crimesnooper
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 582
- Reaction score
- 382
I thought his closing very good. However, I would have expected him to object, "facts not in evidence," when JB said that the police/LE deliberately destroyed evidence. i.e., the drying of the garbage was not a deliberate attempt to destroy evidence IMO. My concern is, by JA not objecting, some on the jury may believe the accusation.
I also think he was wrong when he said CA would not have permitted ICA to abrogate her role as mother. I think CA would have been happy to assume the full role of "mother," IMO it was that Caylee was a pawn in their power struggle, and ICA wasn't about to loose the "game" and let CA have Caylee. I think this was a big factor in her decision to kill Caylee.
Actually, I think he was right in the sense that CA would have been "on" ICA and would have nagged her that she is the mom, she should not be partying ect. Of course if CA had any idea that the choice was Caylee's death versus her getting custody...of course she would have said ok. But to CA, it was "you are ther mom and you need to step up." JMO