(1) The State
(2) The Defense Legal Team And Hangers On
(3) The Defendant
My impression is that #2 and #3 have different goals. For example, all the high powered scientists in the world and legal minds can't make 1+1=3. The forensics may be enough to convict many times over. These scientists won't take the stand and lie; if they are questioned appropriately then they wind up as helping the state corroborate the findings.
Therefore, their involvement to me is suspect; if the interest of the defendant where truly paramount, a plea would be in the works, or something along the lines of a reduced sentence for a diminished capacity. Instead I suspect these people want to play games to make themselves feel important or otherwise advance their own interest. KC is probably does not have the courage to direct them to negotiate a plea. She might be playing with her life as a consequence.
Hopefully, the state will not cave when the defense rolls over to some type of insanity argument if things don't bounce their way on the forensics. I would recommend that the strategy be to make the defense intimate their is no mental defect. This is the defenses escape hatch.
If there is evidence for aggravating factors, I hope the state has the courage to ask for the DP and proceed with the trial regardless of any defense attempt to cry uncle.