testimony of the women who found the same pattern of behavior as the main plaintiff in this case, ms. constand did i think was very instrumental in helping the jury understand what happened here. but i think what was very important from a trial strategy standpoint was the opening of the case with dr. ziv. remember, she is the forensic psychiatrist who talked about the rape myths, how women behave after being sexually assaulted. so they started the case by educating the jury. this is how people behave in the aftermath of these cases and it is not always consistent and it's not like television where they call the police immediately or things of that sort. so i think the combination of the introduction of forensic psychiatry with his own words and the prior bad act evidence leading up to andrea constand's testimony was that which