and a neglective duty case. officer failed to notify communications and her supervisor when responding to an withdrew it and refiled it in 2012. the one year statute of limitations expired in 2011, but the occ investigated the complaint for fact finding purposes. the chief classified the case as non sustained the statute ran before the complainant refiled the case. that concludes the october comprehensive statistical report. then i will move on to the third quarter report for 2013. you have this report in your packet and in the third quarter of 2013 the occ sustained a total of 213 complaints and closed 168. and the third quarter the occ sustained allegations of misconduct or failure to take action in eight complaints and this is a 5 percent sustain rate. the occ mediated cases, which is an 11 mediation rate. in august senior investigator erik was appointed by me to the newly created investigator position. he serves as chief of investigations as well. in the area of training the occ continued implementing its /s

the seven cases included a neglect -- three neglect of duty cases where separate officers in separate incidents failed to collect traffic stop data. each officer was admonished. in another case a sergeant's car was towed and was driven by an unlicensed driver, but the car's owner was sitting in the passenger seat and requested to drive the car, so the sergeant received a written reprimand. and an unnecessary force allegation, an officer used unnecessary force when attempting to take the complainant, fleeing jaywalking from custody by striking the suspect with the suspect's gun when the suspect was attempting to flee. the jaywalker at the time was approached by the officer, the officer did not know he had a gun. >> okay. >> and the officer asked the jaywalker to stop, the jaywalker chose to run and tossed his weapon. >> okay. >> and the officer retrieved the weapon and was attempting -- two officers were attempting to detain the complainant and the officer used the complainant's gun to strike him in the head twice to gain compliance. in another case where allegations discourtesy, negle

i love those cases. i love cases where people do not have strong priors. they are really susceptible to arguments and persuasion. i like the feeling of being persuaded myself. i like the feeling of persuading others. it is not true of every case. there are some cases where we just disagree. we know that we disagree. but there are lots of others and some are less important. some are more important. we are really trying hard to think about real issues, complicated issues, issues that people have not thought about before. issues that people do not have going into -- do not have convictions on. i love that process. >> these law students are reading the final results. from reading some of the opinions and some of the language, some of them and some people may have the idea that there's a lot of animosity among the justices. what has been your experience on a personal level? >> this is the thing that surprises people the most. you are exactly right, judge. sometimes you read a majority and then you read a dissent and you think, wow these people must hate each ot

the chief classified the case as non sustained the statute ran before the complainant refiled the case. that concludes the october comprehensive statistical report. then i will move on to the third quarter report for 2013. you have this report in your packet and in the third quarter of 2013 the occ sustained a total of 213 complaints and closed 168. and the third quarter the occ sustained allegations of misconduct or failure to take action in eight complaints and this is a 5 percent sustain rate. the occ mediated cases, which is an 11 mediation rate. in august senior investigator erik was appointed by me to the newly created investigator position. he serves as chief of investigations as well. in the area of training the occ continued implementing its /stra tee /skwr*eupblg /skwreubg tee /stra for days of training at naco. at this conference attorneys on policy recommendations for officer involved shootings and other incidents. copresented on a panel he presented on investigation. in september clerical staff members and investigators attended a department of health services training on

moving on, we close the quarter with 348 pending cases, 32 more pending cases than the close of third quarter 2012. then moving to case loads and disposition of cases, the /# percent decrease in the available investigators at the end of third quarter in 2013 resulted in a higher average case load. the average number of days the closed cases dropped 17 percent from 166 to 138 and we do have a goal to conclude our investigations within 270 days. moving to sustained cases, as i said earlier the sustained rate was 5 percent and that's compared to 6 percent third quarter 2012. during third quarter 2013 there were sustained allegations in 5 of the 68 complaints. four of the complaints were sustained or 80 percent of them were failure to collect traffic stop data. sustained complaints for failure to collect traffic stop data other allegations, other than for failure to collect traffic stop data, that is sustained allegations, this were two conducts reflecting discredit sustained cases. one involved an officer losing his temper and saying intemperate things and the other officer was using pro

