I'm with you, I read a bunch of articles about it a while ago. Seemed like she just him accidentally?
In reverse? In the snow? Hard enough to kill him? With no noise, no blood on the car? There's no evidence he was "run over" and yes, her Lexus SUV would squash him like a pumpkin, but those aren't his wounds. So if he was hit, in reverse, the car didn't proceed to back over him, and yet he died. Full throttle, maybe, maybe you could pull that off. But then you'd have marks of the tires and car sliding in the lawn as she braked. And wouldn't someone notice that at 2-3 AM? Wouldn't a guy being hit by a call scream in pain?
The prosecution theory is so ridiculous I can't believe it went to trial, except via some fairly widespread concocted theory, and hence the defense approach.