I was stunned at the not guilty verdict, but while I never followed the trial very closely it seems to me that there was no actual evidence that the defendant actually murdered the victim.
Was this true?
If you mean did the prosecution have the killing on videotape, then the answer is yes, "actual evidence" was lacking. However, if you are willing to connect the dots, the circumstantial evidence was there. I would have had no trouble voting to convict her.
I thought there was plenty. Probably more than with the Scott Peterson case. The jury seemed uninterested in the evidence, but they “liked” the defense attorney. They never even asked for a single read-back or to view any of the evidence. My best guess is that they agreed they’d been there long enough, and spent the remainder of the time on how much money could they get for books and guest appearances.
There was far less evidence against Scott Peterson and yet he is sitting on death row. Throughout the trial one thing that kept coming up with the "talking heads" was how the jurors were not taking any notes. Here you have an 8-week trial - witnesses coming out your ears - and nobody was taking notes.
All that evidence and the jury never asked to have anything read back to them, never asked to look at evidence again, nothing...Oh and they were worried about the PUNISHMENT - which is something the jury is NOT supposed to do.
At one point, according to a juror, the jury was tied 6-6 on aggravated child abuse. However, as she put it, each of the guilty votes were picked off until it was 12-zip. I personally believe that the jury was sick and tired of being away from their home and families and they rushed through deliberations just to get done. They also were aware that if any of the three top charges were a guilty decision, they would have been stuck another week or so for the penalty phase.
That depends on what you consider to be “actual evidence”. I think you could infer from what was offered that a crime had been committed. Whether you accept in your mind that it could have been an “accident” is up to you and the jury.