Now, this I don't get. Nancy Seaman was convicted a few years ago for clobbering her husband with a knife and then an axe. Her defense was that she killed him because he battered her.
Now she's getting a new trial on the grounds that the prosecution never proved she's the one who killed him.
Can someone explain to me why these this didn't get laughed out of court?
New trial on hold for convicted murderer Nancy Seaman | detnews.com | The Detroit News (http://detnews.com/article/20101202/METRO/12020462/New-trial-on-hold-for-convicted-murderer-Nancy-Seaman - broken link)