In this particular case that was in that magazine, there was a quote there that went on to say, “we think sexual harassment should only rarely, if ever, result in a reprimand rather than a period of suspension”.
In this particular case that I'm referencing, I believe that he only had a reprimand. There might have been a fine attached to that. But to me that particular incident seems pretty.... I don't know. Someone who is a lawyer and offers up that kind of a deal on the table, I just don't understand why a reprimand was used in this particular case.
I wonder if you could comment on that, please.