Claus von Bulow was probably innocent.

All on this thread seem to have forgotten, or never knew, that Bulow had a mistress and she told him that she would never be with him while he was married to another. There's a potential motive right there. Matter of fact she was on the stand during the trial.

As to his guilt, the first trial jury said, after the verdict of the retrial, that they could not understand how any other jury could find Bulow innocent. Well, there is a good reason for that. The second trial jury did not use, or have permission from judges to use, all the evidence that the first trial jury used. They used a much reduced set of evidence, courtesy of Dershowitz.

Dershowitz did not demonstrate to the R.I. Supr Ct that an illegal procedure occurred, or some legal requirement for holding the trial had not been met. Dershowitz got a state supreme court to exclude evidence as not having been obtained "properly" via the US Supr Ct's exclusionary principle, if you believe in that bit of legal sophistry/chicanery. The crux of that particular issue was insulin and syringes found in a locked closet. Bulow had the only key to that closet and had recently kept it locked whereas before it had not been locked.

Bulow looked guilty. He had motive; mistress and inheritance (upon her death), he had proximity and opportunity. Dershowitz hired all these medical "experts" to testify that her coma could have come from prescription drugs and alcohol. I wonder if that was to cover up the blatant exclusion of evidence.

I guarantee you that an overwhelming majority of "parasites" are not murderers. Now those who knew him personally (not you) can privately suspect he had a hand in her death, but there's no evidence that points to a suspicious death, let alone murder. You talk about his history, but you're ignoring her history. She was admitted to the hospital multiple times and was even in a coma before because of her unhealthy lifestyle.