Considering only what this jury has heard and the voir dire Q&A...
I think there is reasonable doubt as to motive. I do think the "Grief Expert" did enough to reassure those jurors who may have had reasonable doubt already re: the 31 days, and her actions/behavior being indicative of the fact that she intentionally killed Caylee in order to sidestep motherhood. I don't think JA's "in that case all behavior is indicative of grief" has the effect of nullifying her testimony the way many here do, I think the jurors will take it the way it should be taken: combining everyone into a single report you CAN see all types of behavior as indicative of grief but not all types specifically in any one person. Keep in mind that SK was admitted as an expert witness by the judge. Regardless of anyone's personal opinion of her qualifications, (1) the jury was told she is an expert at analyzing grief/trauma behavior, (2) she came across as credible in that she was unfamiliar with the case (unbiased).
Method, means...
I don't think the State proved that chloroform, specifically as a weapon/tool/device for homicide, was involved. I think the RM myspace page re: chloroform could produce reasonable doubt - and also the experts who contradicted the "shocking levels" and/or conceded non-nefarious origins of it. There is no evidence of making or purchasing chloroform. I think the jury may split on this issue.
I think the pet burial testimony CAN point to ICA, but I also think it may cause some jurors to also see the duct tape as a post-mortem measure. I think there was enough testimony that the tape may have not been in pace around the mouth and nose, or originally attached directly to the body. I think the whole RK issue can give reasonable doubt to the way everything was found at the recovery site. I think the jury splits here as well.
I DO think most if not all of the jury will believe that the body was in the trunk of the car. The decomp testimony was solid and for the most part uncontested.
Though I think the jury will start out with some convinced of 1st degree, some convinced of only manslaughter, and perhaps one or two convinced of neither...I think after 4 days they will compromise. My vote is for "ICA will receive 20 years or less", and she'll serve 12/13 years of it.
Keep in mind these votes are before closing arguments, which can alter a jury's mindset a few ticks one way or the other.