Of course, we don't have any idea what evidence has been accumulated, what evidence is yet to be found and whether or not someone will confess. It sure appears that Lori and Chad were pretty incompetent at pulling off these murders and the mistakes they made are going to be revealed as numerous and significant.
Let's assume both will be represented with good and capable defense attorneys and consider the options for the defense. First and foremost, it is almost certain that neither will take the stand. Not only would they be exposed to withering cross examination, an attorney is prohibited from allowing his/her client to testify to knowing falsehoods and preparing an adequate defense is going to result in an inventory of problematic areas. The tiny sliver of evidence we know of now absolutely links Chad to the burial site and Lori to the children and Alex at the location and time of their disappearance and respective demises and there will certainly be more. This will leave their attorneys in the unenviable (and yet common position when representing a guilty person) of having very little affirmative evidence that can be presented at trial. Thus, the best choice of the few available will be the standard defense: 1) The state has the burden of proof and, 2) We need only raise reasonable doubt to win. As I evaluate this case, Alex as the fall guy will be fool's gold. Alex was Lori's brother and the evidence shows extraordinary interweaving of their lives and actions -- especially at the time of the murders. Moreover, Chad's conduct and actions also are interwoven with Alex tightly, including the extraordinary fact that their remains were buried on his property while he was present. Under these facts, pointing the finger at Alex as a murderer will necessarily tar both of them as well and subject both of them to conspiracy and the same penalty that would have befallen Alex, had he survived.
For Lori to now try and claim that Alex was the bad guy and she went along with it out of fear or coercion would not only be laughable, it would require her or Chad to testify to those facts. Without that testimony there is no way for counsel to present such a fairy tale to a jury -- a huge conundrum for the defense in this case. Indeed, Alex's death creates huge problems for them because he can't testify now and the evidence of his movements is damning. There are too many known facts, combined with too many provable lies and acts of deception for either to escape conviction for murder in my opinion.
. I somehow missed the line in paragraph 24. And DW's statement in "Dateline" about coming to say "goodbye" led me astray, as well as the fact that LV talked about JJ making noise and being taken away by AC before they came (which would be kind of strange if they all stayed in the townhouse).