[goldi]

Apparently not in this case, though.

[CharacterCounts]

Circumstantial evidence is just as good and just as bad as direct evidence. It's not whether the evidence is circumstantial, its the quality of the evidence.

If a prosecutor bets the whole ball of wax on a first degree murder conviction, when the evidence may only support (or more likely support a conviction on a lesser charge) he risks confusing the jury and getting a loss. That is what I think happened here.