I read the Wikipedia article about the crime and I found it surprising he got convicted as it seemed like they didn't have any actual evidence against him. Coul

I read the Wikipedia article about the crime and I found it surprising he got convicted as it seemed like they didn't have any actual evidence against him. Could anyone who's familiar with the case shed some light as to why the jury found him guilty? We do know that he did do it, I am just curious as to how it was proven.