dr. kirklin in no way was willing to acknowledge dementia is relevant to his evaluation. so his fact findings about what the patient remembers were made without any context or understanding of dementia. dr. ross on the other hand said you cannot find he has any independent recollection of the crime, circumstances, even that led to his arrest that he made the finding he doesn't understand from day-to-day with pat ending that is disoriented, bewildered. and so,.her gobs of valuation was that he would not be competent to be executed when you consider these medical facts. dr. kirklin, the trial judge nor the state never mentioned dementias relevant to the determination, which is why i don't and this court can find it's a reliable determination. i'd like to reserve the rest of my time for rebuttal others have further questions. >> thank you, counsel. >> mr. chief justice, may it please the court. this court when a tertiary on two questions with respect to the first question concerning whether the state executed offender does not remember committing the capital sin. absolutely n