and a neglective duty case. officer failed to notify communications and her supervisor when responding to an withdrew it and refiled it in 2012. the one year statute of limitations expired in 2011, but the occ investigated the complaint for fact finding purposes. the chief classified the case as non sustained the statute ran before the complainant refiled the case. that concludes the october comprehensive statistical report. then i will move on to the third quarter report for 2013. you have this report in your packet and in the third quarter of 2013 the occ sustained a total of 213 complaints and closed 168. and the third quarter the occ sustained allegations of misconduct or failure to take action in eight complaints and this is a 5 percent sustain rate. the occ mediated cases, which is an 11 mediation rate. in august senior investigator erik was appointed by me to the newly created instigator position. he serves as chief of investigations as well. in the area of training the occ continued implementing its /str

there are civil cases, eviction cases, family law cases where the consequences, the results followed in court are almost as severe to what gideon faced and what people face in criminal cases. what we recognize at the outset of the supervisors proclamation is part inspirational, our leaders in the community have rallied around it and the bar association and our firms have taken on more conviction cases. later we'll be holding an event to thank people in these positions and so please stay tuned about that. in the meantime let's focus on gideon and the public defenders role. i would say if there is ever a time and place to turn the tied and to bring the &m music back to gideon's trumpet. we thank you and look forward to a great day. thank you. [ applause ] >> about a year-and-a-half go we saw one of the most dramatic shifts when the state took funding and reallocated to local and housing for state prisoners. our next speaker chief probation officers not

what the petitioner is asking, constitutional law or statutory construction, courts on a case by case basis after the fact make ad hoc judgments. >> there is an easy way out. chemicals involved are the chemicals, you are not prepared to say that. >> i am not. >> once we get outside the anax we have to draw lines or we have to say this encompasses the poison potato or bold fish or the candle or performance enhancing drugs. judges are here to draw lines and between drawing those things into it or drawing lines is better to draw a few lines. we can talk about hypotheticals but they are hypothetical. and the goldfish -- >> not real case. >> they are not real cases because you haven't prosecuted them yet. if you told ordinary people you are going to prosecute mrs. bond for using the chemical weapons, they would be flabbergasted. it is so far outside the ordinary meaning of the word. there is an enormous threat, anything that can cause death or injury to a person or animal, would it shock you if i told you two days ago my wife and i distributed toxic chemicals to a great number of children?

there are civil cases, eviction cases, family law cases where the consequences, the results followed in court are almost as severe to what gideon faced and what people face in criminal cases. what we recognize at the outset of the supervisors proclamation is part inspirational, our leaders in the community have rallied around it and the bar association and our firms have taken on more conviction cases. later we'll be holding an event to thank people in these positions and so please stay tuned about that. in the meantime let's focus on gideon and the public defenders role. i would say if there is ever a time and place to turn the tied and to bring the &m music back to gideon's trumpet. we thank you and look forward to a great day. thank you. [ applause ] >> about a year-and-a-half go we saw one of the most dramatic shifts when the state took funding and reallocated to local and housing for state prisoners. our next speaker chief probation officers not only in san francisco but statewide. she's here to give us an update on what's happening. >> thank you, public defender inviting probat

the discipline has been settled in this case. it was just specifically about the findings of facts. >> i wasn't present for that either. >> would you like to take a vote. >> vote to recuse. >> is there a motion to -- >> so moved. >> moved by commission chan, seconded by commissioner kingsly. all in favor. >> i. >> if we don't adopt b. we're going to go through -- >> let's wait on that because we may want to deliberate on that. >> i was going to let him go home, but i won't. >> all right, with that, we have the matter before us of case number km 0c 10032mcd 1549 iad 2010047. inspector frank s lee. and i'll turn it over to commissioner marshall who presided over this matter. >> i believe this matter has been before us and this is the discussion of possible action to proposed findings of facts. let's see where we are. i've got a couple documents today. i got one from -- clue us in where we are with this now. >> thank you commissioner marshall. the commission heard and decided this case on the merits and on august 15 of 2012 under co

just a one off type case. i know this department bulletin when it was adopted. i know it was a really important bulletin dealing with towing and cars getting towed. some cases cars gets towed and it costs lots of money. i haven't seen a lot of violations. i'm wondering if this is unique or has happened other times the occ has seen. >> commissioner chan, in this case, this did not involve an immigrant. this involved two african american women and it is unique to its particular facts. >> interesting. and this bulletin certainly was meant to help everybody so that's interested. okay, good to know. and then last thing, con congratulations to the executive director position, but i want to know now that the position has switched to deputy director, if anything has changed in terms of responsibilities or is it just a title change? >> no. it is not just a title change, commissioner chan. a deputy director is an exempt position that serves at my pleasure and in addition to having the responsibilities of chief of invest

