I'm confused...

I have a feeling that there's something everybody doesn't know about the Casey Anthony trial. Her verdict was a major upset, and the media is all over it. But, despite the evidence that has been mounted against her, the jury decided that there wasn't enough evidence to prove her guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. That's the important thing, because, in the court, all are, and I can't stress this enough, INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY! And the jury decided that the evidence wasn't conclusive. I haven't followed the case very closely, though, as I've been paying more attention to Bradley Manning and his role in the Wikileaks case, and its role in the Arab Spring. But, though I don't want to make a rush to judgment, I don't take murder, especially against those that can't fend for themselves, lightly. But I'm containing my gut reaction and waiting for the truth to come to light. Here's what I think I know;

- Her body was found in a swamp.
- The defense claims that they buried the body, and that the victim drowned in a pool.
- Some pieces of evidence include a couple Google searches, including chloroform and how to snap necks.
- In her car was found duct tape and the trunk supposedly smelled like a dead body and had hair in it. (haven't heard about what the forensics dept. had to say about the matter.

I can think of how this could lead to a conclusion other than Casey Anthony murdering her daughter. This could have been set up. Someone could have used her computer and car. What they needed is evidence that proved SHE was the one who killed her daughter, and I don't know if they had that or not. But supposedly they have 300 or so items of evidence if I remember correctly. So I don't know how to feel about the verdict. Is she really innocent or did she really murder a defenseless child? I wish I knew for certain, so I could understand why everyone is angry about this. Are they mad for the right reasons or the wrong reasons?