Sorry, folks, I'm not crying a river over this. Unlike most of the contributors to this forum, I tend to believe in innocent until proven guilty. I am disheartened by the volume of posters who were convinced of guilt before the first voir dire. However...
While you commiserate and ponder how this could have happened, take a moment and listen to the closing arguments of the defense, particular the recitation of mileage and fuel purchases. As you listen, remember that the State has the burden of proving its assertions and allegations, and cannot conveniently "explain away" things with no proof.
I don't remember the specifics, but I was paying attention when defense counsel related stipulated mileages and evidence of fuel purchases. Discounting an alleged purchase in King, NC, where the cursing customer was a little taller than a 5' 0" clerk and the identification was based on showing a single photograph rather than an array, the Explorer got 19.55 MPG from Hugo to the fillup somewhere in western VA. The next fillup was in Burlington, where the average was 19.5 or so. That seems to hold up pretty well.
Now, about the alleged King NC purchase...
Using the ~19.5 mpg number, had Jason driven to the Hampton Inn, returned to his home to commit murder, and then driven back to the motel, he would have run out of fuel 18 miles from the King station. Oh, go ahead and say he could have stopped and purchased fuel, but if he did, why in the world did he stop in King, but more importantly, where was any evidence introduced to show this additional purchase.
Further, using the stipulated mileage figures and the stipulated gasoline price of $2.16, had Jason made the surreptitious purchase at King, he would have had to maintain 38 mpg to the next fuel stop. Oh, go ahead and say he could have stopped anywhere, but remember, it the burden of the state to PROVE that he purchased just enough additional fuel to make the mileage figures work. And why oh why, if he was the cursing customer, did he only pump $15 from a $20 bill and then stop yet again for some small purchase to make that consistent 19.5 mpg work out.
My fellow sleuths, whatever else was presented regarding with whom he slept, whether he engaged in childish behavior, swallowed wedding rings, cheated and wrote long emails, you prove to me that the fuel mileage argument is NOT reasonable doubt.
Sure, the red rocks and hush puppies and mangled cameras and clean babies and hush puppy footprints are very interesting, but get me beyond the mileage argument laid out at closing without resorting to "he could have." Anybody could have done anything. That's no way to incarcerate a man for life.
Flame away.