If you listen to Greta’s interview with #11, his own arrogance and suppositions as to what happened are telling. I suspect this guy is in the legal profession and quite possibly the one person the defense may have tampered with if there was any tampering going on. The rest of them were just lemmings willing to swallow any arguement so they could get back to what was left of their summer plans.
I like you was really surprised at the quick turnaround of those two who originally voted to convict on the first charge. If I were on that panel, right about now the Judge would have been given instructions on retrial because of a hung jury.
Our local paper reported that on the first ballot for manslaughter there were 6 for guilty and 6 for not guilty. Within 10 hours they had all swung to not guilty.
There is someting wrong if 6 people changed their vote in such a short time without the usual requests for evidence review and clarification, questions to the judge, etc. I would expect a serious review and deliberation taking at least 3 to 4 days. Only 10 hours is a joke.
I can't imagine a scenario where I could be talked into changing my view from guilty to not guilty considering the preponderance of circumstantial evidence that went unchallenged in a serious way by the defense.
To me the defense consisted of unfounded "what if's" and slinging crap all over the walls to see how much would stick.