Trying to catch up on last night's posts. Only have way through but wanted to say something about the "weird" jury questions that many find disturbing and or pro defense. I'm not Einstein (hehe) but I've been around, believe me. I've learned to read between the lines more than hear the words that are spoken. The questions we're talking about in my mind were more about validating in the specific juror's mind what they were thinking about JA. Like the camera washing to hide evidence. The question sounded more to me like the juror wanted to hear someone like Dr. D say what they were thinking. We will never know if JA washed it on purpose or not. The juror who asked the tiger/bear thing...same thing. Juror wanted someone like Dr. D to validate what they were thinking but just used a strange way to ask it. I think the jurors like Dr. D and her calm no nonsense way of explaining things.