In People v. Fields, 448 Mich 58, 68; 528 NW2d 176 (1995), the Michigan Supreme Court made several observations in hopes of clarifying what qualified as substantial and compelling reasons. Courts should place emphasis on mitigating circumstances surrounding the offense which do not warrant a finding of innocence, but do make the defendant less culpable. The court should also look at the defendant's prior record, the defendant's age, and the defendant's work history. Factors arising after the defendant's arrest should be given the same weight as preexisting factors. A defendant's cooperation with law enforcement should be given special attention. Fields, supra, 448 Mich 76-77. The Supreme Court of Michigan recognized that "the words 'substantial and compelling' constitute strong language," and found it "reasonable to conclude that the Legislature intended 'substantial and compelling reasons' to exist only in exceptional cases." Fields, 448 Mich. at 67-68. "The reasons justifying departure should 'keenly' or 'irresistibly' grab our attention, and we should recognize them as being 'of considerable worth' in deciding the length of a sentence." Fields, 448 Mich. at 67. It is not enough for a factor to be merely substantial; it must be both substantial and compelling before departure is permitted, and the Legislature is presumed to "have consciously elevated the burden of proof" by its choice of the term "compelling." Fields, 448 Mich. at 83 (Boyle, J., concurring). In keeping with the language of the statute and the intent of the Legislature, the Fields Court also determined that the factors relied on by the trial court must be objective and verifiable. Fields, 448 Mich. at 69-70.