Nicholas Kassotis sat in a Georgia courtroom this week as jurors found him guilty on all 12 counts for the murder and dismemberment of his wife, Mindy. The verdict came after just over an hour of deliberations, closing a trial that prosecutors said revealed a pattern of manipulation, control, and ultimately, violence.

The sentencing phase brought a flood of emotion. Friends and family of Mindy delivered searing victim impact statements, describing her as a bright, generous presence whose life had been slowly constrained by fear and isolation. They painted Kassotis as a calculating abuser who robbed her of safety, laughter, and connection, leaving a void in countless lives.

But when it was Kassotis’ mother’s turn to speak, the tone shifted. Not only did she say that she doesn’t agree with the jury’s verdict, but that they don’t know her son who she described as a “kind, gentle man.” During her impact statement she insisted that a man like her son who helped underprivileged children in South America could never commit such a gruesome crime.

His father agreed, opening his statement with condolences for Mindy’s family. But in the very next sentence he maintained that his son was “not responsible” for her death. He went so far as to say that he respected the jury’s decision but that they “got it wrong.”

The courtroom, which had just heard testimony from friends recalling Mindy’s fear and from a third wife alleging deceit and abuse, now heard parents steadfast in their belief that the man in shackles before them was incapable of murder. It was a striking contrast — two completely different portraits of the same person, laid bare in front of the judge.

For Mindy’s loved ones, the statements from Kassotis’ parents shows just how polarizing this case has been. It’s clear that that his parents believe that the system has completely failed their son in spite of the mountain of evidence to the contrary.

The judge is expected to sentence Kassotis to life without the possibility of parole. For Mindy’s friends and family, the sentence is cold comfort at best.

The clash of narratives — one of a dangerous manipulator, the other of a wrongfully convicted man — is a reminder that even in the most seemingly clear-cut verdicts, the truth can look very different depending on where you stand.