Yeah, that's a pretty amazing documentary; thanks for the tip. I also refrained from researching the movie beforehand, and was similarly surprised by the outcome (although the film was naturally a little biased toward one side). One thing I thought would have been emphasized by one side or the other was where the money came from - husband or wife (it wasn't clear whether or not his books were successful). Either side could have leveraged that to its advantage. Also, no one ever mentioned the fact that he had gone to Duke undergrad - you'd think the defense would have used that point to craft his character as being intelligent, having plenty going for him, etc.
No problem, I thought there could have been more brought up also. But I'm sure there was a lot left out that we did not get to see pertaining to the trial. I also though it was odd that they did not talk about who made the most money becasue the prosecutor could have used that as motive but I'm sure he did ok with his book.
In the end I thought the defense brought up enough reasonable doubt to get a not guilty verdict. I would have liked to hear what the jury was discussing. I know they talked about a lot of blood, but the defense went over the blood splatter.