As for the trial itself, I'd rather have the prosecution's case than the defence.
The current publicised prosecution murder theory - that Tostee forced Rrie onto the balcony and she died trying to get away by climbing somewhere - is the most tenuous one. But that doesn't mean it is the only one and it certainly doesn't mean that it will be the only one that is presented at trial. I'd assume that what they'll be putting forward is alternative scenarios, all of which would have Tostee guilty of murder. This particular one is because the recording might be reasonable doubt on the other theories; the idea being that even if a jury doesn't think he is on the balcony they can still find him guilty.
And IMO the defence has a HUGE problem with Tostee himself. There are a lot of components of this case that Tostee really has to explain. Otherwise theories can be put forward and not refuted. Take, for example, the re-enactment with the policewoman and the certainty of the neighbour about the position of the feet. If the prosecution can then demonstrate how the recording supports that, the only real way that can be refuted is by Tostee. Obviously the defence can poke holes and cast doubt, but they would run the risk of simply poking enough holes that the other theory about her trying to get away (discussed in the para above) was effectively proven.
If Tostee testified he'd book himself a one way ticket to jail. Even a first year law student could rip him to shreds, let alone an experienced prosecutor on cross-examination. He'd contradict himself every second sentence and a lot of his prior behaviour could then be examined............I'd actually expect a prosecutor to be able to get a confession, either by playing up to his sense of entitlement in controlling women or his need for attention.
