Same way OJ got away with it: Lack of credible evidence. And a whole lot of cash.
A court of law says the accuser must prove their accusation, and no exceptions are allowed. Prosecutors can't say things like "take a look at him, he's obviously guilty" or even "who else could it have been" in their arguments, because their job is to prove it. They had evidence, but it wasn't very credible. Credibility is where the cash comes in.
If the accused (no names mentioned) has enough cash, they can hire a team of defence lawyers. That team will pick through all the evidence the prosecution has, and they'll keep picking until they find enough inconsistencies until they can convince a judge that it's inadmissible. A different detail in the story here, a possible bias against the accused there, a red flag in one of the background checks here, and poof... inadmissible evidence.
If you've got that kind of cash, you'll get away with stuff too. Unless you're dumb enough to let someone film it.