I've read that the most successful liars are the ones who embellish and distort the truth, not the ones who make up a complete story. I think KK is the first type and PF is the second.
We have no idea how much blood there was and we probably never will know. Perhaps KK is exaggerating to make PF look worse. Same thing with the tooth and the bloody baby toys - those are details guaranteed to turn a jury's stomach against PF, but there's no actual evidence - only the word of one known liar talking about another known liar.
It still seems to me that although it KK has a solid alibi for Thanksgiving Day, there's no actual solid proof of when KB died. I know how I would see it, knowing just what we know now, if I were a juror, but some might see it as 'reasonable doubt'. If you can accept the possibility that KB wasn't actually killed on Thanksgiving Day, then you've opened the door to the possibility that KK was the real killer.
I think much is going to depend on what was said in texts available to LE. I wouldn't be surprised to see challenges to cellphone pings as reliable evidence of where each phone's owner was, meaning even seemingly incriminating texts might not be what they appear to be.
I think the 'bones' of KK's story are probably pretty accurate and I think she's unquestionably put her own 'spin' on what details to include and what to leave out. It's going to be very interesting now to see how PF tries to 'spin' his way out. IMHO, she's better at putting together a coherent story, but he's got a lot of time to think and a lawyer to work with to tighten up his own story.
