That’s true but they still would address it in some way. They can’t sit there and deny every shred of evidence without some counter to it. At this point though, who else could even be a remote possibility other than AS? A hitman? The defense’s job is to poke holes in the theories and evidence presented. To me, the best way to do that is to give the jurors a secondary thought of who else could correspond with the evidence presented. The defense doesn’t have to prove murder or suicide, but still need to counter with substance that plants doubt.
BBM: Hmmmmm....you wonder if JS really doesn't think AS was the perpetrator that he may *wish* he would have allowed and encouraged the investigation to the fullest extent possible to prove the innocence of his own brother.
Makes me wonder if Greer may bring up the fact that Zahaus tried time and again to get back into the mansion for further investigation and peace of mind and were thwarted every time. There was always the *appearance* that there was something to hide.
My own thoughts.