that i wanted to ask you, but my attention has been diverted to the line of questioning from congress goodland. it is well known that you dismissed charges that were placed against senator stevens following your investigation that indicated that certain exculpatory evidence had been withheld. was there one thing or several things that were done that caused you to dismiss? >> the thing that was the main motivator to dismiss the case, i thought the solid evidence that we had uncovered that brady material exculpatory material had not been shared with the defense. that was the basis, the main motivation for my deciding to dismiss the case. >> and it seems that mr. s-c-h-u-l-k-e. >> schulke. >> agreed with you. the punishment does not seem to match the crime, prosecutor yal misconduct. a lot of people are wondering how does the office of professional responsibility literally dispute the seriousness of the withholding of the exculpatory evidence. how do you account for that? >> i wouldn't agree that they don't take it seriously. mr. schulke i know is a good lawyer. he came up with a report that said