GLASGOW — A murder charge was dismissed Monday in the case of a Glasgow woman accused of shooting her husband because the prosecutor said she did not believe there was enough evidence for a conviction.

Amy Nunn, 33, was scheduled to be retried starting Jan. 23 on a charge of murder in the death of her husband, Joe Nunn. The first trial ended in a hung jury in June.

Amy Nunn had reported a break-in at the family’s home on Jan. 2, 2007, at 312 Green Acres Drive. She told police men had entered the home and struck her in the head. Nunn testified during the trial that she called her brother, who called police after she was sure the men had left.

While police were in the apartment, Joseph Nunn was found in bed having been shot three times in the back of the head. The body was covered by blankets. Officers had been in the home for more than 30 minutes, with at least three people entering the bedroom, before Joseph Nunn was found.

Joseph Nunn had been shot with his own rifle that was kept in a bedroom closet.

While the defense position was that the intruders had killed Joseph Nunn, prosecutors in the first trial claimed that Nunn made up the story of the intruders, with a $421,000 insurance settlement as a possible motive for killing her husband.

After speaking with all the jurors from the first case, Karen Davis, commonwealth’s attorney for Barren County, said she didn’t believe 12 people could agree on a verdict with the existing evidence.

“I took the concerns of the jurors and sent a letter to the Glasgow Police Department asking them to follow up,” she said.

As of last week, Davis said she still had not received a response from the department.

“I felt like I was between a rock and a hard place,” she said. “If we went forward with the case and she was acquitted, we would be prevented from bringing the case back if additional evidence was found.”

The prosecution is not trying to second-guess the efforts of the police department, Davis said.

“I just don’t think it would be fruitful to go forward at this time,” she said.

Proceeding with the trial at this time would not serve the best interest of this community or the family of Joseph Nunn, Davis said.

The request made to the Glasgow Police Department included additional ballistics testing, more interviews with defense and prosecution witnesses and other information to refute the defense theory, Davis wrote in a letter to the department. Davis also asked the detectives to question the couple’s marriage counselor to gain more insight into their relationship.

Davis also made a written request for all officers’ reports because two were missing at the trial.

“I have still not received one of those reports. I received one after the initial trial,” she said.

Davis also requested in writing that the department inform her if a missing shell casing from the trial had been found. The evidence had not been found.

There was also evidence collection jury members were looking for – such as taking Amy Nunn’s clothing to check for blood spatter – that can no longer be done, she said.

Davis said she hopes some new information will surface and this case will go back before a grand jury for an indictment.

Glasgow police have been and are investigating elements of the case, including the additional information requested by Davis, said assistant police chief Maxie Murray.

About two or three weeks ago, the department and Davis communicated about the issues in the case, he said.

“One report was from an officer who is no longer with the department; he now works for another agency. We called him and he couldn’t remember if he completed a report,” Murray said.

But the officer said if he had written anything, it would just been an administrative report stating that he had looked for suspects near the crime scene, Murray said.

The good thing about the decision is it provides detectives additional time to find information about this case, he said.

“As long as I’m employed with the Glasgow Police Department, this case will be looked at daily,” Murray said. “I can tell you this case was discussed with each and every prosecutor before it ever went to the grand jury. They knew every piece of information that would be presented.”

Steve Romines, Nunn’s attorney, said he was ready for the trial to begin next week.

“The move to dismiss was a relief,” he said. “I’m not concerned about them bringing back the charges.”

There is no new evidence in this case to be found, Romines said.

“There is no evidence that Amy Nunn did anything,” he said.

It is very difficult for a prosecutor to admit a case cannot be won, Romines said. In this case, the right decision was made.

“We would have preferred an acquittal. I wanted one at the first trial and was pretty upset afterward,” he said. “But you can’t do anything when the prosecution decides to drop the charges.”