I think there is a difference between being innocent and not guilty. If the jury votes "not guilty" that does not mean she is innocent. It means there was not enought proof to prove she was "guilty".
I personally don't believe the State proved she is guilty as they never could prove cause of death. And in fact they could not prove who killed her, where she was killed, when she was killed, etc.
I am not saying she is innocent as there was not enough proof to prove that but she is "not guilty" as there was also not enough proof of this.
I really did not like the Judge and could not understand why so many thought he was good. I firmly believe that because of his judicial actions that if she is convicted there is an abundance of errors that would support a mis trial if it ends up as an appeal and it will for sure if there is a guilty verdict.
In any significat trial the defense does what is known as creating a bag for the appeal. They put in the bag (figure of speach) all the possible errors to support an appeal. In this case there is a pretty full bag.
