I'm curious if the defense calls AE and she testifies' to having had a loving happy marriage throughout , great husband and great father, no suspicions if the prosecution can use Masedonio's claims that she said she had marital problems and divorce discussions be used against her?
IMO
I think the inconsistencies in the marriage and divorce stories are more likely to come up in any possible civil trials in the future. I think the kids' lawyer was a modicum better than Asa's because it is more that lawyer and one of the kids who have been the most explicit about the divorce being about protecting assets. With that out in public, civil actions against assets that should have been Rex's but are Asa's through fraud, for damages caused by Rex, are more viable.
For Rex's criminal trial, I don't see the relevance of the marriage/divorce. Other events have already made Asa totally tainted as a witness, no matter what she witnessed. Therefore, she won't get called. Therefore it won't come up.
What could Asa say in court? " I suspected him when he did x and explained it with blah, blah." If she does this, the defense says she is lying, she's on the record calling him incapable of these crimes, a hero. She only changed her tune to profit from calling him LISK on eBay.
Or, "I never saw anything but loving husband, dad and breadwinner. [plus spousal privilege to head off uncomfortable direct questions before the jury]" The prosecution can say, sure, but you needed his support, and then got paid a million dollars to essentially say what you are saying here in court.[please, please, jury, be aware that we can't ask her the juicy questions because of privilege and/or scope!]
Asa has the most day-to-day information to fill in the blanks around the troves of documents seized. She could be the best witness for the prosecution to glue together boring documents and call logs. Yet, she is not a viable witness. It's a pity.
MOO
www.dailymail.co.uk
en.m.wikipedia.org
www.courant.com
