is different is because we have a much link your history of mr collins truthfulness which was somehow disregarded by the district court in fact things we've been up here before on this case the first time it was because the government said that he was a you know that that he was a dealer in the price of the cocaine and all of that stuff focusing in on that how can we say it's clear well i'll tell you and part of the reason i'm going there is because what i'm trying to get to is that mr collins told the truth it was found to have been credible detriment of the government's confidential source on multiple occasions so he told the truth about the g p s device he told you about doing cocaine he told the truth about the amount to tell the truth about his sources tell me right now what i about that well but with you look at the tally the circumstances it is a reason i think that maybe he's not lying about that and i would probably use the day you are not you can ok sorry to interrupt not his truthfulness and that's just a fact but it's not and i'll tell you why and i think that if the court goes to exhibit a which was presented at the sentencing hearing by the defendant to assess his credibility during that property you will find that mr collins has one of the worst daughters of anybody that you ever heard and he he repeatedly did it but can't get it out and the whole interview was like that and at the point of the interview that was referenced with clarity and with emphasis in the government's brief saying i was going to go to the auction that evening you actually can't hear that it's very and i'm going to take that forty thousand dollars tonight and buy a car what he said was he was going to use the money to buy a car that's clear he never said i'm going there tonight to buy a car and my argument was what the options were the next day he was probably going to go the next day to buy the car and the agent said well there's no car that you could possibly purchase for that much these are crap cars and i said no they're not you don't know how expensive they are there's beamers there's a mercedes or cadillac escalates these auctions can get pretty heated in a lot of money and cars are deal with this guy that's a spy business as you'll find out if you listen to the tape this side business is selling and repairing used cars and switching him out so he was going to go to the auto auction and buy a vehicle and the forty thousand dollars in the trunk was going to be for that purpose and the quote in the brief that he was going back to evening it is very difficult to understand him because he has this wonderful speech and had been the judge recognized in the ruling and said in the transcript of the second sentencing i know it's really hard to understand what this guy saying because of his speech impediment and additionally what the court said at the sentencing was well you know i'm not totally convinced he's telling the truth i think it may be implausible but i don't know but it's the defendant's bird to show me that he's telling the truth well it is an arson it is and i did because i showed the tape along with all the other evidence from previously with the obstruction of justice the conscious sources were extend the proffer to other areas outside of the proper interview so if you're doing the full cooperation agreement you got to tell everything you ever knew about anybody else forever including yourself your brother your mother and everyone if it's a proper pursuit of the safety belt it's just you and your role role in the offense that you are convicted of that's the difference between the two that's right with the cooperation proffer the government gets to decide if you're truthful and with savior proper the court gets to decide if you're truthful and so what we have in that situation how they respond and because of that totality of observation they're able to make that credibility determination here the court watched the interview and sat and i don't know these acts like to look it up on rebuttal which i'm almost into but he said that he thought the flow of the interview that he was truthful and that he was forthcoming so it but yet because there was no definitive proof that he wasn't going to buy a car the next day that i haven't met my  that is an impossible bird with everything else that has already been presented so i know that it's not to help battle for clear air but sometimes the battle is won if there is sufficient evidence presented to show that the credibility determination was inadequate in and therefore was not eligible for the safety valve you know you don't have to spend forty thousand dollars on the same day you could save it for tomorrow or the next day so the timing just with the money isn't terribly direction and west i'm seventy four in the in the other direction of danville how many miles separates them here and i would have to look at that but i can provide additional information on the exact number of miles i mean people who sit back and forth an interstate all the time i'm not sure that defendant had recently partnered with somebody to purchase kilos of cocaine so i think that you have to consider these other factors as well in supporting the fact that mr collins is not telling the truth about what's going on here he says he's going to do and will go to the gym but we have other information saying no he's actually good indication of just how hard the government was pushing the envelope to make sure this guy didn't get to see you know really push the envelope on that one let me show you how do we care so we'll we are you willing risk you know i don't believe that's correct and that also i think that goes to another point i'd like to crack the defense counsel is making about scope suggest at one point that it was not within the scope of the defendants thirty five fifty three applications to discuss where this money was so he's not really saying i believe that mr collins was lying saying i'm not convinced enough by a preponderance of mr khan's challenge the truth and that's the didn't want to discuss the higher source he was planning to purchase cocaine from and there are a number of reasons the defendant might want to do that but at the end of the day it wasn't up to the district court judge here to determine exactly why mr constantine the truth nor w know we have more than that we have the fact that it is driving the wrong way and we have the fact that he was reportedly supposed to be purchasing a killer in danville which is the way he was driving by the fact that he had forty thousand dollars in cash for a car auction before i think of plenty of cars that would go for forty thousand dollars or more yes trying to but this was the day before the action and the defendant i mean i don't i don't i just understand that there are people who live in the cash economy yes you're out of the dependency was going to the years and he out running around right now if it weren't for this one particular ruling but just to address a couple of the things that the government said the confidential source that they had was blown out of the water in terms of credibility and shouldn't have been considered and wasn't considered in the ruling on