terry did not say that her testimony basically consisted of what she said was there were two large lights at each end of the parking lot and there were individual lights on each apartment that threw light out onto the sidewalk and when she was specifically ask see but the combination of the two lights at each end of the lights center and so when the circuit court made its holding its civically referred back to that statement saying that because there was corroboration it believed of the testimony to see the sidewalk she said yes and question can you see that there's a curve there before you step off correct h three thirty five she said basically if you say that it was adequate or if you just so there was lights coming from can see that curve or no she didn't say as you told us there was enough walked now when when she was asked if you could see the inference that i believe the commissioner was that when she said yes you could see they she was asked to those lights eliminate the sidewalk are you able to see the sidewalk it's three thirty four going to temper five she said yes and are you able to see the curb answer yes but when you go down and she stopped she was asking you see that there's a that was on that specific no that was i'm she said she didn't she didn't say she couldn't she said that she didn't she never said there was inadequate why i think it's a bit splitting hairs there pitchy she did she did say  evidently from what i gather from the record there was one parking lot in front of this entire complex and the employees who work there parked there any visitors to the residence at the facility would park there so there are some there were some members of the public coming and going but the only light visions the inquiry then would become more facts so think what was the level of light and was it sufficient and in this case the commission listened to the testimony of the claimant and listened to the testimony of the right witness and  they are black and white and they are not terribly commission's decision really did not have substantial foundation and clearly the opposite result would be apparent some of those undisputed facts are this was the only parking lot of a local perfect park in as she was working at the hard apartments  back it was the only parking lot of bailable to her so she was required to come and go throughout the night this accident happened when her couple shift ended which was approximately two minutes after ten o'clock at night when it would have been dark it's disputed that she was walking with her supervisor mistery at the time the accident happen miss terry had taken a break in her car and her circular cigarette pouch was in there so her supervisor was actually with her to retrieve the cigarette pouch out of the car so this is something likely to leave the employer knew she was doing and where should the towing that was my next point she was instructed to park there so we got to that and it's also clear in this case exactly how the lighting was set up from the testimony of witnesses mistery testified the lighting really depended on where you were coming from in the parking lot she testified to two five lights at the end and individual smaller bites on the apartments throughout the playing of the building which i believe the testimony shows there were at least eight or nine parking spots for the of the building and the photograph showed this was a long and narrow building missed the petitioner also testified to the same thing that there were these five bites at the end of the building and those were more adequate lighting however in the middle that was flat she said hear that testimony she if you read her testimony in context she's asked is there lighting in the parking lot that's the first question she said to see those it's right up there in the parking lot but you got light it depends on where you're coming from and then she starts to describe the different li night the testimony doesn't go any further than that what as well she's not in there saying she should have been able to see the curve because i could that night when she felt that foundation is never laid in this transcript it off we don't know where she asked we don't know if she's behind her in front of or that they weren't on or do we make of that i think at this point he's saying i can't rely on the craft to make a decision in this case and what i have to look at is the claim it's just my and then i have to see if it was sufficiently rebutted by the respondents witness and in this case he found that the testimony was really system and different than the way the commission interpret it on the record as opposing and i believe that reading the record even with my fallacies on cross examination that you can't read these two witnesses as possibly had said i saw it that night but that's not what she was saying and cross examination it was a general what's lighting why can you see the sidewalk and when she wouldn't say when she when she wouldn't say could  she's not saying that night for you show for the record through home but in general i believe that she was answering generally with regard to the condition of the parking lot because she got perfectly sat right before that it's a prison where you're coming from and describe why the light the ends of both buildings clearly those are there for a reason to provide elimination and that you know lumination was better at the end of the parking lot than it was in the middle section or even said i had to park in the middle that night and that's where stark so that is that what i believe judge harrison on the only thing i wanted to reply to is that miss terry did differentiate between the sources of white somewhat to the relative strengths of the white perhaps and what those different sources were but she never said she never said the lighting was suspicious but she never said it was insufficient and when she was asked generally can you see out there can you see that her she did answer in the affirmative and even though she differentiated as to what the setup is at this particular work place her her testimony was not quibble she basically laid out the layout for everyone and then in the end said generally yes there is enough there's enough light to see generally you can see when you