usually, you need a lot more precedent to overrule a case. if you could overrule a case

i love those cases. i love cases where people do not have strong priors. they are really susceptible to arguments and persuasion. i like the feeling of being persuaded myself. i like the feeling of persuading others. it is not true of every case. there are some cases where we just disagree. we know that we disagree. but there are lots of others and some are less important. some are more important. we are really trying hard to think about real issues, complicated issues, issues that people have not thought about before. issues that people do not have going into -- do not have convictions on. i love that process. >> these law students are reading the final results. from reading some of the opinions and some of the language, some of them and some people may have the idea that there's a lot of animosity among the justices. what has been your experience on a personal level? >> this is the thing that surprises people the most. you are exactly right, judge. sometimes you read a majority and then you read a dissent and you think, wow these people must hate each ot

the cases are differently. >> yes, the cases are very >> yes, the cases are very different. different. the number one difference is the number one difference is just the scope of the cases. just the scope of the cases. in the national football league in the national football league you're talking about over 4,000 you're talking about over 4,000 forward. forward. this is a case of 10 plaintiffs this is a case of 10 plaintiffs coming forward. coming forward. >> won't that grow? >> won't that grow? >> yeah. >> yeah. i'll tell you one of the things i'll tell you one of the things that is going to make this that is going to make this particularly interesting is the particularly interesting is the fact that the way the nfl case fact that the way the nfl case ended ended was that is national was that is national football league football league was indemnified was indemnified and didn't have to admit gift in and didn't have to admit gift in open court. open court. what's interesting is whether what's interesting is whether that will affect the that will affect the nhl players nhl pl

of causes, that would be that case and in maurice's case as well. he had an effective attorney. he was not a public defender and has since been disbarred. it was his only criminal case. he shouldn't have taken the case to begin with. it's with the help of the public defenders office that initial help with jeff's office that we were able to get the case over turned ultimately. but as maurice said about his case, i wouldn't have needed an attorney if the police and prosecutors had done their job to begin with. he's right. i don't want to lose track of that. his attorney was inadequate but he wouldn't have been in the position if everyone else had done their job in the first place. that is pervasive in our system and people working in the trenches is hard to overcome that complacency and their client issen entitled to that. that doesn't provide the information that they need to challenge the prosecution. where we know many of our experts on arson and the fire wasn't arson. when you have evidence that isn't disclosed you have experts that are challenged

these cases. these cases. although it's important to note although it's important to note that even though i think that even though i think catholics have been associated catholics have been associated with the opposition to birth with the opposition to birth control and the opposition of control and the opposition of this mandate that hobby lobbies, this mandate that hobby lobbies, a christian owned company, and a christian owned company, and there is another company, a wood there is another company, a wood cabinet making company that is cabinet making company that is mennonite owned, you have the mennonite owned, you have the usual suspects, the beckett fund usual suspects, the beckett fund and freedom groups and then on and freedom groups and then on the other side the american the other side the american civil liberties union, and old civil liberties union, and old fashion church state-separation fashion church state-separation groups that are lined up as well groups that are lined up as well

the cases are differently. >> yes, the cases are very different. the number one difference is just the scope of the cases. in the national football league you're talking about over 4,000 plaintiffs when this went forward. this is a case of 10 plaintiffs coming forward. >> won't that grow? >> yeah. i'll tell you one of the things that is going to make this particularly interesting is the fact that the way the nfl case ended was that is national football league was indemnified and didn't have to admit gift in open court. what's interesting is whether that will affect the nhl players ability, their play in the national hockey league, not in the juniors or minors coming up in the nhl that led to their post-concussive syndromes. >> the nhl took some action sooner than nfl and they resisted what might have helped them. >> there has been a code of conduct in hockey about the way you are supposed to play the game. for a lot of players even the idea of wearing helmets which has now taken place over a generation is seen as often bizarre. there is a hockey le

the department makes its own determine nation on whether cases on whether cases should be brought to da's office and i'd like to see them do that, so that we leave the officers out there in limbo and we leave the individuals who involve their families out there in limbo so that's one thing we need to talk about and get taken care of sooner and that's a part of that. >> well, respectfully we're going to talk about it on december 4? that what i heard? >> yeah. >> that's done. >> so december 4. thank you. >> that's it. all right, anything further? hearing none. >> yes. >> commissioner kingsly. >> our scheduling resolution can help guide us in terms of what is fixed on our schedule from week to week, and i was looking at it as we came in to this meeting and see that moving into december, the december 4 date brings us around at that time of year again where we're looking at budgetary matters and we have scheduled for the december 4 meeting, addressing the capital budget, capital budget versus is operating budget so whether or not there will be requests this year from police department for

