To have one juror find any credibility to "the story" - and why introduce sexual abuse in opening statements when you claim your client did not kill her child?
What does possible sexual abuse have to do with innocence in a murder trial. This trial is not about family ties, it is about the murder of Caylee. The guilt phase is about "How" the penalty phase is about "Why".
How could sexual abuse be introduced that went on and on and have anything to do with ICA's guilt or innocence of murder? George has not been charged as a co-conspirator in this murder trial.
Not saying he is a co-conspirator. I think the defense is going to say she reacted the way she did (31 days) because she was sexually abused for years and years and that is that. And she is not reacting normally because of the ongoing abuse. Her lying is also proof of abuse. I don't know people who are abused, sexually, lie and steal.
I don't think they are going to say she did it. They are not using zannie anymore because Linda said that was a lie. So I don't know what they are going to say about the child missing. I think they are going to say someone took her and paralyzed KC (in mind here) could not deal with it because of the extreme sexual abuse that she has endured over th e years by George.
I think they are giong to use sexual abuse.