasons  not knowing what the alibi is this is a case about an attorney making a strategic decision choosing between two defenses and based on his professional judgment because the legal defense that he thought was best the alibi witness set up an alibi there interrogate or to interview these these alibi witnesses to the state nor back these witnesses to my knowledge your honor the state was not aware of these witnesses i am not a hundred percent sure about that but claim obviously yes but i think here the question is did he present enough to entitle him to an evidentiary hearing again counts was asking you to determine the ultimate question that's counsel in effect on say before you determine whether or not is in effect before we make these assumptions that causes claim that this was strategic he made the judgment call i'm going to go by attacking them on cross examination let's find out what's happened at evidence or was that a strategy there's nothing inconsistent the alibi enhanced as the prophets allegation that it gives the jury more reason to reject the credibility of these witnesses there is no strategic reason not to do it and that was your holding in king we're asking