The court finds that it is necessary to grant (Moody) a new trial because it finds the jury misconduct undermined the integrity of the jury deliberations and public confidence in their verdict,

There is clearly jury misconduct. My client should be entitled to a new trial.

In the first trial, wrong evidence went to the jury. It should not have, as confirmed by the court of appeal. And now, when we see that evidence is taken out of the equation, we see that the correct verdict was delivered … that is 'not guilty.'

This was a very complex case, and the jury heard testimony from witnesses unlike any trial that's really been held here in the southern district of Indiana before. There were many difficult legal concepts to grasp and we are extremely pleased with the outcome of this trial.

A jury verdict is just a guess - a well-intentioned guess, generally, but you simply cannot tell fact from fiction by taking a vote.

A fox should not be on the jury at a goose's trial.