I did not take a straight path to research. I was a first-generation college student who started at community college, finished my bachelor's degree online while helping manage a GameStop full-time, and never assumed I would get a PhD. I just kept following the questions I could not let go.

One of those questions started in English 101, when my professor challenged us not to search for the answer we already wanted. I was writing about a criminal justice policy I thought I understood. When I followed the evidence honestly, my mind changed. More importantly, research made uncertainty feel less scary. It gave me a steadier way to think.

That lesson shaped everything that came next.

I became fascinated by psychology and law because people can feel certain and still be wrong. In courts, that matters. A mistaken memory, an unchecked assumption, or an overconfident decision can affect someone's freedom, safety, family, and future. Today I study how judges and legal professionals evaluate evidence, technology, and uncertainty, and how we can help them ask better questions and make more confident decisions in high-stakes moments.

I have always loved science communicators like Bill Nye, Carl Sagan, and Neil deGrasse Tyson because they made big ideas feel possible without making them feel small. That is the energy I want to bring to legal professionals. Research does not have to be inaccessible. Hard questions do not have to be paralyzing.

At the heart of my work is a simple goal: I want to bring people back to people.