Did the courts erroneously deny Ms. Stroud's constitutional right to due process when she was convicted of second degree murder and three counts of felonious assault where the evidence was legally insufficient and violative of due process where the prosecutor failed to prove that her acts or encouragement caused the death or the assaults?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. DID THE COURTS ERRONEOUSLY DENY MS. STROUD'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS WHEN SHE WAS CONVICTED OF SECOND DEGREE MURDER AND THREE COUNTS OF FELONIOUS ASSAULT WHERE THE EVIDENCE WAS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT AND VIOLATIVE OF DUE PROCESS WHERE THE PROSECUTOR FAILED TO PROVE THAT HER ACTS OR ENCOURAGEMENT CAUSED THE DEATH OR THE ASSAULTS? II. DID THE COURTS ERRONEOUSLY DENY MS. STROUD'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS BY REFUSING TO SUPPRESS COMPLAINANT LATASHA BARGAINEER'S MISIDENTIFICATION OF HER THAT WAS : INFECTED BY IMPROPER POLICE INFLUENCE AND SHOULD A NEW TRIAL , BE GRANTED? III. COULD JURISTS OF REASON HAVE ACQUITTED MS. STROUD OF ALL CHARGES IF SHE WAS NOT DEPRIVED OF HER CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRESENT A DEFENSE WHEN THE COURTS FAILED TO QUALIFY DR. TERRENCE CAMPBELL AS AN EXPERT WITNESS FOR HER ONLY DEFENSE OF MISIDENTIFICATION WHO'S TESTIMONY WAS RELEVANT AND RELIABLE? i