Overwhelming Evidence?

A co-worker of mine was summoned for jury duty earlier this week. She came to work relieved that the case had been canceled and she wouldn't be asked to serve after all.

However, she also told of another time when she did have to appear at the courthouse for possible jury selection. She went through the entire process of questioning, but still hadn't been selected in the final process. The case was a murder trial where a son had murdered his father for money. According to her (later) the prosecution had overwhelming evidence that the son was guilty of this crime.

That brought to mind a question of my own. I've been called only once for jury selection, and in the end, I was selected. I enjoyed the process. However, the case didn't involve murder, sentencing someone to life, OR capital punishment.

I'm not sure I could truly serve on a jury that was considering the death penalty for a conviction. Whether I'm for or against capital punishment isn't even an issue. I'm just not sure I could find enough overwhelming evidence to support such a punishment.

I've considered this matter, and I think that in order to convict someone of murder, that person would have to have been caught standing over the body, gun in hand, (assuming the gun is the weapon), gun residue on his hand, and the victim's blood spatter staining the front of his shirt. And even then, I'd have to know that the spatter pattern on his shirt was consistent with the angle of the bullet shot into the victim.

Would that be enough overwhelming evidence? Honestly, I'm still not sure. How about you? What kind of evidence would you consider overwhelming enough to convict someone of a capital crime and sentence him to life in prison or even death?