Opinion:
But the Indiana LE were not the same LE as in Idaho.
So now we have a picture of various "inconsistencies" from various, unrelated LE agencies. That, to me is normal. Inconsistencies are normal and rarely pose any problems in court (because raising them can damage the defense as much as the prosecution - in many cases, moreso). I think this is one of those cases.
Your argument seems to be that LE is inconsistent, rather than that "all human investigations are inconsistent, so we should expect inconsistencies." I think the consistency argument gets weaker every year, as more and more jurors understand what investigations are like - with help from the various attorneys involved. It becomes a matter of ordinary reason and common sense. If every LE agency across the US is "inconsistent," then what do we do about law enforcement and murder?
It's up to the jury to decide (and they do).
The early inconsistencies are all explainable and very unlikely to come up at the actual trial, as the defense doesn't want cans of worms. The Coroner alone is responsible for about half of these inconsistencies, and the vagaries of investigation for the other - as we're seeing in the Murdaugh trial. Inconsistencies abound, but the jury has to sort them out. "Crime of passion" vs "LE receives information in a particular order, gradually getting a full picture..." well, I don't think the jury will ever hear the phrase 'Crime of passion' or "targeted" in this entire trial. I don't know why they would.
Do you think that the defense will bring those things up? I don't. It will just make their situation far, far worse. They need to stay away from any of that rhetor.
IMO, IME.
It's behind us. The strategies for bringing someone to the court of justice are quite different (fortunately) from those involved in convicting them. The defense doesn't want to give any hint that BK could have committed a crime of passion - and if they choose to introduce that notion, I think his goose is cooked, because the prosecution has its own strategy for turning that around on him.
IOW, LE is not going to be harangued at trial; it's all about whether BK is guilty. At trial, IMO.
I do understand that some people are still caught up in the first couple of weeks of what people in Moscow said - but it's not going to look consistent to a jury. IMO.
Although it would be very interesting to call the coroner to the stand and let both sides have at her (if that's what happens). The medical examiners (from Spokane) will then be called and I am pretty sure the Coroner's "inconsistent" phrasing will go down the drain. But I don't fault her or the 'crime of passion' mayor, either. Most of us understand what it's like in the first days of a major crime (we just imagine it if we haven't been through it).
IMO.
