For those that are still interested in this, I just saw the best analysis I think that there is on the outcome of this case. They had an interview with one of the jurors, and the commentator asked every damn question that I would have asked, and that doesn't happen too often.
![Brow :brow: :brow:](/i/s/brow.gif)
, and it just validated what I originally thought, and that was that the prosecution over-charged and seeking the death penalty required much, MUCH more than just circumstantial evidence. This juror made it perfectly clear that it was that penalty that weighed so heavy on their minds, that the burden of proof really escalated past what the prosecution was able to come up with.
Going after the "mother" of all penalties really lowers your odds of winning a case. They gambled, and lost, and that's the sad part, because if they went for a lower charge, the odds are MUCH better Casey would be in prison for a decade or two, which to me, makes a helluva lot more sense than what happened.
They also had a one on one interview with the lead defense attorney and it further cemented in my mind that he didn't win the case. The prosecution lost it.
Nightline-----ABC-------10:00pm pst.
If ya didn't see it, you may want to find a stream of it.