Could it be that the jurors are actually "basically laughing at Dusek"?
I am. And let us not forget that this compelling (IMO) bug evidence follows a very minuscule bit of so-called trace evidence by the prosecution.
Now seriously......consider those two things and tell me you could convict a man to die.
I just don't see it. Two entomology experts, alone, have injected plenty of reason for doubt and the People have proven nothing. Could a fair person convict?