Her defense will be, "I'm a skinny, helpless old lady who simply did what my son told me to do." The prosecution will introduce her vicious emails, action at the bump, and the wiretaps to prove otherwise. Paraphrasing along the lines of "It is about you and me and this TV will cost 5 thousand dollars."
It will be an event if DA testifies on her behalf. Does anyone believe she can hold it together on cross?
She might offer, as a defense, that she didn’t know anything at all until months after the murder when Charlie came to her and told her to put Katie on the payroll so she could get insurance for her kids. She could then possibly explain the bump calls as her being afraid the feds were onto her and Charlie for insurance fraud, or that Katie’s friends had heard about the payroll scam and weee shaking them down for money. (“It concerns the two of us and an ex girlfriend.”).
Katie did testify that the money was wet and appeared to have been washed, (did she say in her proffer that Charlie told her his mom washed it? The search warrants seem suggest she did, but I don’t recall her saying that on the stand, only that she thought it might have been washed.) Her lawyer could try to discredit Katie as a liar and convicted murderer.
The cell tower records do show Donna outside Charlie’s house on the night of the murder, and there are some texts between her and Charlie indicating she is outside his house, so her lawyers might have to try to get around that somehow.
There are those emails, but her attorneys might try to argue, as Rashbaum did, that those emails show that she was trying to use LEGAL means to get Dan to agree to the relocation, and the emails mention nothing about murder. I’m not saying it will work, but it might be something her attorneys might try. She might say she knew nothing, Charlie did this himself.
The attempted flight to Vietnam does show consciousness of guilt, in my opinion that could be a problem for her.
m.flsenate.gov
