To be fair, just because they were not proven guilty doesnt mean they didnt do it though. I couldnt be sure whether they did it or not, but the job of the jury is to make a desicion based on the evidence provided, so i had to say not guilty as the evidence was not strong at all.

I suppose its so hard to prove a case like this though, but i cant see how anyone could be 100% sure they were guilty based on the evidence they provided. And for archer to change his decision at the end proves to me that he wasnt sure in the first place so should have said not guilty to start with in my opinion.