This is a legit question, not trying to be a wise*** for real. How could anyone believe her, with exactly ZERO corroboration of anything she said anywhere?
I'm really trying to consider all options for everyone on the jury. With all of the evidence on the State's side, what could anyone possibly hang on to if all the defense has is the word of a psychotic liar who has clear motive to lie? A few text messages where TA appears angry? I mean...THAT could be enough? :help:
Like believing the abuse allegations for example. No writing in the journal, no witnesses except the magically awol MM, who said he'd lie for her, no medical reports, no police reports, no pictures.
The pedophilia allegations. Nothing found on the computer, no witnesses, no activities that TA undertook specific to targeting children, no police report, no journal entries.
A completely implausible timeline of events on 6/4, including wounds that directly contradict the murderer's account.
Gas cans, phone turned off, gun theft, lies to the police, cleaning up the crime scene, deleting photos, dumping the weapons, setting up an alibi in Utah.
I could go on and on....what basis could someone actually believe her? They would have to be totally void of even the most basic understanding of people.