thought in the past if you find them it helps you make a determination of drowning versus something else. i think the literature discredited that. i think there is very little you can do to try to differentiate out drowning versus other causes. >> but do you know what? this is a murder one case, if the claim is drowning if it's everywhere these diatomes why not test the bone marrow? say do you know what? we've got a little evidence here, it's some evidence of drowning? they didn't do that. what does that tell you? >> you know... you know, have you to, you know when you asked for a test you have to be ready to understand what those results are. since basically it's a field that is somewhat discredited people do not understand what particular result would mean, i think it's pretty much useless i think for the prosecution and if the defense decided to have this done, and have it tested and find