Was it me or were there lots of slippery half answers?
At this question about whether she knew SP had been cleared of misconduct, it was useful to contrast KS' very sure evidence of SP's guilt based on DU description. So I had wondered why NC hadn't asked KS - if the board don't think there is any evidence, then why do you think otherwise?
Also another item about meetings with LM and KS saying she didn't recall any "formal" conversations with her. I had wanted NC to ask KS if there had been another other conversations?
Other incidences of this throughout but I can't remember specifics now. But the way KS answered left a lot of gaps.
Judge's questions were good. He asked a lot of clarifications.
Does the 3rd panel member ever speak?