Well, I think, I'm not sure. I know what I seen in the autopsy report from St. Louis County. I haven't seen anything about the federal autopsy report. As far as I could see with the St. Louis County autopsy, the findings are the same. It is the interpretation we get into that can differ depending on experience and other things. For example, whether or not the bullet wound in the clavicle or up by the shoulder by the collar bone is a reentry or not. As a forensic, we can disagree forensically, doesn't make any difference in the scheme of things, except it ads a bullet that struck the body. So from my experience, I would interpret it as a reentry wound rather than an entry wound, but it really doesn't make any difference in the overall interpretation of what happened. I don't know if, I think as far as the toxicology goes, I think the issue that was brought up by the attorney was that there are toxicologists who are very good at finding toxicology, and an interpretation of how long the drugs last in the body. They are very good how long the drugs lasted in the body, for example. And that would have, uh, what do you call it, many more importance than a medical examiner's interpretation, but I think that the point you are in a position to do much more than we can is finding out his behavior during the day. If marijuana has caused his behavior to be different than usual, that can best be determined by other observations by people that you've taken testimony from during the day and marijuana if I smoke it now, if I start acting bizarre it would be very quickly. You know, if I'm normal behavior for the next four hours, I'm not suddenly going to do something to act differently when the level of marijuana has gone down considerably, that's all.