What an exhausting day, and I was only watching from the sidelines.
I certainly hope the prosecution has a better day tomorrow. But for the first day, I think the defense carried the day with their very focused attention on the name Eric, to the exclusion of nearly everything else the prosecution presented. Is that one thing enough reasonable doubt to allow Tellis to escape conviction, with so many lies, and false alibis, and cell phone, and M&M CCTV evidence? Possibly, unless the jurors are willing to hear ALL of the evidence before making up their minds. But I suspect the defense will use every opportunity to drive home that one inconsistency, maybe even asking every witness if they had ever heard Jessica Chambers refer to Quentin Tellis by the name Eric and thus constantly reminding the jurors of that weakness in the prosecutions case. The prosecution has to prove everything, the defense only has to create a single reasonable doubt.
But for the moment overlooking that problem, I suggest the following can be deduced already from the prosecutions opening statement:
If Jessica Chambers car keys had a mixture of DNA on them, including that of Quentin Tellis;
If all the DNA at the crime scene was destroyed by fire inside the car;
If no keys were found inside the car (my assumption at this point);
If Jessica Chambers was found burned near the crime scene and barely able to walk;
If keys were necessary for the car to be driven to the crime scene;
Then
(1) Somebody removed those car keys from the car at the crime scene.
(2) Somebody discarded those keys between the Herron Rd crime scene and Courtland.
(3) The car keys were not burned (an assumption) since DNA evidence was found on them.
(4) The DNA on the car keys would include that of any person(s) handling them AFTER the car was driven to the crime scene, but BEFORE it was set on fire without them in it.
(5) Gasoline found by ATF in remnants of Jessicas bra was probably the accelerant used.
Regards,
Clouseau