It is a tragic case and there may be some case for questioning the verdict, although not through the courts. Nonetheless, it was the verdict reached and the judge did not seem to find it unusual or worthy of comment that this was so. Judges who find that the verdict seems out of kilter with the evidence presented usually remark on this and this is usually reported in the media. There was no comment in this case.
There is a proportion of cases in which the CPS considers prosecution a valid step and conviction likely, but the jury disagrees. That is what happened in this case.
I've read here and elsewhere speculation that juries alter their verdict on the basis of "there but for the grace of God go I..." Along with many other CC members, I've done jury service. I sat on three juries between many long waits, with some common members in all three and some I saw only once. The notion that a jury will openly or tacitly adopt the mindset that leaway should be given 'as this could easily have been them' is one I do not recognise from personal experience.
Just out of curiosity, has anyone in CC sat on a jury where they suspect this mindset had an effect on the outcome or the verdict?