tehhis is a is, charlie, because, you know, tennis is a very emotional sport, so you see tennis is a very emotional sport, so you see a tennis is a very emotional sport, so you see a lot tennis is a very emotional sport, so you see a lot of emotion going on. she has you see a lot of emotion going on. she has talked about that, the fact that when she has talked about that, the fact that when she was a junior her parents that when she was a junior her parents always said to her that negativity was a real no go area. to that she negativity was a real no go area. to that she had negativity was a real no go area. to that she had to seek solutions and work that she had to seek solutions and work your that she had to seek solutions and work your way round the problems but without work your way round the problems but without showing the emotion and negativity. and she has the most amazing negativity. and she has the most amazing poise, composure on the court, amazing pois
testimony they ve heard, the laws they ve read are the rules they must obey. they ve been provided with 7 pages of instructions to guide deliberations which will be critical to the outcome of this case. remember, these jurors are six regular people. not lawyers, certainly not criminal justice experts. as important as what the law says is how they re instructed to interpret it. i spoke with the harvard law professor alan deshwitz on my rao program earlier today. he had a very strong opinion regarding verdict in this case. i feel that the prosecutor engaged in serious prosecutorial misconduct. this is a simple case. reasonable doubt is written all over it. if the judge had any guts, she would have directed a verdict of not guilty but of course, judges don t do that, particularly elected judges don t do that. we re rejoined by lisa is, karen desoto, tad nelson. tad, would it have been better