of causes, that would be that case and in maurice's case as well. he had an effective attorney. he was not a public defender and has since been disbarred. it was his only criminal case. he shouldn't have taken the case to begin with. it's with the help of the public defenders office that initial help with jeff's office that we were able to get the case over turned ultimately. but as maurice said about his case, i wouldn't have needed an attorney if the police and prosecutors had done their job to begin with. he's right. i don't want to lose track of that. his attorney was inadequate but he wouldn't have been in the position if everyone else had done their job in the first place. that is pervasive in our system and people working in the trenches is hard to overcome that complacency and their client

we abaited 188 cases. and so that concludes our report. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you, commissioner. >> okay. further commissioner comments? >> public comment? on the director's report, item 6 a to 6 e? >> commissioner? >> good morning, my name is robert davis and i am a bay view resident and i would like to ask for a little help with this case, this is 38 and 31rd street and on the corner of third and oak dale. and if you will look at the summary all of the details are here. we lost some money by not collecting the multiplier, and this case has gone on for many, many years, all of the details are in the back. and we would like to resolution. thank you. >> thank you, mr. davis. >> mr. davis, on these you bring them in to us in the morning of the hearing is there any way that you could get them into the office before the hearing so that we can review them? >> of course. >> yeah. because i know that you go to so much work with these but it would be nice before you would make a presentation on it. >> no pr

but whether that case is constitutional or not, this case is far from the constitutional line, further from the constitutional line than the state legislature's practice in marsh. because there, nebraska had one chaplain from one denomination for 16 years and yet, that was constitutionally permissible, and his prayers were not distinguishable in content from the prayers at issue here during the time that was relevant to the case. >> would it make a difference in your analysis if instead of, as i understand the hypothetical, there was a point of saying, all rise or something of that sort? would it make a difference if the hypothetical justice kagan posed were the same except people weren't told to rise or invited to rise or, in fact, were told to stay seated, something like that, so there would be no indication of who was participating in the prayer? is that a -- is that a ground of distinction that you're willing to accept or not? >> i don't think that is constitutionally significant, unless -- i mean, it might be different if people are compelled to stand, but whether they are or not

the cases go on and on. we can't have equal just announced i firmly and absolutely believe in x and x happens to be inconsistent with the case. i believe it strongly and it comes from whoever the great leader is in this particular moment and no one doubts it at that notion is not a viable notion. that's not the way we run it. rfra was enacted to overturned. >> did not overturn lee. the principles and lee have been recited by the supreme court over and over again. they are viable principles that sometimes free exercise has to give way to the common good depending upon whether the government is shown there is a way. >> a restr

meantime, let's go to another case that just crossed moments ago. we are talking about something that happened seven years ago, did or didn't happen, seven years ago, a rape allegation turning duke university lacrosse team and the community for that matter upside down. three team members accused of raping a woman hired as a stripper at a party. the athletes were arrested, but charges later dropped, even the head coach lost his job. well, now fast forward the woman who falsely accused the three duke university lacrosse players of rape was now recently convicted of second degree murder in the stabbing deaths of her boyfriend, the conviction happened friday. 34-year-old crystal mangum said she stabbed her boyfriend in self defense, but an attorney said evidence didn't support her claim. now magnum was sentenced to between 14 and 18 years in jail for the killing of her boyfriend. so mark, let me bring you into this. difficult to know whether we should even compare these two cases, but now given this conviction, does it make you, does it make anyone thin

justice hagan samurai star case, kagan summarized our case. you cannot refuse to participate in the prayer just before you stand up to ask the board to take discretionary action that affects you directly and personally. this is highly coercive and also a sectarian endorsement. it violates all of the principals of the establishment clause that both sides of the court, the liberals and conservatives, have agreed to carry and endorsements are prohibited. and we have both of those things in this case. >> what is the larger problem, the message or the method? >> the message. it does not matter who was selected to give the prayer. it matters what the prayer givers says. the prayers in this case are explicitly christian and often heavy handedly christian, talking about the saving grace of jesus christ on the crossed and similar things. we do not care if pastors give a prayer as long as they remain nonsectarian. >> how can you make them sectarian to appeal to many religions? how can you do that? >> we have a tradition in this country of nonsectarian p

