I'm not even sure why this is an issue here. MM didn't mention she was abused, DM's defense did and she responded in the affirmative. I can only guess that was brought up to show that MS is an abusive creep and entirely capable of hurting someone to get what he wants. Taking the spotlight off of DM for a moment and causing the jury to think the worst of MS.
But really, it all seems like smoke and mirrors to me. The defense really has nothing except pointing fingers at each other's client because they both know they're both guilty. Now it's just a matter of which side can make the other side look more like a vile monster. To me, they both do.
moo.
How did that information get to the attorney's do you think? There is only two possibilities;
- Smich told his attorneys he was abusing MM (Not likely)
- MM made it know during her police interview.
So lets not give her a pass because she was asked about it. She was only asked about it because she told them about it.