g my name is donald discrimination the commission after reviewing the initial investigations and back with specific instructions on what the investigator ought to look for specially with respect to the the nd investigation is no better than the st investigation and the real problem here is that the investigator failed to use the tools that the human end to provide the full record to the commission before the nd time around the commission that sustained the dismissal for lack of substantial evidence one of the the crux of our this appeal means that we feel even the nd investigation by the department and their failure to provide the complete record to the commission in the act itself i've been doing this business before the commission for well over thirty eight years in fact is not a wreck changed inside of the not brief is the case that i are going before the supreme court thirty two years ago and so i know what a good investigation looks like and this was not a good investigation and it needs to be reversed and the commission ms gannon and place everybody under oath you know the irony of this all of this is that spread could have solved this problem in the st investigation by simply opening up with their records to get the benefits the police human rights act was created to provide to an african american who believes that she was treated differently then her non african american  decision because the commission did that use its discretion when it's a standard dismissal cannister arj for lack of substantial evidence when it implicitly found the department's investigation sufficient or when it considered only the evidence that the parties placed before substantial evidence of the cream of ash a case of discrimination because there was no substantial evidence that she was disciplined more harshly than other employees outside of her class who were similarly situated to her the investigative report  can and had a significant history of disciplinary action that wasn't just a matter of expired signage but that showed according to the employer a complete lack of care for the stores that she was responsible for  with respect to the incidents and leave it leading up to her discharge as noted it wasn't just the lack of it wasn't just the expired signage that hearst her manager had visited seven o stores and found that she failed to address serious placement and or training issues three of the stores lacked insurance handouts and current information on available insurance promotions and services for stores  at only had expired signage but also store employees were unaware of pricing changes and according to the investigative report can was not showing improvement over the  disciplinary issues can in statement that other employees that the comparatives that she identified had expired signage and that was the only disciplinary issue that she noted for those  gone into her her responsibilities and it went further into that discipline and into her disciplinary history better compared to ours it provided additional statements from jennifer hurley who was a comparative or that she had identified in her store so that was added to the investigative report and then also it was noted that they department couldn't reach a number of the earth or i'm sorry a number of the other witnesses weren't willing to cooperate and provide testimony provide information to the investigation i would note that the commissioner the commissioner remounted for further investigation it didn't direct the party it didn't direct the department to conduct an investigation and a certain way it simply reminded for further investigation because the department didn't of coeds their requests for review that the department indicated that that remained would be appropriate and so the commission's order didn't direct that that based discrimination that she was discharged that she was treated differently than other similarly said  because that there was no evidence that that event even though compared to ours that she quit forward there was no even her allegations with respect to those even her statements that those employees  written for having expired signage that's something that the employer indicated as well that isolated incidents of having expired signage was not something that you know so that they might not have been written up for that but that was in  you can end lengthy disciplinary history which again was occurred over the course of being supervised by three different managers over a true year period and so they had the investigation took into account the statements of jennifer hurley who had been identified as a comparative or in her her her own statements as well as as the employer's  statements about the discipline was that they simply weren't similarly situated as we didn't have the same employment issues the same disciplinary issues now would not that they can't to have the opportunity during the investigation i complained of during investigation can submit evidence themselves and she never did that she never came forward with additional evidence to establish if the case of discrimination what i'm really stumbling over as you know this doesn't seem you know it's is that the current you know they were willing to to accept it nothing here well but it seems like other than from the employer they don't really have any conversations among jennifer hurley i think she had made a statement in the original about you know yes she had sex fires at least you know i don't know i guess i just i'm surprised that when they're told to do more to the fact that there was no objection by the parties and so and they at the department at the nd go around the nd request to review the department again found that there was no evidence and that they commissioned sustain the dismissal of the charged and it's really the question is whether the commission abused its discretion and implicitly finding the the investigation adequate and here and we would say that that is not an abuse of that that was not an abuse of discretion because there simply was no evidence and canon did not submit substantial substantial evidence showing that she was treated differently than similarly situated employees i would not additionally bet you know there's two stages of the of the process before the department and then before the commission  pursue not to pursue or request the review before the commission but to but to bring an action in the circuit court the investigative report and argument and supplemental evidence that is submitted to it by the parties and any and the results of any additional investigation before the commission and those materials were considered and that's all that the parties placed into the record and so it was not an abuse of discretion for the commission to consider those materials african american employee who along with mr jackson can issue question with respect to early what other employment problems did she say she had well that's that's one of the problems that i have with the i have nothing further out here thank you both for your arguments here today this matter will be taken under advice that decision will be issued to you as soon as possible and with that we stand recess i