I had this terrible dream last night that the jury had asked for the entire testimony of Alice LaViolette to be read back! Took me a few minutes to recover my senses after I awoke.
On a more serious note, I think the more time that goes by, the more I am convinced we're not likely to see a first degree murder conviction. As much as I'd like the jury to see the evidence the way I do, I think they're hung up on a couple of things that Juan (whom I love and adore, BTW) could have hit harder in rebuttal and closing. To me, the "loose ends" are:
1 - I wish the prosecution had brought Chris Hughes to the stand on rebuttal to provide context for the e-mail that ALV 'interpreted' so selectively for the jury. Not only would it have redeemed the damage it did to TA, but it would have reinforced the idea that Jodi was a wacko and that TA's friends didn't trust her and were actively working to "rescue" him from her.
2 - I wish JM had spent more time arguing alternative murder scenarios and not wedded himself to one, emphasizing to the jury that it doesn't matter which weapon came first in the attack, and that they don't need to figure out what happened in that hallway -- only to conclude that the end result, TA's death, was part of Jodi's plan. In that regard, I wish he'd hammered more on the point that the evidence tells us that Jodi brought BOTH deadly weapons with her (TA owned a gun and at least one bullet, but no other ammo? No gun cleaning items or accessories? Ridiculous. No knife in the house was known to be missing, and none in the house matched his wounds). Even if she hadn't brought them with her, the amount of overkill and the fact that she didn't utilize the many opportunities to "escape" completely negates the idea of self-defense. As such, it doesn't matter which weapon she planned to, or did, use first. The plan and the result are still there, established beyond a reasonable doubt -- hence, premeditation.
3 - I wish JM had engaged in a more lengthy discussion to the effect that, "mistakes and messes don't negate premeditation." I have seen intelligent and thoughtful comments from people on this board, who are conversant with all of the evidence, who get hung up on this idea that "Jodi did a shoddy clean-up job, so it couldn't have been premeditated." A plan doesn't have to be fool-proof. It doesn't have to get carried out as intended. A killer doesn't have to do a "good job" in order to be guilty of murder 1. JM could have suggested that her original plan WAS for a "clean kill" in the shower that wouldn't have required a clean-up. Not only that, but Jodi actually DID do an incredibly good job of cleaning up, given the short time frame she had to work with. She spent hours in that house, had sex in at least 2 different locations and brutally slaughtered someone, and the only evidence she left behind was a couple of hairs, a single handprint, and a couple of partial footprints from shoes that can't be located/traced to her? (As for the camera -- I don't think she meant to throw it in the washer, and even if she did, it was a reasonable presumption that deleted photos from a camera washed in bleach were not going to be recoverable!!!) Seriously, not bad. O.J. left 100x more D.N.A. and physical evidence behind, and he was still acquitted.
I don't know what's going on in the jury room any more than anyone else, but I suspect that if they're hung up on some issues, these are likely suspects.
