at this point i was asking this court is to allow this excessive post indiction petition to be filed we're not asking for a new trial we're not asking for an evidentiary hearing just that hubbard be allowed to file his successive petition and receive an attorney to examine his claims in light of what we now know about torture at area two and his motion for leave to file hubbard argued that cause was established because he had recently obtain that the time frame when he came into possession that when he knew that this report was out there now when he knew what the report states but when he came and so this would be my best case for that mismatch and that's the case that deals with the forensic come as a kettle of fish and the problems with her testimony that case it was caused when the petitioner learned of him live fish has problems with her testimony however this is not like being charged with with knowing a change in the law this is being required to stay abreast of new another point about the first petition he raised a different claim in his first petition this first petition he argued the trial counsel was ineffective for failing to obtain medical records from the motion to suppress statements to support his physical coercion claim but it was an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim it was a different claim than a due process torture claim and post condition counsel was under no obligation to develop additional when and this is important because in this case hubbard has not yet been afforded a review of his torture claim in light of the egan report showing the right spread systematic torture of prisoners at area two or the confidential report another basis that hubbard has established was a point that is argued in the opening brief i once posted a petition also establishes prejudice such that he should have been granted leave to file howard has been claiming that he was tortured since he was in jail following his arrest his grandmother testified at the motion to suppress statements that his face was swollen his red cage was black and blue he was holding his midsection he was bent over and he told our three days after his confession that the police had beaten him he also needed and received medical treatment shortly after his confession we also now know that detective michael mcdermott has been found beyond a reasonable doubt to have tortured prisoners at area two and detective michael mcdermott testified at the jury trial that he arrested cupboard and he interrogated hubbard multiple times we also know that mcdermott has committed perjury to cover up these offenses is physical torturing sack displayed before the reports however did not have the evidence that he needed to support these claims but now we know  conduct that has been consistently hidden away the police have gone to great lengths to hide this conduct even committing perjury to do so as the illinois supreme court stated price satisfaction of the cause and prejudiced test really allows the petition to proceed it doesn't relieve the defendant i was of an entry burden in the post conviction proceeding there is a need here for further litigation into hubbard's claims as to say points out and it's brief there are open questions here that need to be examined obert has never had an attorney appointed to examine his claims after the widespread torture areas you came to light and even in the egan report given the evidence prejudice required to file for these reasons i asked the court to reverse the denial of leave to file hubbard's excessive post conviction titian and superman for the appointment of pounce all and further post invasion proceedings thank you thank i if the defendant could not satisfy cause and prejudice now he claims the two thousand and six report of the special state's attorney probably five his cause to allow him to relive the day his claim that his confession was the product of police courtship and he cites rights rice never held that cause is automatically established in any case where a defendant tries to use the two thousand and six report rice entailed a case where the defendant had claimed police coercion against the same officers sit from the motion to suppress he had done it before trial he raised it on direct appeal he wasted in the first post conviction petition and then this report came out that supported the claim that he had been trying to raise that he had raised all along  come paired that to this case because the claim that the defendant is now seeking to raise is a wholly different claim than the claim he addressed one time in a motion to suppress prior to trial now prior to the hearing on that motion the defendant was requested to specific to specify which officers committed the abuse when they committed will give you the quote him that he them abused you raised no your honor i'm saying that it is an entirely different claim and it's very easy to understand why the defendant alleged on february ninth at five thirty pm in the evening to write detectives who were six feet tall with black hair and glasses slapped him twice in the face during the course of one interview these were allegations that the state asked the defendant to specifically clarify so that they could properly respond with the right quick this is at the motion to suppress hearing now all of a sudden the defendant is claiming after the two thousand and six report that he was abused on the night of february eighth the day before her he says he was abused he said he was abused in his motion to suppress by one detective detective mcdermott and that that abuse occurred over the course of three different interviews and it didn't involve being slapped in the face it involved being hit in the head with such force that he fell to the ground and then in the subsequent interview being punched in the stomach and then in the third interview being kicked and punched this is an entirely new claim and the defense the two thousand and six report had nothing to do with whether the defendant in it so he because he was asked to swear to what allegations of abuse existed and humidor said anything about