Did the Prosecution Really Listen to the Evidence?

Prosecution had a very good job of actually putting the evidence before the court. The clincher was that she had to admit that she had never worked as a therapist, not on one single traumatized patient. She knows know little about troma and thatwy none of studies were and victims of drama. So she's applying studies about apples to studies about giraffes as not even apples and oranges. It's a totally different end of the spectrum. And i get it. The defence was grasping at straws. But what i'm shocked at is that the jury actually listened to the evidence, actually understood what happened and actually found her guilty of five out of six of these charges.