No idea of whether she is NT or not, but what is obvious is the lack of any strong evidence against her. The DNA evidence has been proven false now, so much so that one of the leading scientists who studied it said he was 'horrified' at the results, and how horribly the whole initial case was run (since the lynchpin or the conviction was on the DNA evidence). Plus, the prosecutions leading (and only worthwhile) witness has been shown to be entirely untrustworthy; his statements filled with contradictions and uncertainties. Her unusual behavior after the arrest is meaningless, and not evidence at all.
The only thing of any worth is the confession, but after learning of the immoral tactics used by the prosecutor to get that confession, that becomes much weaker evidence also. That means there is no strong evidence, and with the assumption of innocence, there is no reason (other than the sensationalistic media) for her not to be acquitted.