I actually agree with you, I think she should be given more time. But it is not up to me it is up to the courts - and the courts have decided - over and over again.
Name all of the fact-finding courts who have heard the case. Bear in mind that trying a case "de novo" requires that witnesses be requestioned so that any questions which were inadvertantly admitted the first time may be asked; any appeals court which claims to evaluate a case "de novo" without witnesses being re-examined is talking nonsense.