her in a sympathetic light, which is what they have to do. it s their job. i think what the jury is tried to do is was she in on this or not? because they re considering some very, very serious crimes here. from where we sit from the outside in the media world, how could she not have known what was going on in there? is each charge different? might cshe have known about som things but not others? that s part of it, but you have to remember that it s easy to say things on social media and twitter, but a different thing to prove reasonable doubt in a kcourtroom where there s skilled lawyers and experts who are injecting down into it. in that bubble of a courtroom, in that bubble of a trial, things that seem obvious to you or me when we re talking may not be as obvious to those jurors in the case. good reminder. we ll see what happens today or
role of the professor limited to the kcourtroom, you would tell them what? i would say that i meant classroom. yeah, to the classroom. what i would say is that that s not correct because our general understanding, what we are looked at in terms of the, you know, accuracy of our performance is we look at what happens in the classroom, we look at the research that we develop, and we look at the public service we provide. and when you re not able to testify in a case, then what that is doing is keeping you from sharing your research with the public. so that impacts both the research that you re creating and your opportunity to create that research and of course your willingness to do that, and your ability to share that research and serve the public in that way. but let me say this, i think that it was the right call for