Day 11

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
No. Hello Hello jury microphone testing one jury microphone testing
two violation in Connecticut General Statute Section fifty three A
sixty eight two at count four. This will end your
deliberations at count four if, however, you unanimously find that

(00:22):
the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant did not have in self defense or
in the defense of others, or has not proved one
of the statutory disqualifications beyond a reasonable doubt that on
the strength of the defenses alone, you must find the
defendant not guilty of the assault and the second degree
intentional Account four, even though you have found the elements

(00:43):
of that prime proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This will
end your deliberations at count four lesser included defenses to
assault the second degree intentional. In accordance with the Court's
previous instructions, you will consider lesser included defenses to assault
in the second degree if it only is you have
unanimously found the state has not proved beyond a reasonable

(01:06):
doubt all of the elements of the crime of assault
and the second degree intentional, and therefore that the defendant
is not guilty of assault and the second degree intentional
at count four. The defendant at count four, the substitute
information is specifically charged with the crime of assault and
the second degree intentional. The offense of assault and the
second degree intentional under count four, I'm sorry, excuse me.

(01:28):
Under our penal code is such that it may include
the elements of the crime of assault in the second
degree reckless, similar to my previous instructions, unlesser included defenses.
This brings into play the rule of law known as
lesser included defenses. You will consider lesser included defenses to
assault the second degree intentional in the order and under

(01:48):
the circumstances as provided herein the fact that I am
instructing you on a lesser included defense to assault in
the second degree intentional as to account for should not
be interpreted by you that I believe the evidence crue
the accused guilty of any lesser included defense. You the jury,
are the sole judges of the facts in this case.
You must determine whether the defendant is guilty beyond a

(02:10):
reasonable doubt of assault in the second degree intentional, or
is guilty of the lesser included defense, if and only
if you unanimously found that the state did not prove
beyond a reasonable doubt all the animals of the crime
of assault and the second degree intentional, and that the
defendant therefore is not guilty of assault and the second
degree intentional. At Punt four, Shall you consider the lesser

(02:31):
included defense of assault in the second degree reckless directly
below its subception a A assault in the second degree reckless
Section fifty three A sixty eight three. The statute defining
this defense reads impertinent part as falls. A person is
guilty of assault in the second degree when he recklessly
causes serious physical injury to another person by means of

(02:55):
a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument. For you define
the defendant guilty of his charge, the state must prove
the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt. Element one recklessness.
The first element is that the defendant active recklessly. A
person acts recklessly with respect or result or circumstances when
he is aware of, unconsciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable

(03:17):
risk that such result will occur, or that such circumstances exist.
Refer to the court's previous instruction recklessness at sixteen. Element
two cause serious physical injury The second element is that
the defendant caused serious physical injury. This means that the
defendant's conduct was the proximic cause of the person's injuries.

(03:38):
Refer to the courts previous instruction of proximic cause at fourteen.
You must find it proved beyond a reasonable doubt that
Bason Tield was seriously physically injured as a result of
the aptions of the defendant. Serious physical injury is something
more serious than mere physical injury, which is defined as
a puremid of physical condition or pain. It is more
than a minor or superficial injury. It is defined by

(03:59):
statue is physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death,
or which creates serious disfigurement, serious imparement of health, or
a serious loss of impairment of the function of any
bodily organ. Element three Dangerous instruments. The third element is
that the defendant used a dangerous instrument in causing serious
physical injury to another. Dangerous instrument means any instrument, article,

(04:24):
or substance which, under the circumstances in which it is used,
or attempted or threatened to be used, is capable of
causing death or serious physical injury. Serious physical injury means
physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or
which causes serious disfigurement, serious impairmentive health, or serious loss
or impairment as the function of any bodily organ It
is important to note that the article need not be

(04:46):
inherently dangerous. All that is retired is that the article
is capable of causing death or serious physical injury under
the circumstances in which it was used. Any article or
substance without limitation, and even though harmless under normal use,
may be found by you to be a dangerous instrument
if under the circumstances of its use or threatned or
attempted use, it is capable of producing serious physical injury

