SoCalSleuth
Verified Expert
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2008
- Messages
- 1,729
- Reaction score
- 381
I've read here the responses you've gotten so far, and ITA with all of them.
I'm going to throw out another way the information may be admissible during the SA's case in chief, during direct examination of witness(es): if the SA can find a way to show that the information that Casey was stealing is relevant to the case-in-chief against Casey for a purpose other than to show she acted in conformity with her prior bad acts, then the information comes in and SA doesn't have to wait to see if the defense "opens the door" (unless, of course, the defense can lobby the correct objection to this move by the SA, which I'm not going to lay out here for the defense.)
It will be very easy for the prosecution to admit evidence of KC's stealing in its case-in- chief. KC stated at her initial LE interview that words to the effect that she was lying, stealing, etc. to find Caylee or that she would do so. They can introduce it to show she was lying to them or said that to cover up her theft crimes, etc.