But suppose, for example - JP is the father. Suppose KC knows he's the father. (and I am using JP ONLY as an example) Suppose Jose decides to use this to produce doubt in the jury's mind.
It's on record that JP did NOT like KC.
They could spin that to look like a set up - at least generate reasonable doubt in the jury's mind.
IMO the father is EXTREMELY important to this case.
Disagree. The baby's DNA was in KC's car. KC did all the lying, planning, and covering up. ALL of the forensics point STRAIGHT to KC.
Let's say we find out JP was the father. He's essentially nothing but a sperm donor, who had no interest in Caylee, so he didn't want custody. He had no apparent nterest in KC, either. Why would he do it?
And, there is no evidence in his car, his house, or anywhere around him. The As also cannot assume that he was conveniently where they would like them to be on any of the key dates.
And, why would KC cover up for him? Why would she carry her child's body in her car for a month, for him? It's not believable. Why make up a cockamamie story about Zanny the Invisible Perfect 10 Nanny taking Caylee, then running KC all over town, making her go to nightclubs, giving her "scripts" and promising to return Caylee in 50 days? She certainly has no reason to lie to protect Caylee's safety NOW.
You couldn't plant enough stuff on any alleged bio father to make a case, or even cast doubt.
In order for any other person to be material as a possible perp, the As need a case, backed with evidence. They can't just point fingers. It's all about the evidence. The forensics.
They can accuse President Obama, if they want to do. But, there would have to be evidence implicating him.
Then, in order to set KC up, the perp would have to know about the fight between KC and CA. He would have to be able to predict that KCs car would run out of gas at Amscott, would get towed, and he would have to climb over a high fence, carrying a decomposed body. He would also have to know about the pet burial ground. And, that's just for starters.
In addition, an unwarranted pointed finger at Chatt could likely get a second lawsuit shoved right up their noses (or other oriface).
They are VERY lucky that the Grunds aren't suing. If they got a defamation suit every time they tried to offload KC's guilt onto somebody else. My guess is that they would stop it so fast they'd burn out their brakes.