the opposite side had been allowed to introduce a witness just because of how bad a witness he thought he would be. >> well, i -- i know -- i feel his pain, so to speak. you cannot just lay down in a case like this and say we're not going to object to something that's complete junk or bogus science, but at the same time, can you imagine the sand box you could play in if you put that so-called expert up on the stand? as a defense lawyer you would have a field day with something like that and i think the judge maud it right decision by keeping it out. there isn't anybody i think that would say that's a peer reviewed or generally accepted in the scientific community. i understand the marks of two minds of that, as most good defense lawyers would be. you give up the right or the opportunity to take somebody on the stand who has gone over the top in their opinion. >> as we said earlier, o'mara