I think you're missing the point. Found guilty or not... due to witness tampering it's likely he should have never been charged with it to begin with... but the "bigger picture" actually being that the states case against him all becomes suspect when there is foul play in it's inception.He was found not guilty on that charge.
The circumstances in the way the state brought the charges against him also didn't follow procedure, so the manipulation of the lead investigators testimony on top of that can certainly make it appear to be more agenda driven than actual wrong doing.
A decent defense attorney could have a field day.