What the state lacks evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that she was sufficiently sane to be held criminally liable at the time of the murders in the state of Massachusetts. That last bit is important because it’s the only state where the prosecution has to prove sanity rather than the defense having to prove insanity.

Personally I suspect she’s not guilty by reason of insanity, but I’m not certain I’d feel that way beyond a reasonable doubt were I on the trial. And it seems a large portion of people are of the opinion neither side managed to clear the bar of reasonable doubt