(05:08):
or death. The state need not prove that in fact
death or serious physical injury resulted, only that the instrument
had the surface In the summary of the state must
prove beyond a reasonable doubt that one the defendant acted recklessly,
two the defendant caused serious physical injury two phase on Teel,
and three the defendant cause the injury by means of

(05:28):
a dangerous instrument. If you unanimously find that the state
has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt all the
elements of assault and the second degree of reckless, you
shall find the defendant not guilty of assault on the
secondary reckless that account four. This will edge your deliberations
on count four. If, however, you unanimously find that the
state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt all the elements

(05:49):
of the crime of assault and the second degree reckless,
you shall mixt consider the defendant's claims of self defense
and defense of others. Refer to my instruction on self
defense defense of others below at twenty two. If you
unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable
doubt that the defendant did not act in self defense
or in defense of others, or that the state has

(06:10):
proved one in the statutory disqualifications beyond a reasonable doubt,
you shall reject the defenses and find the defindant guilty
of assault in the second degree reckless, in violation of
Connecticut General Statutes, Section fifty three a sixty eight three
at count four. This will endure deliberations on count four. If, however,
you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove

(06:33):
beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act
in self defense or in the defense of others, or
has not proved one of the statutory disqualifications beyond a
reasonable doubt. Then on the strength of the defenses alone,
you must find the defendant not guilty of assault and
the degree reckless at califour even though you have found

(06:53):
the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. This
will end your deliberations on the count four twenty two
self defense defense of others. The defendant has offered evidence
in this case that he acted in self defense and
or the defense of others. Self defense and defense of

(07:14):
others are two separate but related defenses. Although the court
is instructing you on both defenses under this section, the
defendant is entitled to and must be given by you,
a separate and independent determination as to each defense under
each kilt. After you have considered all the evidence in
this case, if you find that the state has proved

(07:36):
beyond a reasonable doubt each and every element of a
crime to which self defense defense of others may apply,
you must go on to consider whether or not the
defendant acted in self defense. In this case, self defense
and the defense of others applies to all crimes charge
and the substitute information under each of the four counts,
along with the lesser included defenses to each of those

(07:58):
crimes at each kilt. In other words, self defense and
the defense of others applies to all offenses submitted to
you for deliberations. The statute defining self defense defense of
Others reads impertinent part as follows. A person is justified
in using reasonable physical force upon another person to defend himself,

(08:19):
a third or a third person from what he reasonably
believes to be the use or imminent use a physical force.
And he may use such degree of force which he
reasonably believes to be necessary for such purpose, except that
deadly physical force may not be used unless the actor
reasonably believes that such other person is using or about

(08:42):
to use deadly physical force, or inflicting or about to
inflict great bodily harmed. The determination of whether a defendant
reasonably believes physical force to be necessary to defend himself
someone else from what he reasonably believes to be the
use or imminent use physical force by another individual is
one whether the defendant actually believed that the other person

(09:07):
was using or about to use physical force or deadly
physical force against him a third person, and two whether
a reasonable person in the defendant's position, knowing what the
defendant knew and being in the same circumstances, would have
had those same beliefs. Whether the defendant's belief was reasonable

(09:27):
is a question of fact for you to determine based
on all the evidence presented. The acts of the other
individual James McGrath atcount one, Ryan Hines, Account two, Thomas
Connery Junior at count three in fais Atilla, Account four,
leading to the defendant's use of defensive physical forces need
not be an actual threat or assault. The test is

(09:49):
not what the other person actually intended, but what the
other person's acts reasonably caused the defendant to believe was
the other person's intention. The state's hardened when evidence of
self defense the defense of others is introduced at trial.
The state, in order to obtain a conviction, must prove

(10:09):
beyond a reasonable doubt both the elements of the crime's
charge and that the defendant did not act in self
defense or defense of others. If the state fails to
prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not
act in self defense or defense of others, unless the
state proves beyond a reasonable doubt a statutory disqualification as

(10:30):
discussed for the below in this section twenty two. At
statutory disqualifications to self defense, defense of others and statutory
disqualification to the use of deadly physical force, you must
find the defendant not guilty despite the fact that you
have found the elements of the charge crime proved beyond
a reasonable doubt. The defendant has no burden of proof

