I'm sorry to hear that - it's awful. I do think though that perhaps your negative experience has affected the way you view such trials. The burden of proof in a murder case is extremely high, and the trial should go on as long as there is evidence to be heard on both sides, regardless of what you think of the evidence. Do you want a killer to walk free on appeal because of a procedural error? Also, look at the Innocence Project. Innocent people are put away all the time. I know you think Jodi is guilty, and maybe she is. Maybe she killed him but she's so insane and perverted she doesn't grasp the seriousness of it. That matters, too. However, until all that evidence is heard and she's convicted, she's innocent and she has the right to a fair trial. Would you rather have a guilty till proven innocent system like Italy, which locked away Amanda Knox for 4 years without evidence?