I kinda got lost at the end (partly because I was listening on my phone when I left my house to go buy wine), but I believe the defense poked some holes in what Rivera said about SG and KM being in communication during the murder trip (or maybe the June trip?) They were able to say that SG and KM were not in "constant contact" as Rivera asserted. But I probably missed some stuff because it was so very tedious.
I wasn't following closely either (got boring) - but yes, I think KM's team scored some points. I could be wrong but this is what I got:
1) Corbett conceded that he couldn't say that the phone communications btwn KM and SG and btwn KM and CA during the July 18 time period were unusual/out of the ordinary for them.
2) Corbett also said there was nothing in the phone records to support LR's claim that SG was on the phone with KM before noon on July 17th (the alleged call when LR said they saw the lady with the kids on Trescott).
3) Corbett conceded that cell tower information for KM's phone on the morning of July 19th -
i.e., going towards CA's home -- is also near or in the direction of KM's brother's home.
4) Corbett acknowledged that the prosecutor failed to bring out on direct that the July 19 records show a call first from KM to LR and then from LR to KM -- meaning LR was wrong when he (apparently) said that he did not call KM.
5) This part I'm really not sure about but I think KM's attorney's brought out that the alleged July 19th KM/LR phone communications were NOT with the phone number associated with LR's phone, rather it was with a number that was one digit different than LR's number.
Also, it seems KM's attorneys plan to bring in text msgs btwn KM and CA that seem to indicate that there was at least one direct communication btwn SG and CA (I guess supporting KM's theory that CA could have hired SG directly).
Not saying any of these points are earth shattering and perhaps some of it will be cleared up on re-direct. Feel free to correct any of the above that may be incorrect! JMO.