(10:52):
whatsoever with respect to this defense. Deadly non deadly physical force.
The law distinguished use non deadly physical force from deadly
physical force. Deadly physical force is justified only when a
person reasonably reasonably believes that such force is necessary for
the defense of oneself or others against the use of

(11:14):
imminent use of deadly physical force, or infliction or imminent
infliction of great bodily harm. Deathly physical force is physical
force which can reasonably be expected to cause death or
serious physical injury. Physical injury is an impairment of physical
condition or pain. Serious physical injury is a physical injury

(11:35):
that creates a substantial risk of death or which causes
serious disfigurement, serious impairment of health, or serious loss or
impairment of the function of any bodily organ imminent is
that the person is about to use physical force or
deadly physical force at that time, and not at some
unspecified future time. The physical force used by the defendant

(11:57):
need not actually have caused a death or a serious
his physical injury in order to be considered deadly physical force,
nor need it have been expected or intended by the
defendant to result in such serious consequences. Instead, what determines
whether the defendant used deadly physical force is whether the
force actually used by the defendant could reasonably have been

(12:18):
expected to cause death or serious physical injury. It is
up to you to determine, after considering all the evidence,
whether the defendant used deadly physical force or non deadly
physical force against James McGrath at count one, Ryan finds
account two, Thomas Connery Junior at count three, and pass
on til at count four. If the state claims that

(12:39):
the defendant used deadly physical force, the state must prove
that beyond a reasonable doubt. In addition, the state may
prove that the defendants use of force was not justified
if it can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that while
the defendant may have believed that he needed to use
such force, his belief was unreasonable and light of all

(12:59):
this circumstances known to him at the moment, whether the
defendants belief in the need to use such force was
reasonable is a question in fact for you to determine. However,
a person must use no more force than he reasonably
believes is necessary for such purpose. Statutory disqualifications to self
defense and defense of others. In addition, the state tend

(13:24):
defeat the defendant's name of self defense or defense of
others by proving beyond a reasonable doubt. One of the
statutory disqualifications to self defense defense of others, the Statute
defining self defense defense of others describes certain circumstances in
which a person is not justified in using any degree
of physical force in self defense defense of others against another.

(13:46):
These circumstances include provocation and initial aggressor, as more fully
instructed below its sub sections A and B below. A
provocation in accordance with Connecticut General Statute Section fifty three
AM Dash nineteen C one provocation is one such circumstance
under which a person is not justified in using any

(14:08):
degree of physical force and self defense defensive others against
another when he provokes the other person to use physical
force against him in order to provoke the use of
physical force by another, it is not enough that the
defendant by his conduct elicited the use of physical force
by another. Rather, the defendant must have embarked upon such

(14:30):
conduct with the specific intent to provoke the other into
using physical force and intending to cause the other physical
injury or death. The defendant must have specifically intended to
provoke another into using physical force, and then used force
to defend himself from the ensuing use of force by
the person provoked. It is important to remember that the

(14:52):
defendant has no burden whatsoever to prove that he did
not provoke James McGrath, Yen Hines, Thomas Connery Junior, or
Teal with respect to their respective count into using physical
force against him. To the contrary, you may only reject
his defense on the basis of this statutory disqualification if
you find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable

(15:14):
doubt that the defendant provoked the use of physical force
by jameson grath, Ryan Hines, Thomas Connery Junior, and or
Faison TiAl with respect to their respective count against him
b initial aggressor in accordance with Connecticut General Statutes Section
fifty three A nineteen cv. Another circumstance under which a

(15:36):
person is not justified in using any degree of physical
force and self defense defense of others against another is
when he is the initial aggressor in the encounter with
the other person and does not both withdraw from the
encounter and effectively communicate his intent to do so before
using the physical force at issue. In the case under

(15:57):
this provision, the state can prove that the defendant was
not justified in using physical force in self defense defense
of others by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he
was the initial aggressor in his encounter with James McGrath,
Ryan Hines, Thomas Connery Jr. And or face On Teal
relative to each of their respective counts, and that he

(16:18):
neither withdrew from that encounter nor effectively communicated his intent
to do so before using physical force against that To
prove that the defendant was the initial aggressor in his
encounter with James McGrath, Ryan Hines, Thomas Connery Junior, and
or Faison Teale relative to each of their respective counts.

