Well it's with the jury now. I was worried yesterday when Terry did his 'emotional' closing. At times he went off on inexplicable tangents, like questioning Hearn's version of how he killed Rob. It was absolutely pointless and has no bearing on her guilt or complicity at all. Presumably he was doing it trying to somehow prove that Hearn is a liar, but it backfired spectacularly. Hearn has admitted everything - it makes no sense for him to lie about the modus operandi, plus his account of the shooting is backed up by the ballistics/forensics. Sabrina Limon on the other hand has lied at every single opportunity and it has been easy for the prosecution to expose those lies - again supported by evidence 'in her own words' calls, texts, written in cards, and notes and so on. All Terry succeeded in doing with his lengthy diatribe, was boring the courtroom and those watching. Even the judge was yawning spectacularly throughout the defence closing. What I found in particularly poor taste was the use of the children in his final plea to the jury 'these kids have already lost their dad, don't take away their mom'.
Thankfully, Smith addressed this immediately in his summation. He was pithy, concise, cited evidence to back up his arguments (unlike Terry who just cited theories and hypothesis) and I think has done enough to get her convicted. I do hope so. She is facing an array of charges and it would beggar belief that she would get away with all of them.
She is not a likeable individual in the sense that she did not come across at all well in court. During the prosecution case she was sullen, slumped in her chair, continually shaking her head and grimacing and hiding behind her hair.
When she was called to the stand by her lawyer she came alive, all cutesy smiles and little girl lost looks as well as smiles, shrugs and exasperated looks to the jury of the 'I'm so bewildered as to why I'm even here' kind. It was frankly embarrassing at times and so transparent. Then on the penultimate day, Mr Terry clearly did something to upset his client. When called to the stand she was visibly annoyed, tight lipped, rolling her eyes and shaking her head and the little girl lost act had been dropped. Her attorney, clearly realising something was up, got her off the stand as quickly as possible and the defence case fizzled out.
During the closing statement and summation by the prosecutor she was back to slumping in her chair, shaking her head, and mumbling and grumbling to herself. Also her body language sitting next to Mr Terry again reflected she is not happy with him. She never glanced or spoke to him once and was turned away from him, almost showing him her back - as much as you can be when sitting directly next to someone.
Personally if I were on that jury I would vote Guilty in a heartbeat. No doubt at all in my mind of her guilt. However, we all know how juries can surprise us, so all we can do is wait.