"No....it was the Medical Examiner's job....and she said that it couldn't be determined."
"So are you asking them to be superior to the expert?"
The jury did not need to find a specific cause of death. They only needed to be convinced that a murder happened. Finding a body with duct tape wrapped around the head, in a bag, in a swamp, is enough for any reasonable person.
"It came down to:..."
But it shouldn't come down to those things. That's where the jury went wrong. They didn't have to answer every possible question.
"Even the prosecutor, in his summation said :" Somebody in that house killed that child!"
And as you know very well, he didn't just stop there. He explained which one.
"So save your ire for the prosecution. They failed....not the jurors."
No, it was the jurors.
I'm guessing that you didn't fare well in Law School.
They didn't find a body....they found a skull.
A skull that had been tampered with by the meter reader.
The only thing that could be said _with certainty_ was that duct tape was found with the remains.
As to where the tape was placed on the body was pure supposition.
Yeah....it's a shame that the evidence was lost in that fetid swamp....but lost it was.