left me torn between sides on an issue i usually oppose. the problem lies in the world of subjecture(when someone talking goes from A to C, D to F... look closer and you will see a phantomic or revealing B and E) behind the interviewers nature of language. michael struck me as a rat(the one being executed) that has no hope of true recovery. jason was given leniency and it has been/was effective in changing his nature(seemingly, or just a better liar). and not to mention the victim(s) daughter and sister who has an unmittable damage and nature because of death. this whole thing left me with a fatalistic sense that people cant be trusted with their own self, much less recognizing others when in the wake of atrocity. the law gives us no help towards this by removing an evil, by the person, when we can't tell the person from the evil.