BBM. I disagree with the bolded statement.
The prosecution doesn't have to prove how or why BM killed SM, and they don't have to prove precisely where or when. The standard jury instruction says what the prosecution must prove, and this is all they must prove beyond a reasonable doubt:
"3-1:01 MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (AFTER DELIBERATION)
The elements of the crime of murder in the first degree are:
1. That the defendant,
2. in the State of Colorado, at or about the date and place charged,
3. after deliberation, and with intent to cause the death of a person other than
himself, caused the death of _______________ .
After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has proven each of the elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty of murder in the first degree.
After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has failed to prove any one or more of the elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant not guilty of murder in the first degree"
The preliminary hearing presented more than enough evidence to convince a reasonable jury that BM killed SM at the PP residence on the afternoon of May 9, 2020, that he intended to do so, and that he deliberated about killing her before he did it. That's all the DA needs to prove, and that's not just my opinion.
Judge Murphy, misled by the defense's demonstrably false claim that DNA evidence pointed to someone else, commented that the case could go either way, but since that myth has been dispelled it's clear - even the bare bones of the prosecution's case is enough to convict IMO.
---
