Yes, there are a few things by FA that really should be clarified here.
Investigators testified (as seen in the surveillance) that ZA never came to the aid of her child when being attacked by her father, but instead was seen choking FA as her husband was being pulled off of FA by others. And FA told officers the same when interviewed at the hospital. However, during the trial, FA testified that her mother was holding her down at her neck and chest, but she did not think her mother was trying to hurt her.
IMO, ZA was very much the aggressor. She previously attacked FA's boyfriend at the HS, causing the school to take out a no trespass order against ZA, banning her from school property, as did the parents of the minor student who took out a PTO against ZA. I think it was ZA who sent the father to the school where he assaulted FA. ZA already knew FA was safe- she'd followed her early that morning and saw her in the parking lot of Safeway before school hours-- which start at 7:30 AM.
Relative to the why evidence of a forced marriage was not allowed during the trial, this was because FA recanted the allegation she first made to teachers and investigators-- when later being questioned by the defense under oath.
During the trial, without being specific, FA was asked by the defense if she had lied during questioning, and later told the truth, and FA responded yes. They also got her to admit that she often lied to her parents, but we don't know what about--they could very well be meaningless fibs!
Nonetheless, these are my concerns for the jurors not finding intent by ZA. MOO