I think they did the FA part, we are now getting to the FO part. kek

Nearly - they are signalling a period of repsite or recovery. She needs some time. But I think there are many hands helping with what she had already revealed. But the main cloud hanging over it is the claim that womehow that evidence was illegally obtained - it was-not - and then transmitted to not-officials. The argument for defense is that she needed expert eyes to verify what she suspected.

Since then the courts spiralled into criminalizing the intent behind her actions - thus her free speech - indeed, her freedom to think something. (She believed something was up, and sought a second opinion from a learned person, and it was wrong to say that her intent was criminal).

So, the main issue is getting that evidence into a court.