(16:41):
The state need not prove that the defendant was the
first person to use physical force in that encounter. The
initial aggressor can be the first person who threatened to
use physical force, or even the first person who appeared
to threaten the imminent use of physical force under the circumstances.
To prove that the defendant did not withdraw and communicate
his intent to do so, the state must prove that

(17:04):
he did not abandon the conflict in such a way
that the fact of his withdrawal was perceived by James
Mcgrathryan Hines, Thomas Connery Jr. And or fase On tele
relative to each of their respective counts, so that they
were aware that there was no longer any danger from
the original aggression. It is important to remember that the
defendant has no burden whatsoever to prove that he was

(17:26):
not the initial aggressor or that he withdrew from the
encounter and communicated his intent to do so before he
used physical force against James Mcgrathryan Hines, Thomas Connery, and
or fase On Teale relative to each of their respective counts.
To the contrary, you may only reject his defense on
the basis of this statutory disqualification if you find that

(17:49):
the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he
was the initial aggressor, did not withdraw from the encounter,
and did not communicate his intent to withdraw before you
using physical force. Statutory disqualification to the use of deadly
physical force. In addition, the state can defeat the defendant's

(18:10):
claim of self defense by proving a statutory disqualification to
the use of deadly physical force. The Statute defining self
defense defensive Others describes certain circumstances in which a person
is not justified in using deadly physical force and self
defense defense of others against another The exception applies only
to the use of deadly force, So if you have

(18:33):
found that the defendant used deadly physical force, you must
consider this. You must consider this the exception of duty
to retreat at a below a duty to retreat Section
fifty three A nineteen B one. A person is not
justified in using deadly physical force upon another person if

(18:53):
he knows that he can avoid the necessity of using
such force with complete safety by retreating. This disqualification requires
a defendant to retreat instead of using deadly physical force
whenever two conditions are met. One a completely safe retreat
is in fact available to him, and two he knows

(19:14):
that he can avoid the necessity of using deadly physical
force by making that completely safe retreat. The low stress
is that self defense defensive others cannot be retaliatory. It
must be defensive and not punitive. The term of complete safety,
as used in the statute, means without any injury to
the defendant whatsoever. A person acts knowingly with respect to

(19:38):
a circumstance described in a statue when he is aware
that such circumstance exists. It is important to remember that
the defendant has no burden whatsoever to prove that he
could not have retreated with complete safety, or that he
didn't know that a safe retreat was possible before he
used physical force. To the contrary, only reject his defense

(20:01):
on the basis of this statutory disqualification if you find
that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that
he did know that he could retreat with complete safety.
In summary, if you unanimously find that the state has
failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the
elements of a crime to which self defense, defense of
others may apply, You shall find the defendant not guilty

(20:24):
and not consider self defense defense of others. If you
unanimously find all the elements of a crime to which
self defense defense of others applies have been proven beyond
a reasonable doubt, you shall then consider the defense of
self defense defense of others. If you unanimously find that
the state is proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant did not act in self defense defense of others,

(20:46):
or as proved one of the statutory disqualifications beyond a
reasonable doubt, you must reject the defenses and find the
defendant guilty. If, on the other hand, you unanimously find
that the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt,
but the defense did not act in self defense or
defense of others, or has not proved one of the
statutory disqualifications beyond a reasonable doubt, that on the strength

(21:09):
of the defense alone, you must find the defendant not guilty,
despite the fact that you may have found the elements
of the crime proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Sympathy and
deciding whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty, you
should not concern yourself with the punishment or potential consequence
in the event of the conviction. This is a matter

(21:30):
exclusively within the court's function. Under the limitations and restrictions
imposed by statute, you are to find the defendant guilty
or not guilty, uninfluenced by the possible punishment or consequence
that may follow a conviction. You should not allow any
display of emotion by counsel during the trial to draw
upon your sympathy. There is no place for sympathy in

(21:53):
your deliberations. You should not be influenced by any sympathy
for the defendant, the defendant's family, secedent, the decedent's family,
the complainants, or for any other person who might in
any way be affected by your decision implicit bias. As
I indicated earlier, your verdict must be based on the

(22:14):
evidence introduced in Core and my instructions on the law.
Our system of justice depends on judges like me endurors
like you, making careful, unbiased, and fair decisions. During our
interactions with other people, it is not unusual for us
to group or categorize people. Sometimes these categorizations involve negative
or positive biases or prejudices, which may be conscious or unconscious.

