The careful followers of the trial had more info than the jury, and access to video replays and written transcipts -- save in one area -- the overwhelmingly prejudicial porn charges. No experts in psychology or criminal habits testified as to how porn is linked to murder. The porn was used to emotionally charge the jury, against the already massive barrage of media spin against Westerfield.
The porn charges -- especially sans experts to testify as to weight in motive -- should have been a seperate proceeding, and not in the murder trial.
The child porn was a sick product of this man's habits. He CHOSE to save them. There was no way the defense could have shown that he had them innocently. Thank God child porn is illegal. I do not believe it should have been a separate trial for it because it shows what that man thinks about IN HIS LEISURE time..and he is accused of doing what the adults were doing in the films..in a round about way.