nnJessica was an electrician at Electro Corporation, and claimed she was subjected to “persistent verbal abuse,” including taunts and references to how inappropriate it is for a woman to be an electrician, including by her co-workers and her immediate supervisor. She is the only female employee. Jessica said she was repeatedly called derogatory names. One of her co-workers, whose abuse was particularly egregious, would always conclude his harassing comments by stating, “Woman should be homemakers instead of trying to be the equals of men.” After complaining about the harassment to supervisors, the trouble escalated and Jessica said she received multiple death threats, despite Electro’s policy against gender and racial harassment. Because of the lingering abuse, Jessica began to experience depression and regular panic attacks, which undermined her ability to perform her responsibilities optimally. Jessica filed a suit in a federal district court against Electro (after receiving a right to sue notification from the EEOC) under Title VII. Is she likely to succeed? Explain using the IRAC method of case analysis, focusing on and applying only the five elements discussed from related to racial harassment in connection with the EEOC v. Lockheed Martin case.nnIn your conclusion, please address the following: Suppose during the trial, Electro learns that Jessica had a prior arrest for stealing equipment from one of her previous employers which she failed to disclose on the employment application which ask whether the applicant has a prior arrest record. The legal dispute between Jessica and her previous employer was settled out of court and resulted in no criminal conviction.nn