today -- 300 cases. they apply to the cases that are reported where the command climates are sufficient, that a victim feels i can come forward. i can report this case. in the 23,000 other cases, those victims don't have that confidence. and so, madam president, if you don't create a transparent, accountable system that's outside the chain of command, your hope of getting more victims to come forward and report so we can at least weigh the evidence and see whether we can go to trial, it's not there. the hope isn't there. the confidence in an objective review by someone who doesn't know the perpetrator and doesn't know the victim doesn't exist. so while you have these 3,000 cases, you have these 3,000 cases that were reported and commanders did make sure one in ten went to trial and when they did go to trial, you had a 95% conviction rate, so they're not making the wrong decisions about what case to try. it's just that only 3,000 of these command climates were strong enough. you can't train your way out o

there are cases where, specific cases, getting a homeless individual. there are a group of case managers called court accountable homeless services. it targets homeless individuals. and mental health cases have been common. traditionally cases that the court is looking for supervision, but again as you might imagine the resources are severely taxed. and during the budget difficulties in the last years, the ability to manage large numbers. we are talking for example, homeless individuals, we see 30 individuals at any one given time. that's the active case load and it's driven by that. >> i have a question from the public defender for the law enforcement officials here. what reforms can you commit to at this point to reduce pretrial detention population? shall we start with sheriff mirkarimi or the district attorney? >> i will reiterate that the strategy that i think san francisco should seriously consider legislate a new criteria. that's what the penal code has empowered us to do. we could start right away by corralling a number of legislators and city h

speaking out against these cases. although it's important to note that even though i think catholics have been associated with the opposition to birth control and the opposition of this mandate that hobby lobbies, a christian owned company, and there is another company, a wood cabinet making company that is mennonite owned, you have the usual suspects, the beckett fund and freedom groups and then on the other side the american civil liberties union, and old fashion church state-separation groups that are lined up as well as planned parenthood and the abortion rights groups. it's shaping up as a standard culture war battle. and i think it's not going to be--this isn't going to be the final word on this mandate. you're going to get a lot of cases coming out of this. >> have earlier attempts by the department of health and human services meet some of these objections have the yays and the nays been lying up, or have the religious organizations for whom these exceptions have been offered been satisfied with what the gover

the case is unresolved. after the carnage in 2009, the president promised there would be justice. >> the perpetrators will not escape justice. >> the current president says his government is working overtime to prevent new cases of human rights violations and resolve previous cases and ask that people be patient. it is not helping. >> the university of the philippines is doing more than the president. at least the up three years ago introduced an elective course for would be or aspiring jurnalists. that shows them ou to do hostel coverage, what to do if you are in a possible hostel situation. how to protect yourself in the pursuit of an ex-closive story. at the end of the day cases about killings of media men are dependent on the lawyers and judges. >> the disappointment has come from a position that the acheano administration has taken, that a case of a violation against press freedom or the life of a yournalist has been taken to court, that it is now - must be left to the judicial process to bring it to it

major case. we rely on other lawyers and law professors to help us cover the other 50 cases or so. really have gotten some terrific contributors. we also had terrific contributors. but the number have been proved past. a bit in years i think that we see a reflection of the ncreased veblt book. >> tom and amy do many things -- thank you for having us and inviting me. tom and amy do things well, one thing they do awfully is brag. the fact is -- think about it for a second. tom does not come to practice the e the supreme court by usual route. he was not a clerk. trotten follow the path from the law firm, to the fancy firm. tom is a self-starter. he developed his practice by likely routee most for cases to get to the supreme ourt when the lower courses were divided. one thing they do is harm unite and he law is enforced views around the country. o when there is what they call a circuit split, that's a likely case for the supreme court. way for the a circuit splits and maybe that's the e that can come to supreme court. in t of big law firms washington would kill to have the scotus blog.

