Briefly, I don't disagree with what Mr. Caputo and Mr. Brock have said. I just interpret the language used in the section prior to the amendment as being restrictive.
The amendment in no way restricts anybody with a prosecutorial hat from providing that information, whereas the language in there, as I see it, puts a prosecutor in a situation of having to provide information that is going to elicit questions from the person they're talking to, which could then take them down the road of putting them into that conflict, and that's what we're trying to avoid.