IMO -
1. i think trying SG and KM together is great news for the prosecution. i think when the jury looks over at that table and sees them both sitting side by side together and hears and sees the evidence against them (video surveillance, cash transactions, etc), it will really help the jury visualize this conspiracy and eventually they'll say - "yup. i can see how this played out. they did it. guilty." especially when you throw in what will be Luis Rivera's riveting testimony against both of them. this is worth the delay IMO. now these two are tied to the hip. not sure i'd want to be tied to SG's hip when they got him on video near the crime scene and they got his partner in crime testifying against him. i think this is ultimately very bad news for the alleged masterminds. if SG and KM go down together, the alleged masterminds are cooked.
2. as i've said before, i don't think either will sing against the alleged masterminds until post-conviction. i think SG's "machismo" doesn't let him rat on the mother of his kids. we know KM already REJECTED AN IMMUNITY DEAL! WHY? i think KM is repeatedly being reassured by her bad-advice attorneys (who's their REAL client, who is their puppet-master? who are they really protecting?) that she will easily beat this thing and that there's an even bigger pot of gold ($1M?) waiting for her when this is all over. the reality will only set in on KM when she hears that guilty verdict. THEN perhaps she can and will cut a deal. but until then, i think she's got dollar signs in her eyes. she's holding out for the big payday. the big reward for keeping her mouth shut.
3. i get that defense attorneys need to advocate and argue for their clients. but i think it's despicable IF any are involved in communicating or facilitating the bribery of a co-conspirator in a crime in order to gain her silence in order to protect their client AT HER OWN JEOPARDY! how is that ethical? presumably the alleged masterminds would not/can not directly communicate with KM (or SG for that matter) - for ~2 years. so how would an alleged bribe and reassurance be communicated? from attorney to attorney? perhaps located in the same building? if true, it's despicable and it should be grounds for permanent disbarment. and we still don't know who's paying for all of these legal fees! i don't mind honest lawyers advocating for their clients, but i don't like crooked lawyers doing unethical things and crossing the line if that's what's happening here. the possibility of that outrages me almost as much as the murder because if it's happening it's a mockery of our justice system.
constant communication, dangling big $1M pot of gold for silence, and reassurance? if so, unethical??? -
KM<----->KM's Attorneys<----->CA's Attorney<----->CA
