Need a little more detail

It's never made explicit but since the prosecutor doesn't contend that Tyler's client shot Michael twice, it can be inferred that the first shot must have missed and that the police didn't find the first bullet.

I missed that there were two shots in the testimony or evidence and doubt it was mentioned at all.

As to Tim-O-T's question (why the guy was on the floor when his wife came into the room), that is a huge question. Bullet missed him and the scuffle likely wasn't too major otherwise AND V.Mayo had been gone at least 30 seconds if not longer (long enough for V. Mayo to get down the stairs and wife to come up, etc).

A lot of this movie in ending seems sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.

Also Ann Dvorak's character, if she wanted to save her own skin, might well have indicated that V. Mayo fired both shots - pointing out V. Mayo had indicated she was confused and didn't remember details like picking up the letters.

All the legal aspect seems wrong, and as IrvBerg pointed out the above likely not even necessary, particularly if the trial had ended as he pointed out, when the prosecutor jumped to dismiss the charges.

It was painful to compare to today's CSI and other detailed and much more accurate shows.

Why would a writer string us along, as if 2 hours invested was necessary if both ladies get off easily on self-defense. In this day and age, that would have been evident early on, and the movie wouldn't really have been necessary to make(!).