it closed its case by underscoring again why ed ates couldn't be the killer. he had no motive and was too unhealthy to kill paul duncsak and flee the scene as police claimed. and he couldn't have been in two places at once. in new jersey when paul duncsak was dying and in louisiana where a neighbor named matlock clearly identified him. >> matlock saw him and his car there wednesday night. august 23rd. >> now it was the jury's case. but it wouldn't take long, a little more than a day for it to render a verdict. >> what is your verdict? >> guilty. >> the 12 men and women who had heard the case agreed ed ates had, in fact, murdered his former son-in-law paul duncsak. his "too fat to kill" defense may have won points for being original, but the panel rejected it completely. >> he held his hand out, shot a gun, and went to the neighbor's yard and got in a car and drove. >> they found the prosecution's evidence circumstantial, though it was pointed overwhelmingly to the man's guilt.