They pushed hard for a first degree murder verdict, which requires not only proving that the defendant killed the victim, but that he did it intentionally, and that it was premeditated (planned or thought out beforehand).
The jury had the option of involuntary manslughter.
a clear easily made case.
They did, but the prosecutor didn't argue that to the jury.
As a lawyer, I can tell you that it's very tough to argue two inconsistent things to a jury: "The defendant's dog didn't bite the plaintiff, but if he did, the plaintiff provoked him." You basically have to pick one story and push it, and the prosecutor here picked the wrong one-- a homeless guy owned a $1,000 handgun and intentionally shot someone he didn't know.
There's a lot more to the article, I could only post 300 words.
That's what I've been wondering, did they have the option of lesser included charges, or was this an all-or-nothing charge?