See, this is where I think the prosecution saying it happened in the house might be a big barrier. We here at WS's are having to make it more complex to make the evidence fit, make all the calls fit in, the toy search, the toys in the back of the truck, etc. I sure hope the prosecution can come up with a cohesive timeline that the jury can 'believe'.
I really dont think it will be that big of a problem for the state.
I'm positive in their CA they will layout succinctly the evidence they have presented for the jury. They will probably use visuals on huge screens throughout the courtroom listing all the the CE that points to the home being the most reasonable and logical conclusion where the murders happened.
The state can also legally tell them in CA they do not have the legal burden of proving where it happened or even what happened or even why it happened.
The only burden they have to prove BARD is the evidence proves CM did it no matter where, why,or what happened.
The jury knows it did happen and are now sitting in judgment of the one accused.
Every criminal trial I've sat on we were advised during jury instructions what the state was legally required to prove BARD and that was solely determining if the defendant was guilty or not guilty based on all of the evidence entered.
In some of the state's CA they went line by line citing the law of what they had to prove and what they weren't required by law to prove.
In a couple of cases in the state's closing they stressed to us since no one was there at the time when the murder occurred but the victim and the accused the DA based their theory on what is known. Also stressing there will be always be questions that can't be answered.* many of us can attest to that right here because all questions are never fully answered in any murder case we may follow.
They even told us we could have our own theories/opinion based on the evidence we had heard.
All we had to agree on unanimously was whether all 12 agreed the defendant was either guilty BARD or not guilty. If all 12 couldn't agree one way or the other then of course it would result in a hung jury.
If all those things were legally required burdens of any prosecutors then missing body murder cases couldn't ever be brought or a suspect arrested since most of the where, when, what happened or even how they were murdered remain unknowns.
Yet they are successfully won now like any other murder case through entering compelling CE like they are doing in this case.
As the state's case proceeds I think at the end of it when the state lays out all of the CE facts, one by one, pointing to the home being the logical location where the murders occurred the jury will agree even though they are allowed to have their own theories/opinions where they believe it occurrred. They do not have to be in agreement. One can think it was at another location and 11 may think it was at their home for example.
Imo