I can understand the concern and also the idea that she may have minimized her role in the crime, however, She did seek counsel prior to sharing of details. I would expect any lawyer that has a chance of not being disbarred or sued for malpractice. would have stressed that a plea is based on complete truth.
Does that mean that she did not lie or minimize, no. But I personally believe the wildness of the story underlines that she actually is sharing her complete knowledge. (keep in mind the bat, blindfold and candles was her relating what he said to her, not what she saw.)
It does no service to her that she actually knew the body was in the tote, but recounts, I do not know, but I assumed it could have been. It does no service to her that she lie about locations or times, since what trapped her in the first place was the cell records. Maybe it stretches credibility that she says she left clues hoping to get caught, but even that serves her no value and provides little wiggle room for the defense.
I would have expected that her lawyers worked very hard with her to share a factual recount that would make her plea unassailable. She went to them before she said anything other than, I was not involved. According to attached article she spoke to agents on Dec 17th and asked for counsel and said she would cooperate, yet it was the 20th before she shared her recounting. She had counsel from her first involvement and those lawyers would have known and expected the defense to confront her and dig for any inconsistency. They had 3 days to work with her to make sure her story was both true and as minimally incriminating as possible.
I also expect that DA May would have cross checked all of her story prior to accepting a plea and using said information as a basis to indict PF.
Many express concern about her deal and the idea that she is getting away with so much, which I understand and can agree with. However, what I see from the timeline is the case and almost all physical evidence is a result of the information she provided originally. Per attached article it was the evening of the 20th after KK's interview that police researched KB's apartment and began removing physical evidence, also suggesting that physical evidence became apparent due to the recounting of KK.
I always have concerns when a deal is made with a perpetrator. This, however, is often the case in the judicial system and I have faith that logic and reason will allow a jury to understand that.
Yes KK was involved, after all that is why she knows things, but also that her story matches the physical evidence and therefore regardless of her punishment it does not negate the involvement of PF.
Fingers crossed for logic and reason, but also imho.
Kelsey Berreth case timeline: Everything we know so far