(22:39):
Such preferences or biases, whether they are conscious or unconscious,
have no place in a courtroom or your deliberations, where
our goal is to treat all parties equally and to
arrive at a just, fair and unbiased verdict. All people
deserve fair treatment in our system of justice, regardless of
their race, national origin, religious, age, disability, gender, gender identity,

(23:02):
sexual orientation, education, income level, or any other personal characteristic.
Techniques that you can use as jurists. Check whether any
unconscious biases are influencing you. Include slowing down and examining
your thought processes thoroughly to identify where you may be
relying on reflexive gut reactions, and to consider whether you

(23:24):
are making assumptions that have no basis in the evidence.
Ask yourself whether you would view the evidence differently if
the parties, witnesses, or attorneys had different personal characteristics. In
some your task is to render a verdict based on
facts drawn only from the evidence introduced in the courtroom
and from the law as stated in my instructions to you,

(23:46):
and not based on prejudice or bias or against any
party or person involved in the trial duties. Upon retiring
in conclusion, I pressed upon you that you are duty
boundarys to determine the facts based on the evidence as
it has been presented, to apply the law as I
have outlined it, and then to render a verdict of

(24:08):
guilty you or not guilty as to each count. When
you reach a verdict, it must be unanimous. That is,
all twelve of you must agree on the verdict. As
a check that your verdict is in fact unanimous, the
clerk may ask each of you to individually announce your verdict.
In court, it is the duty of each jerk to
discuss and consider the opinions of the other jurors. Each

(24:31):
of you takes into the jury room your individual experience
and wisdom. Your task is to pull that experience and wisdom.
You do that by giving your views and listening to
the views of others. There must necessarily be discussion and
give and tape within the scope of your own That
is the way in which a unanimous verdict is reached.

(24:52):
Despite that from the last analysis, it is your individual
duty to make up your own mind and to decide
this based on the basis of your individual judgment and conscience.
Note taking. If you took notes during the evidence, you
may use them during deliberations, and you may discuss your
notes with your fellow jurors. Remember that notes are merely

(25:13):
aids to your memory and should not be given precedence
over your independent recollection of the evidence. If there is
a conflict between your recollection and your notes or the
notes of any other jur it is your recollection of
the evidence that must prevail. Your notes or the notes
of any other juror are not evidence. You will recall
my earlier definition of what constitutes evidence. Your verdict must

(25:37):
be based exclusively on evidence presented at trial and the
principles of law given to you in these final instructions.
A juror who has not taken notes should rely on
his or her recollection of the evidence and should not
be influenced by the fact that other jurors have taken notes.
Notes are only a tool and not always accurate. Do
not assume that a voluminous note taker has taken notes

(25:59):
that are necessary more accurate than your memory. You may
discuss your notes with your fellow jurors during the deliberation phase.
The decision to do so is yours and years alone.
After the trial has concluded, all notes will be collected
by court'staff and destroyed. In closing, I remind you that
you have the right to request portions of the testimony

(26:20):
to be read back to you if you deem it essential.
During your deliberations. You will have all the admitted exhibits
with you during deliberations. You may only deliberate while all
twelve of you are present in the jury room in
for the judicial Marshal or court officer. When you have
reached a verdict, but do not tell him or her
the verdict, you will be asked to return to the

(26:42):
courtroom where you're four person will announce the verdict orally
in response to questions from the courtroom clerk. The rest
of the piano will be asked whether they concur with
the verdict. If you have any questions, please send them
out as a note signed by the four person worked
with the time, and please be as specific as possible.

