Does a negative finding on personal use enhancement mean the accused was not a direct perpetrator of the crime?

We agree with the conclusion reached by the Nunez and Lopez courts that a negative finding on a personal use enhancement does not necessarily mean the accused was not a direct perpetrator of the crime. As pointed out in those cases, "inconsistent findings may be caused simply by the mercy or leniency of the jury" (People v. Nunez, supra, 183 Cal.App.3d at p. 226, 228 Cal.Rptr. 64) to which we might add, or through confusion or ennui.