It's better than letting things admitted into evidence that could be used later as a grounds for appeal (or mistrial) IMO
Just jumping off your post...
Well that's a whole other can of worms we don't need to open. I personally have a real problem with how this has transpired over the years. How juries are only getting about 50-60 percent of the facts now and how so much is thrown out as "prejudicial". All the fear of appeals and mistrials which is making judges make more rulings that the defense attorneys are using to get even more things thrown out in future cases. It's a vicious cycle. In this case, any overlapping evidence can jeopardize two or three cases so it's getting thrown out. So being charged with 2 or 3 murders is actually playing to their advantage. How is this justice? Not looking for an answer really, just venting. I know this can be a very contentious issue that would be way off topic.
MOO