That is not really the point.
Let us assume that DA has a low IQ.
Irrespective of that, he has been cooperating with LE on this case for about a year now, and just in September he tells them stuff that results in him being charged. What that means is that all the stuff he told them before is not truthful.
Now, lets us assume the prosecution offers him some sort of deal and gets him to testify in court.
The first thing the defence is going to do on cross is rake him over all the stuff he told police prior to September that was not true. They are going to go back and forth to poke holes in his story, reveal the contradictions and insist he explain. Remember, this is a guy with an IQ of 70, we are told. How well do you think he is going to stand up to cross examination from a lawyer who most definitely has an IQ considerably higher than that.
He is going to be a sitting duck and the defence is going to rip whatever his testimony is to shreds. Then later, in closing, they will point out all these contradictions to the jury, and point out that DA has been given multiple rewards for his co-operation. Firstly on his original unrelated charges, and secondly on charges related to Holly. So, the defence will argue, he has every incentive to lie, and not only that, has already lied or mislead LE. He cannot be believed. The defence will then offer an alternative scenario, namely that DA and DA alone was responsible for Holly, since he is the only one implicating himself. A plausible alternative scenario establishes reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt results in acquittal. IMO this will be the defence tactic if the trial goes ahead and DA is used as a state witness. He is a liability for the prosecution, but he is also critical for their case. Therein lies their dilemma.
The only way the prosecution can counter that is if they can corroborate what he claims, but they were apparently not able to do that for a year. Remember, that had already executed warrants multiple times prior to the ones done in September, so, if there was material evidence there, they should have found it because that is specifically what they were looking for. That means that whatever physical evidence they might gather at best might implicate DA, but probably not the others.
Whether you wish to believe it or not the NEW DA has said the evidence against ZA&JA is 'VOLUMINOUS." So it is illogical to think nothing was found against the two main suspects when search warrants were done.
In fact once the three day search warrant in February 2014 was completed of Zach Adams home and property shortly after he was arrested for the specific charges of aggravated kidnapping and murder with JA following shortly afterwards. At that time according to Dylan's mom the TBI had just begun to talk with Dylan the night before his brother was arrested. So all that they have against ZA&JA is not just the words of Dylan Adams.
In an investigation of this magnitude it is always a work in progress and when more is revealed other search warrants are obtained now looking for specific items...i.e..mattress most likely in Zach Adams' bedroom and the flooring taken, again most likely in Zach Adams bedroom.
Who has said that Dylan has lied? I have not seen that verified anywhere. It is rather typical that all who are being interviewed by LE doesn't tell everything they know right off the bat. The police knows that and often it takes numerous interviews for the person to tell everything they really know so that is why they continue talking to the person rather than doing one interview and that's it.
I don't think Dylan has lied. What he is doing is little by little is giving more information and confessing to his own part in this viscous gang rape.
On one hand you want to conveniently make him into having a low IQ but then are trying to say he was the sole mastermind behind the entire kidnapping, rapes and murder and the jury is going to believe that.LOL! That is not going to fly because it makes no sense. This was Zach Adams home where he lived and he was right there being ringmaster along with his buddy, JA.
Dylan Adams will not be the 'get out of free' card for either main suspects. He will be deemed credible on the witness stand. IF he does have a low IQ that will work in his favor because it shows him incapable of being the mastermind behind Holly's kidnapping, rapes, and murder. Along with his testimony DA will enter the voluminous amounts of evidence Stowe said he has against ZA&JA. Dylan is not the leader in that family. He is a follower and I have no doubt that several witness will testify to that. His narcissistic violent sociopathic brother masterminded all of this along with JA.
Reasonable doubt is very easy to say and much much harder to obtain. That is obvious since the majority of trials end in convictions. The kicker is 'reasonable' and there is nothing reasonable that Dylan was the only one involved.
I have seen that defense strategy tried many times against the key witness. I have seen witnesses come in shackled and chained, yet time after time, after time, after time, the jury does believe the witness even though they have baggage of their own. They are believed because other evidence entered supported their testimony. This will be the case here.
When DA Stowe announced he has voluminous evidence in these cases he meant it and once all of these cases come to trial some will be shocked about how much evidence they really did have.
If I had a dollar for every time I have seen it posted 'I don't think they have any evidence to prove the case' I could go out and have a fantastic lobster and steak dinner several times over.
Why some wish to believe this I have no clue. It is like 'well if they don't disclose all the evidence they have to the public at large that must mean they don't have any.'
ZA&JA will be convicted based on eye witnesses backed up by the voluminous evidence that has been collected showing guilt. No DA goes to trial and even is considering the death penalty based on eye witness testimony alone.
That is why DA Stowe hasn't budged one inch on the charges against ZA&JA.
And reasonable doubt rarely results in an acquittal. At best it may cause a hung jury with one lone wolf holdout but 12 people who sit on this case are never going to agree that reasonable doubt exists in this case.
It is far fetched to think the recent SW didn't reveal any further evidence against ZA&JA. It was just done less than a month ago. Forensic evidence on any case comes back periodically and takes time. And at anytime the police or DA can decide to have further evidence forensically tested they have in their possession. That is why in many cases like this the discovery continues to come back in even months or years later. I have seen other cases where forensic lab results were still coming back shortly before trial and those were cases where the defendant had been in jail awaiting trial for years.
The only ones in the courtroom that will be leaving duck feathers everywhere is the two that are charged.
IMO
So what's the status with JPs charges now ?
