well he said i don't want no more questions man i want my lawyer the picture and commenting on this statement the trial court stated i don't want to call it problematic but there is a question mark in my mind respectfully the trial court should listen to that question serves on the defendant initiated further conversation with the police after the police honored his request for to turn it in just told him how the cases seating there was no more interrogation indeed i started out in my grief and i'm going to do so here and there's a good view of redundancy here but i think the facts are fighting for look at the facts that are in the defendant's own motion to suppress the final was held after the defend an exercise his miranda rights the cops told the defendant he'd been identified as at the defendant then number four times you can call this three times before depending on how the last group statements are counted whether stores what he says this time but that more your being the defendant then remain randomized and then he gives a statement defendant was mirandized he spoke to the police then he said he wanted to meet questioning sees cops told him he's going to be in a lineup they really are told even before that he was going to be in a lineup so that was pretty redundant information from the cops ask him to pick his lineup number common practice he did then there was the lineup the police did not speak with him outside the interrogation room after the lineup the cost returned to him told him he was charged with murder they did contact the alibi witnesses and he'd been identified in the lineup he says f that i'll tell you what happened this texas hold on that we said to be sure he knew his rights to detectives and mirandized defending they give you time to think about it detective left the room to get a supervisor the protective return to get into the lineup and get height and weight information that sort of thing then they took you wind up questioning properly had ceased the judge below from the police returned from the lineup to the room with the defendant tony been said according to the judge this judge finding f that lawyer the judge found these were three as i point out you can argue it's either three or four clear initiations edwards versus euro zone and you re initiation of  of compensation by counsel detective mcdaniel if you get a supervisor they return detectives do a fine job backing up that supervisor surjit body i was searching for his name here it is was very clearly and calmly asking him if he understood his rights in reinforced these are the judges funny judge foundry initiation your hon court case holding that well what's going to happen to me was a real initiation of conversation and wooly said there was a reinitiate by the defendant saying i didn't do it again i'll be terse as my sort she was not identifying a stranger she picked out his photo from i think it was eight hundred thirty five photographs also the next day the defendant even even more incriminating statement after the date issue and in in the defendant's initial brief here nothing was said about that statement and below there was no motion made to suppress that leaders so there was no argument made until the