From your link: "On the other hand, prosecutors also get a bit of a win, as the court decided the state can talk about Gonzales' and Kelley’s drug use on the night Victoria Martens was killed." If he had been stealing cars, would they only be allowed to prosecute him, for that very last one? The one that got him caught? Where here, all past drug use, led to all the crimes leading up to this horrifying murder. Of an innocent ten (10) year old child. How can that not be used? I wonder if any of their own words (legal statements) mentioned their previous drug use? Then it would be admissible, eh? I may be off on a wild goose chase. But, I wonder?