GThe defense will have to prove there is reasonable doubt - that Casey did not have possession of that car during the entire time. There's nothing saying that anyone else had possession or access to that car when Caylee went missing. There is allegedly Caylee's decomposition in the car meaning that a dead human was there. If they could only identify the Mitochrondrial DNA from the hair, we know that Cindy and Casey are alive so, by process of elimination, it would have to be Caylees. Remember they have to prove REASONABLE doubt , not FANTASY doubt
yes, and while I agree with this, (not sure why my post was quoted?) the defense team's cards remain to be seen, and it is up to the jury to determine what is "reasonable", not you or me
I think that was the attorney's point...
I just think that assuming a "slam dunk" either way is a stretch. You just never, never know what will come out at trial...fortunately, I don't think they will produce any information that exonerates Casey whatsoever...in fact, I feel that there will be more damning evidence introduced
I also think that the fact that Baez keeps reiterating "when Casey tells her story, everyone will understand" will hurt their defense, because they will HAVE no story, and no one will understand...and it doesn't answer WHY if the "answer" is so clear, she wouldn't just tell the story now, to find her daughter.
I mean, if it is all going to come out in a few months anyway, why not spill it now, and help us find this daughter that you swear is alive, and with the nanny?
I think that will really hurt them, and no jury will be sympathetic to that...