Also, why were they judging culpability? That is, what part of the process, whether "due" or otherwise, did they think they'd reached? Were they determining on Frenkel's liability ("did he do it?") or on the quantum ("having agreed he'd done it, what were the consequences?")
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2014-07-22 09:44 am (UTC)