this jury was very pensive and very deliberative. 16 hours they spent going through the evidence. when you listen to b37's interview last night, she knew every fact of that case chapter and verse. i didn't hear one factual mistake she stated that came out during the course of that trial, so you can't fault a jury for making a decision upon the presentation made by the state or by the lawyers. that's their job is to take the evidence in front of them. they don't have the benefit of twitter and facebook and media when they are trying that case. they can only make a determination based on the evidence presented to them. and based on the evidence presented to them, there was reasonable doubt, because the rest of it was not in there for whatever reason. it wasn't there. so to fault them for being deliberative and disagreeing with their opinion is not the direction that the public who disagree with the verdict need to go. the questions need to be posed to the prosecutor. why do you go with second-degree