this from us this is trying to get to the next in a timely fashion and he cannot establish cause because the two thousand and six report had nothing to do webster ever with rather or not he could have raised these claims in the source of the information in my attorney didn't talk to me about what happened to me on february eighth my attorney failed to i told him that i had also been abused on february eighth and he didn't he he didn't put that in a claim that could have been raised in his first success in his first press conviction petition the two thousand and six report knowledge of it had nothing to do with his ability to do that he had the assistance of counsel and that two thousand six report was out six months before he ever got counsel appointed in the first post conviction and would have been out for two years have you found a new case law that incarcerated of found through reasonably dilution leaves in terms of this type of work or this report your honor from my personal experience i've done nothing but post conviction watch for the last ten years information this defendant like every other incarcerated defendant has lied claim privileges has the assistance of out of a paralegal can speak with other jailhouse lawyers this claim has been raised for thirty years and the defendant didn't need the this two thousand and six a live report or this claim the claim that he was abused by a specific detective and he could have found this report within the time first for his first post conviction and the defendant's efforts to raise new arguments in his reply brief and the concept that these are not  that you claim in a one sentence perfunctory claim to the extent that you know my other attorney should have been included this in in my first p c petition oh he rendered on reasonable assistance you are not a route to raise new claims for the first time on appeal and you certainly aren't allowed to do it for the first time in a reply brief and to cite additional evidence such as reports and how hard it is to wrap find that this is and wholly improper re my attorney was ineffective for failing to properly support my claim that my confession was coerced and he could have supported it with medical records from the the attorney if the claim was supported by the two thousand and six report if the claim of abuse could have been supported by the two thousand and six report the attorney on post conviction  review could have said and hears from the evidence in support of his claims the reason right he didn't do that most likely was because the defendant's allegations of abuse that were little go to pretrial had nothing to do with any of the people that were listed in that two thousand and six report and that's why the defendant had to come up with entirely new arguments or claims all new abuse because he had taken it's the people position that having suleiman to his allegations of abuse in the motion to suppress having indicated that they occurred on february night they were committed by two white officers who were the abuse occurred february ninth by two tall right detectives so now it is the people's positions that his current claims are affirmatively with betty and i think the record he's already said what happened to him it didn't involve these allegations and he's not allowed to change it the low profile at the trial of has to be the primary flor requires if you were beaten over the course of three interviews on a given date and you didn't remember to raise that when you were arguing a motion to suppress the less says you for fitted that's the role of coos room to read his allegations of abuse are and now he can't come back and change his mind and say oh yeah i think i have another another claim to raise that's not the way the labs and that's not right post conviction was designed to do conviction is designed exclusively by the legislature to provide a forum for the litigation of claims that have not been previously litigated and that could not have been previously  defendant his claims have been anything that consistent and he should not be able at this time simply because he uses the magic word and two thousand and six report your current threat a second bite at the apple and that's the long haul and that's why the circuit court properly deny defendant leave to follow this successive your honour's i'm not saying that that you can report is cause in every case but in this case in cases like this where you have a longstanding claim of torture and documented injuries  successive petitions the same argument was made by the state in rice who had also alleged torture since day one just like hubbard and rice i think that's an argument is that it was within the really to focus on the second interview with just detective owens and fitch but the file motion did mention everyone in the state had asked for a narrowing of that but there were many officers and detectives that were involved in this case and interrogation and hubbard has had them physically beat his failure to possibly remember the names of the detective is understandable in light of that and again they're all open questions here but need to be looked at all are asking for at this point is that hubbard be allowed to file his excessive petition and have an upturn he appointed to look into these claims to examine these claims in light of what we now know in the evening report they even report was the first time that an independent body published an official report into the abuses at areas two and three it's the first official published document the corroborates the claims of these men that claim they've been tortured and consistently alleging that they were tortured by berge and those underneath him like detective  i also would like to clarify the dates about the post conviction petition the state mentioned that the date that the even report came out and said that my client's first petition was still pro se was before counsel had been appointed the appellate court sent his petition to the second stage due to a ninety day violation in october two thousand and five so it was before the even report came out so it was at