You're not unreasonable to question this--I honestly think he's guilty, but it's also true that the evidence is indirect, that Sneed has a motive to lie (avoid

You're not unreasonable to question this--I honestly think he's guilty, but it's also true that the evidence is indirect, that Sneed has a motive to lie (avoid death penalty), and he's hardly the most reliable character. Most of the evidence is Glossip telling some very suspicious lies about a dead guy's whereabouts and allegedly splitting $4,000 with Sneed. I'd still say you're better off not executing people as a matter of policy--you can never undo a mistake in that process--but I'm not very convinced of Glossip's innocence. Given that it mostly relies on testimony, all of which is inherently unreliable, it's a bad use of the death penalty. I'm guessing the prosecutors used it with the intention to force Glossip to cave and plead guilty, but that really doesn't sit well with me.