Me - ignorant? I think it is you who are misunderstanding the instruction - do you have a reading comprehension problem? What the attornies said in their closings was not evidence - so Dusek's little schpeel about what to do regarding this is just as irrelevant as Feldman's - the instruction comes from the court - and is clear. You're example was lame - can't you come up with something better? If you want to argue about our all our different interpretations of what "reasonable" is - you've got a better chance of making your point - but you cannot argue with the instruction - well sanely anyway.
I posed the question about the tenth person being LE - because early on we heard there was an LE arrest in the candyman probe - do you recall that?