The prosecution's strongest case: Special Assistant District Attorney Layla Zon used bank records to show the travels that Hill and his traveling companions took so she could counter the defense's attacks on the credibility of witnesses. She used a power point presentation during her closing argument that tied it all together, chronologically. She repeatedly told jurors that while the case may have been politically motivated and the witnesses were of questionable character, that didn't change the answer to the question: Did he do it?
Why the defense may have won the case: Hill's lawyers repeatedly attacked the credibility of key prosecution witnesses and successfully framed the case as petty politics. During closing arguments, an animated and emotional Drew Findling, one of Hill's lawyers, strode around the courtroom mocking prosecution witnesses and called them liars.
A key decision by the defense: Hill's lawyers did not ask for the trial be moved to another county, even though the case had received widespread publicity. Hill's legal team wanted their client to be judged by the Clayton residents who elected him with 76 percent of the vote against a write-in candidate in the 2012 general election, after Hill defeated Kimbrough in the Democratic primary runoff, taking 54 percent of the vote.