OK, there are several ways this can go.
A. Jodi gets back on the stand and continues her testimony, including cross.
B. Jodi refuses to continue her testimony.
1. JSS could have JM cross-examine her (because she's waived her right to remain silent as to the issues on which she's already testified) and tell the jury that if she refuses to respond they may assume she agrees with what JM says. IMO this will not happen because no one has the cojones to suggest it lol.
2. JM could agree to let her testimony stand and "cross-examine" through video snippets from JA's prior testimony. This is possible.
3. JM could agree to let her testimony stand and just comment in closing on whatever she said--e.g., her testimony was inconsistent, no real expression of remorse, no serious mitigation, etc. This is possible.
4. JSS could agree to treat the testimony as allocution and re-instruct the jury that they are permitted to consider that it was not given subject to cross-examination. This is possible.
5. JM could ask for the testimony to be stricken from the record, and indeed, in one of the sidebars released today, that's what he said would have to be done. IMO this is the most likely result if JA refuses to continue, but is a poor strategic choice on the part of JM as he then can't comment on the testimony in closing.