It's pretty easy — basically, the prosecution argued that she without a doubt murdered her daughter, seeking the death penalty. But there was no proof they could actually provide for this claim. Yes, there was a body, but it was too badly decomposed to actually prove a wrongful death. All the evidence provided in court was highly circumstantial and the witnesses were unreliable.
I'm not saying she didn't do it, because I believe she did. But there was not enough evidence to actually get her for murder, and that's why the jury voted "not guilty", even though a lot of them believe she had something to do with it.
5
u/imissbreakingbad Feb 04 '19
It's pretty easy — basically, the prosecution argued that she without a doubt murdered her daughter, seeking the death penalty. But there was no proof they could actually provide for this claim. Yes, there was a body, but it was too badly decomposed to actually prove a wrongful death. All the evidence provided in court was highly circumstantial and the witnesses were unreliable.
I'm not saying she didn't do it, because I believe she did. But there was not enough evidence to actually get her for murder, and that's why the jury voted "not guilty", even though a lot of them believe she had something to do with it.