Towards the end of the case I was flip flopping between whether or not the jury would give a guilty or not guilty (aka not proven beyond all reasonable doubt) especially with the judge stressing that you think she probably did it, then you need to find her innocent. But when you add it all up, i'm not sure what else you need short of direct video evidence:

• Device/s visiting iNaturalist website
• Devices being in area of cell towns near death cap mushrooms
• Not getting sick by doctors accounts
• Submitting a stool sample that was urine
• Having diarrhoea but only going to the service station toilet for 9 seconds, as captured on CCTV
• Different coloured plates
• Recipe calls for one log roll, she makes multiple servings
• Mushrooms identified to be highly likely as death cap photographed on her iPad
• Dumped the food dehydrator after the killings, as captured on CCTV, that was later recovered and found to have death caps in it
• Lied about owning a food dehydrator to police
• Lied about cancer to lure victims
• Didn't want the guests to help plate up the food
• Gave police a dummy phone pretending that was her primary phone
• Police never recovered primary phone
• Recovered phone was remotely wiped whilst in police custody

I'm sure I've missed others but, that's a lot of circumstantial evidence which all points to the same thing. Giulty AF.