In the last episode, you heard the prosecution's case against Jamie Snow for the murder

of 18-year-old gas station attendant Bill Little in Bloomington, Illinois.

The story was built piece by piece, witness after witness, each one pointing to the same man.

They told the jury to focus on what matched

and not get distracted by inconsistencies.

And if you do that, if you only look at the pieces that fit,

the story feels clear and it's convincing.

But what happens when you look at everything else?

When you step back and look at the details that didn't

match, the witnesses who changed their stories and the evidence that never existed. What if

everything you just heard only works because certain details and context were left out? Because

that's exactly what the defense argued.

They said those inconsistencies weren't small. They were critical. And when you hear the full

story, it will make you question everything you knew about this case, these investigators,

and the prosecution. The prosecution says the voices all point in one direction.

The defense says these voices can't be trusted,

but it's the jurors who have the final say.

This is the 13th juror podcast, where we break down real court cases

and put you in the juror's seat.

Two sides, the same evidence. You decide what to

believe. I'm your host, Brandy Churchwell. Today's episode is Illinois versus James Snow,

part two, the defense.

...