FWIW, here's my take. I'm no computer expert, but I understand just enough to be dangerous. I was there for Agent J's and Det. Chappell's testimony for the State. (I have also watched every bit of testimony either online or in court, except for the blacked-out testimony in the first couple of days-CPDetectives, I think.)
For those of us who are not computer experts, there is now reasonable doubt surrounding the computer evidence. If that were the only problem with the State's case, I might just consider that "over my head" and believe the State. However, couple that doubt with the total picture. Look at the overall arc of testimony, and how the Defense illustrated time and time again that on many points friends of Nancy were inaccurate at best, or lying at worst. To me the CPD's record keeping and testimony came off as shoddy at best, or dishonest at worst. I saw the real "tipping point" for the jury as being when Cummings asked MH about BC's tennis grip, and then got really ugly about it. The jury's reaction was one of shock and disgust. I actually wrote "tipping point for the jury" in my notes. Then came Cummings' tantrum over the ducks. The jury was trying not to laugh. It really was circus-like. I actually had a PM conversation that evening with ncsu and told him these things, and stated that IMO "the jury is OVER IT."
The next day was the note from them saying as much. Interesting timing, to be sure.
I don't claim to know what the verdict will be, but I certainly don't predict a guilty verdict after witnessing what I have in the courtroom. I wouldn't be surprised by a hung jury, or even an NG verdict at this point. MOO