It’s been a long ordeal for Conrad Truman, but the justice system finally reached a definitive conclusion Friday with a panel of his peers finding him not guilty.

While we must never forget that a young woman’s death has irreversibly affected two families, Truman’s case is an example of the importance of the American justice system and the safeguards in place to ensure that the process is fair.

One of these safeguards is requiring that the prosecution prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The state must convince a jury the defendant is guilty and — unfortunately for the prosecution — there appeared to be many areas of doubt in the Truman case.

Although we weren’t present for all the testimony, it seems apparent investigators did themselves no favors throughout the case. Notably, gunshot residue tests taken after the shooting were likely affected because a police officer said Truman could wash his hands (despite Truman reportedly wanting his hands to be tested).

Possibly as a result, only one of the victim’s hands was found to have gunshot residue. While that didn’t definitely establish who the shooter was, it helped build reasonable doubt.

The medical examiner was also uncertain as to the cause of death. The doctor initially ruled that Heidy Truman’s manner of death couldn’t be determined, but later determined it was homicide before changing it back to undetermined. Another point toward reasonable doubt.

The medical examiner made his final declaration of uncertainty after it came to light that officers improperly recorded the dimensions of the Truman residence during the initial investigation. The doctor testified the correct dimensions made a defense theory that Heidy Truman took her own life plausible.

The incorrectly reported measurements bring us to another important safeguard in our justice system — being able to appeal a case. A prior jury convicted Conrad Truman, but his attorneys were able to raise questions, including the inaccurate measurements that were presented to that first jury. A judge granted a second trial so a jury could weigh the matter with the correct dimensions.

Finally, the fact that the matter twice came to a jury of everyday residents is the ultimate safeguard. The state has tremendous power to investigate and prosecute crimes, but it also faces the highest burden — to convince a random collection of citizens to unanimously agree on an outcome.

Although Conrad Truman was in custody for much of this process, it is of the utmost importance that it was citizens and not the state who determined his fate.

These elements, combined with the fact the government must present its evidence in a court open to the public, help ensure that our justice system is as free and fair as possible. It is far from perfect, but it is a system that best balances the pursuit of justice and the rights of the defendant.

For the sake of full disclosure, we note that Conrad Truman’s mother is a non-newsroom employee of the Daily Herald. The editorial board did not speak with her in connection with this matter.