we know that harvey weinstein s convention was overturned. a lot of evidence was a highly prejudicial. certainly, the stormy daniels testimony and the testimony from david pecker wasn t really pertinent to necessarily stormy daniels. the issue as far as the money that was given over. her s testimony went way beyond the business record record. this is what this case was about. then you have a conspiracy that was argued which was not charged, you have a menu of three different crimes that the jury could pick from, and they didn t have to agree on which crime they would rely on. you have a law which was incredibly novel as to the way it was used. it s never been used that sway. the actual charges were time barred, but because of machinations relating to how they took this up, they brought this into court. so there are a lot of questions here, and of course you have thejudge, questions here, and of course you have the judge, whether he was biased, whether that affected the jury,