(27:03):
You will have the exhibits with you during your deliberations.
We will also send in with you a computer on
which you will be able to view or hear digital evidence,
with instructions on how to use the computer, which will
be marked as a court exhibit. You will also have
with you in the jury room a copy of these
instructions entitled jury Charge, which will be marked as a

(27:23):
court exhibit. I remind you, however, that you should follow
all the Court's instructions and not single out some and
ignore others. They are all equally important. Do not begin
deliberations until you have selected one of your members to
be the four person of the jury, and you have
received the jury charge, the substitute information, the device, instructions

(27:43):
on how to access the device, and all fully admitted exhibits.
So at this point in time, I am going to
pass chers to please step out and go into the
jury room for a brief moment. I do have to
make some comments on the proper Do not begin your
deliberations just yet, as the alternatures will be in that

(28:06):
arm with regular jurs. So please reading silence just for
a few moments as a jury piano, and I will
be bring you wipe back into the court. Thank you.
Comment sending questions, comment a council, any questions, comments, their
exceptions to the Court's church, nothing from the state, your art,
not from the defense, arn all right, and it's a
good thing we told them, just a free comment. We'll

(28:27):
lend the jury about you. PA thank you. Way on.
Thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. At this time,
I am going to ask all regular jurors to please stand.
You're a regular jerk, please stand. Alternators, please remaincated. Regular jurors,
I'm going to direct you to the deliberations room. You're

(28:49):
going to move into the room. You will be deliberating shortly.
I will ask you to hold off until such time
as you have all the exhibits. You've selected a four person,
you have the substitute and information, and you have my
jury charge as well as the device and the instructions. Okay,
so I would ask the aut regular durds to please
go into the jury growth once you have all of

(29:09):
those documents and the device, and you've selected a poor
person who can begin your deliberations on this place. The alternatives,
please just patient with the court for just a moment.
Madamer is going to state your name and ask you
to stand, just to be confronted. That's a trial. I

(29:34):
know it may be somewhat frustrating to hear the animus
and not participate in the actual deliberations, but you do
perform a very important function by being here, and we
appreciate that now. While it is unusual, alternatures are sometimes
called upon to take the place of a juror during deliberations.
For that reason, I am going to ask you to
go back to the jury assembly room and report back

(29:56):
to that room and remain there every day until such
time as there is a verdict. The same instructions are
going to apply to you as I've repeated them throughout
the trial. Do not read, listen to, or watch anything
about this case. Do not speak to anyone or let
anyone speak to you, not even the other alternates or
one of the primary jurors. Do not make any private

(30:17):
investigations or do any research. When there is a verdict,
we will bring you into the courtroom so that you
can hear what the verdict is. So I apologize for this,
but it has happened. So I am going to ask
you to please abide by your oath. I do continue
to approach the concervice that you are giving us. It
is an extremely important one. The Marshall is going to

(30:40):
escort you to the jury deliberations room, and I will
ask you to continue to report here daily back to
the jury deliberations from the clerk will update you throughout
the day and once there is a verdict, you'll be
brought back into here the perduct. Thank you so much,
Thank you. Count this time I am going to as

(31:00):
the PAS to meet with Madam Clerk and make sure
that all full exhibits are going to the jury and
that only full exhibits are going to the jury. Please
make sure that the latest substitute information is going to
the jury. Also, please check the instructions for the device.

(31:21):
Please make sure that you are okay with those instructions.
I did ask you to look at the exhibit list
to make sure that you're okay with the description of
each exhibit. If you are, then we'll mark that and
we'll have that go in as well. And then I
will just state for the record that there were two

(31:42):
things in my charge that I thought while reading the charge.
I intend to make that change that I believe they
will both under self defense. Yes, they were under initial
with grass therapy was before you in physical course against
and it was them. I had to add them. And

(32:03):
then there was also at the end you describe in
statutory coalifecations just added and I did do it on
the record beyond a reasonable do all right, So I
will make those two changes, and I will submit that
to the clerk as an exhibit, our final exhibit to
go into the celebrations. Was there something else? Nothing from

(32:29):
the stay here, nothing from the defense round? All right,
So then we're going to take a brief recess, and
I'll come down on the bench just to confirm that
you've gone through the exhibits, and I'll hear any issues,
and then i'll have fun on clerk, deliver all of
the exhibits, and the Device Court's going to take a
ten minute recess. Thank you,