If you where truly an officer of the court you would be in complete agreement with me.
The prosecutor believes that she did it, yet he is duty bound NOT to disparage the jury and he has not. Of course he disagrees with them, however he would never call them stupid. Heck, he helped to seat them.
You are sa fool and every utterance that dribbles from your drooling pie hole only goes to further prove that fact.
The jury was sequestered. Thy where wholly engaged in the process. Why do you consider yourself more informed of the relevant information than them?
The fault lies squarely with the prosecution. This shouldn't even have bean a death penalty case. There was absolutely no evidence that there was premeditation. There was no evidence that there was malice of fore thought, both of which are required for a death penalty conviction of First Degree Murder.
The prosecutor over reached and over charged the defendant. He should have indicted on manslaughter, lying to authorities and obstruction of justice, This the result of the lying.
That being said. A manslaughter conviction would have been difficult enough due to the fact that they could not establish a cause of death with any certainty.
You are one angry person.