I’m getting anxious about what KM’s proffer may bring …or mostly - what it may not bring, and my mind is getting flooded on overload. When I’m in this anxious state, I may not always think logically so please forgive me for my rambling mind.
After all the lying she’s done, what could possibly come out of KM’s mouth now that would bring charges against Donna and Wendi at this point? KM is damaged and is so not credible that just her words now couldn’t possibly be enough to have Wendy and Donna charged could they? Wouldn’t she need to produce some type of pretty solid proof and receipts that she’s now telling the truth at this point? I wonder if any of her family will be questioned now, or offer up any evidence or proof? Will a grand jury be called after her proffer for a possible arrest for Donna and Wendi?
Ugh ….I just want this to happen!
While Katie's prior perjury certainly damages her credibility, it doesn't eliminate her value completely. Georgia Cappleman has proven herself to be quite a chess player and I suspect she is evaluating Katie's testimony from several angles:
1) You ask, "After all the lying she's done, what could possibly come out of KM's mouth now that would bring charges against Donna and Wendi at this point?" Whether or not Katie is credible is a different question from whether or not her testimony might support charges. Let's say Katie now is willing to testify under oath that Charlie told her about family meetings with his mother and sister whereby they planned the murder. She further explains how Wendi was the "brains" behind the plan and that Wendi was insistent that they insulate her from any involvement or communication because she would have the obvious motive.
We can all agree that it would be difficult to convict Wendi or Donna on Katie's word alone in this case. On the other hand, there is a huge amount of circumstantial evidence and, quite frankly, almost NO other plausible suspect not named Adelson. Therefore, if Katie swears under oath that such a conversation occurred, it would almost certainly be more than enough to take to a grand jury with the rest of the circumstantial evidence to get an indictment against both Wendi and Donna. [And, yes, such testimony would be hearsay under the rule, but it would be admitted under the
co-conspirator's exception to the hearsay rule].
My belief is that Georgia and her team want to bring charges against all three Adelsons to be tried together. Imagine that Katie does take the stand to describe in detail the foregoing. She would be savaged on cross examination, of course, but it would put enormous pressure on Wendi and Donna to take the stand to refute it and you can bet Georgia is salivating over the prospect of crossing Donna Adelson and Wendi now. Katie is damaged goods, but she could still be the link necessary to get the indictments. Remember, there is NO cross examination and NO defense participation in grand jury proceedings.
2) The second possibility is that Katie may have corroborating evidence. There may be family members or friends who she can have testify that they were aware of whatever facts she is now going to reveal. We just don't know. There might be documents or recordings that could be critical. It is a long shot, but there's still a possibility that there will be something incriminating behind the way the defense got financed. There could be a third-party unknown at this time who acted as an intermediary and who might be able to testify that the Adelsons were funding the defense and influencing Katie's decision-making.
3) Even if none of the foregoing is correct, you cannot overlook the fact that, to win, a trial attorney must tell a story that is both believable and engaging. My current company does a lot of work consulting with trial attorneys on the elements of persuasive science that cause people to make decisions -- and, specifically, how jurors make decisions. Katie is now a HUGE part of the story that will unfold in the upcoming trial(s). As a cooperating witness, she suddenly takes on a starring role in the new case and her testimony will unquestionably be riveting. She presents an intriguing picture as being both evil and despicable, while also being a sad broken doll who threw her life away, leaving innocent kids behind who we all will feel sorry for.
In many ways, a good trial lawyer is akin to a good movie director. Juries react to the story unfolding before them and a good trial lawyer casts his or her trial to tell that story as effectively as possible. Being able to present Katie within a controlled narrative using the resources and power of the state makes her extraordinarily valuable even if she's seen as a lying killer. We all are fascinated by such figures (see, e.g., Bundy, Dahmer, etc.). Trust me, Katie has already auditioned for the part, and I trust Georgia to know how to use her as a white pawn now.