No, Fiesta, they haven’t.
Ekat corrected my language on “legally insane” vs “criminally insane” (which I appreciate).
The jury determined that wrt to LK, the state had proved its case on all elements of the attempted murder charge except for the aspect having to do with his state of mind. It’s a big exception and explains why he was not found guilty of attempted murder of LK.
According to the judges glow chart for the jury, the jury would never even gotten to the phase of considering the defense’s affirmative case of insanity unless they determined that, beyond a reasonable doubt, the prosecution had successfully established that he shot her.
Ekat said that she, personally, was not convinced he shot her. She also said, I think, that possibly some jurors were uncertain and “compromised” instead of genuinely agreeing unanimously that the prosecution had proved its case. But Ekat was not on the jury. If jurors joined the unanimous verdict because they compromised because they wanted to finish the verdict, they still signed in to a unanimous decision that implies agreement with the notion that the prosecution established all the elements of its case wet LK aside from state of mind considerations.
The jury’s decision doesn’t establish that her shot her with absolute certainty, just beyond a reasonable doubt. A different jury might have decided differently. But that jury unanimously agreed that, beyond a reasonable doubt, he shot her.