The title explains it all, or those with the loudest voices and most raucous moral outrage are the ones that seem to hold the least informed opinions:
From the point of view of a media scholar, it is interesting to see how the facts got so distorted. This decision was a huge upset to many of the commentators, Nancy Grace is my particular favorite, and yet as the closing arguments brutally explain, there is no way a jury could legally convict her. I just wonder the kind of filter that is present that allowed us to get this this position. Paper topic anyone?