I do not question that JW said G4 was at the scenes and wore the shoes. I think the issue are the other things JW is claimed to have said in his proffer as to G4 that may cause a slight issue. The several things known about do not seem logical. I guess it depends on if it can be proven otherwise. To a jury it may make a difference. You never know with a jury.
I do not think the defense thinks they can get G4 off, but may think they can get him lesser charges or lesser sentence if the jury believes JW. Believing what JW said about the night of the murders in reagard to G4 may be hard for them.
They may not be able to differentiate between his truth and his lies. JW may not do well on the stand.
ETA: I also think Jake will do well on the stand because he knows his life depends on telling the truth. Sure, defense attorneys will try to twist his words, but the state has evidence to back up everything Jake says.
My impression from AC's statements during GW4's previous hearing (not today) was that Jake began his proffer interview stating that GW4 didn't kill anyone, but ended up with a different take. JMO, during that intervew, AC, Junk, BCI agents, etc. all had evidence to see if it matched what Jake was telling them.
I can see them methodically pulling out evidence to question him when he said something like "George didn't kill anyone". They probably put Jake on the spot making him explain why his claim didn't mesh with the evidence they had. Once he realized they had enough evidence to contest any false statements he made, he eventually told the truth.
JMO, it's a mistake to assume that, because Jake and Angela confessed, the state didn't already have a very strong case. They absolutely do have a very solid case. The mountain of evidence is the foundation of their case, the proffer is the icing, so to speak. They could still get a conviction without the proffers, JMO.
