Unfortunately, the jurors don't have the luxury of poring over the details of the case for a year (nor, I suspect, would they want to, since I'm sure they are eager to return home).
The jurors only have access to what has been presented in court.
In court, the 911 tapes were played. In one of them, CA said she hadn't seen her granddaughter since June 7th.
In other evidence (KC's interview with Yuri Melich & the jail visitation w/LA video), the jurors heard KC state June 9th, & the cryptic conversation between KC & LA that ensued.
Jurors heard CA state she hadn't seen her granddaughter for a month.
Jurors heard KC state she hadn't seen her daughter for 31 days.
Then, CA testified that Father's Day, June 15th, was the last time she saw Caylee (contradicting what she said in the 911 call).
GA testified he saw Caylee on the morning of June 16th, and described her clothing, but it was different from what was discovered @ the crime scene.
IMO, there are so many dates regarding the last time Caylee was allegedly seen, it might cause jurors to doubt each of the family members' testimony (especially with all that weird back-and-forth between KC & LA on the jail visitation videos when LA was playing sleuth).
It might cause them to ask was it June 7th? Was it June 9th? Was it June 15th?
It might cause them to question if GA had actually seen Caylee on the 16th, based on the contradictory description of what he said Caylee was wearing (compared to what was found @ the crime scene).
Confusion & contradictions are not a good thing when trying to decide who to trust.
If I was a juror, I might not trust what the family members have testified to, and I might decide that what the DT has alleged has some merit.