But I'm wondering, in the context of sentencing within a jury, is that something that typically is effective with a jury, where you say to them, "Yes, this man did these things, but there are people on the outside, his kids in fact, who are counting on him, and by incarcerating him, they will suffer," and is, is that an argument that resonates with juries?

So the first thing to say is jury sentencing is not common.

Um, but I think it can make a difference for judges, and I suspect for those same reasons, I would think that it would be an effective tactic to use in front of a jury.

So I think that that was a good strategy.

It can't just be the, these people are gonna be harmed by your absence because I think juries understand everyone has people who love them, and everybody who goes to prison has somebody who's sad and hurt that they've gone to prison.

So that's not enough by itself.

You also have to have, as existed here, uh, uh, a story that is both of trauma, that helps you understand how it was that somebody could be put into this position where they would feel trapped and have no choice but to do the thing they did.

And I'm asking you, what's your sense of what justice ought to look like like this in a situation with, with, with Keith?