in the end, brad king declared michelle o'connell's case closed. >> when you talk about this case, yes, there is a visceral sense of, "oh, what if she was murdered and this guy goes free?" there ought to be at least some visceral sense, "what if she did commit suicide and he's in prison for the rest of his life?" >> bogdanich: and that's what juries are for, i suppose. >> well, they're for that only if there is sufficient factual basis to start that process. >> narrator: no charges have been brought, and her death officially remains a suicide. >> narrator: the shadow that lay across michelle o'connell's death was the question of how effectively law enforcement investigates cases involving its own officers-- especially when there is the possibility of domestic violence. >> in my 32 years in law enforcement, i can probably count on these fingers the number of agencies that have actually held officers accountable and terminated their employment. it is very rare that you see an officer even prosecuted because most prosecutors don't want to file criminal charges against an officer because t

. >> so scott, you've covered a lot of these cases over the years. raj rotman going back to worldcom, a case of a different sort, can you recall one that was as long in the building as this one? >> well, the interesting thing about this one, tyler, i think is the quality of the lawyering on both sides and the chess match that has gone on here and the fact that steven cohen individually has managed to escape charges. surely his financial empire is going to change considerably, becoming sort of the family office trading his own money but there was -- there's quite a chess match that's led up to this. bethanie is right, this is going to go on. this is a rich vain still for preet bharara. if you think back to five years ago when you had this growing industry of expert networks, almost it was a replacement with the old analyst research, this was going to tap people in and hedge funds into the deep knowledge of companies that's changed entirely and the way that hedge funds conduct themselves in terms of gathering information has changed because now they kn

almost all of those cases. but i think there has definitely been an increase in the use of social media to do intimidation. >> a manual published by a retired judge outlines how to combat intimidation, urging the ban of sunglass, cell phones and gang attire in courtrooms. he says one of the downsides to the internet is it allows people to remain anonymous. >> people feel much more comfortable say things that they would never say in public, that they would never say face-to-face. so the internet has made it much easier to intimidate witnesses. >> some of the district attorneys we spoke to around the country say anonymity can make it difficult to track down those doing the intimidation. both facebook and twitter say they're doing everything they can to cooperate with law enforcement. >> definitely got to crack that case. thanks so much, brian, interesting. >>> brand-new polling numbers finding approval of obama care is drop like a rock with americans. take a look at this. only 40% approve the affordable care act.

the injunctions being binding not only on the individual but in this case hhs in favor of this case the gilardis and the entities and the people. [inaudible] >> focusing on the gilardis as individuals the government's response is that the gilardis aren't forced to do anything that because they have chosen to operate under the corporate for him there is no burden on them but the corporate veil is is not an iron curtain. there are exceptions particularly in the area of first amendment rights. the court in citizens united specifically listed the kinds of special advantages that corporations enjoy specifically limited liability. the supreme court said they are that the state cannot exact the price of these corporate advantages the forfeiture of first amendment rights. >> is the burden assuming -- >> the substantial burden is the mandate requires my clients to do something their religion tells them they cannot do. >> which we know courses permissible in our constitutional scheme. you are merely saying it that way to answer the question. there are lots of cases in which -- and i mean no one s

for how many cases the public defender offices should carry. most offices don't meet those standards. and the lawyer has something like six hours under the standards to go to the jail and interview their clients multiple times and spent time with their families and learn things, filed motions, advocate and the trial itself it's not going to be a good outcome so that is a huge problem in our system and something that should scare people. when you think about the number of convictions you have in the country certainly the fact that defense lawyers are underfunded as one of the reasons. >> guest: the sequester has had an impact. most people don't realize that it is actually a kind of exemplary indigent defense system because it has been properly funded. but the federal defender offices across the country are laying off lawyers and it's shameful. >> the department of justice was going to be under -- the department justice, for those who don't know, they have the attorney's office. they were seen as too important to the fund. so meanwhile, the attor

. >> poison goldfish is not a real case. >> they are not real cases because you haven't prosecuted them yet. if you told ordinary people that you were going to prosecute ms. bond for using a chemical weapon they would be flabbergasted. you know it's so far outside of the ordinary meaning of the word >> that statute has an enormous breadth. anything that can cause death or injury to a person or an animal. would it shock you if i told you that a few days ago my wife and i distributed toxic chemicals to a great number of children? [laughter] >> your honor. >> chocolate bars. chocolate is poison to doug so it's a toxic chemical. there was chocolate all over the place. >> this is serious business with all due respect. the line that the petitioners asking -- >> i want you to answer. my question was a question to get your answer and the answer that i want you to address itself to you is the problem of once you you are a part from annexes in defining the chemicals you throw into it a list of a thousand miles long and we can tell joke after joke but the fact that it's so easy to make up an examp