I don't think they'll go that way. Are jurors really going to buy the relatively petite girlfriend over the muscular, controlling husband? And it's putting too many eggs in one basket. If the girlfriend is the only alternative, Remy loses. I also have to think she has an alibi.
My guess, from what's been made public, is that Remy's lawyers present a straightforward reasonable doubt defense. They'll hint at a random stranger, maybe online relationships and tell jurors "We really don't know what happened to Jennifer Ramsaran. And the state certainly hasn't proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she was murdered by her husband and the father of her children." If there are weaknesses in the forensic evidence tying Remy to the crime - and we've gotten the sense there may be - the defense will do its best to make that clear.
I also don't think Remy will be given the chance to impress the jury. I doubt he'll testify. Too risky. If he takes the stand, the case is no longer about reasonable doubt, but about whether or not the jury believed his testimony.
Remy has a number of things going against him, after all, not the least of which is his race in an upstate county where the jury may be all white. And we've seen him in the TV interviews. How many people following the case were convinced Remy did it after seeing his odd, angry responses on the local news? Under pressure, it seems to be the resentful, self-obsessed control-freak that comes out, rather than the charmer. The defense isn't going to want jurors to see that.
Of course Remy may be just the kind of defendant who insists on testifying, thinking if he can just make his sales pitch to the jurors, they'll buy it. His lawyers will advise against putting him on the stand, in that case, but he has the right if he insists. That will leave him open to cross-examination, though, and I don't think he'll do well.
Of course, maybe he'll take a plea at the last minute and save everyone the time, money and heartache of a trial.
