I get the impression that this is a woman who has always been in control of events, circumstances and other people - including her own children - and is indignant that the control has been taken away from her. She doesn't think she should be there right now - in her mind, she is Donna Adelson the Miami socialite and matriarch of the wealthy Adelson clan, and not a common criminal. There is barely-suppressed rage and contempt in her face.
I think you're on the money there. I think in her mind she is completely conflicted. The Chimp in her head is arrogantly telling her she will walk out of court a free woman, the more logical voice has been silenced. An issue (IMO) exacerbated by sycophantic legal representation.
e.g I'm assuming DA checked with Fulford that she was going to claim her trip to a non extradition country was because it would be easier to return to the US when charged. Did Fulford, an ex judge, really think this was going to fly in a court of law?? A better option would be to simply claim she was innocent, but feared arrest (guilty by association) hence the flee. Sometimes innocent people are jailed.
Same with CA. Even if the double extortion theory did happen and was the truth, DR should have told CA, this will never be accepted in court, not in a month of Sundays. You will be laughed out of the courtroom (in handcuffs). It wasn't DR's job to question CA over what happened or to imply to him that he might be lying, but it was his job to be transparent with CA. To let him know that the evidence against him was overwhelming and his defence had more holes in it than a block of Swiss cheese.
Is Fulford doing the same? Schmoozing her client?