Question to the group- do these mitigating factors presented by the defense at sentencing typically only occur if the accused admits to the crime after being found guilty? It would seem strange to say “he still didn’t do it. But if he did, here’s why and so you shouldn’t give him the DP”.
If BK is found guilty of murder 1 by the jury, then he proceeds to the sentencing phase. He doesn't need to admit to the crime and I am sure he won't, since it is possible that his defense will file an appeal of his conviction.
If a criminal case is death-eligible, then BK and/or the defense will be able to introduce evidence of mitigating factors. At this stage BK has been convicted of murder 1, and the prosecution has charged him with aggravating circumstances, which are necessary for the case to be death-eligible.
At the start of the sentencing hearing, the jury is instructed that (1) the defendant has been found guilty of murder 1, and (2) that the prosecution is charging BK with aggravating circumstances. Now the jury has to decide if the prosecution has proven or will prove during the sentence hearing that they have evidence of aggravating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt. If the jury feels that BARD applies to the aggravating cirumstances, then they have to weigh the mitigating factors against the aggravating circumstances and decide if it is just or unjust to impose the death penalty in this case. If
they decide the mitigating factors outweigh the aggravating circumstances, then BK will not recieve the death penalty, but will be sentenced to life without parole.
The jury only needs to decide that one of the aggravating circumstances, if proven to them beyond a reasonable doubt, outweighs the mitigating factors and then BK will be sentenced to death.
One would expect that the defense team and his family will pull out all the stops to present every mitigating factor they can think of in an effort to spare BK's life. That's how it works in death-eligible cases.
And if BK wants to address the sentencing jury on his own behalf, regarding mitigating circumstances, he has that option, and he can't be cross-examined during his remarks to the jury. From what we have seen of BK so far, I think it is unlikely that he will speak to the jury himself, but you never know. We have a lot to see and hear at trial before the sentencing hearing takes place.
Also, if there is an appeal in the works, would the defense team want BK to speak? Maybe certain things would be okay to discuss, and not others. But that would be a tough call, because the death penalty is in play at that point, and an appeal is uncertain.
All imo and IANAL.
edited several typos