The flaw is that Dusek says he drove around with her in the MH dead or alive most of the weekend.Dusek has not said that explicitly.
I agree, the implication of his questions leads one to believe that is the prosecution theory of the case, though.
http://www.courttv.com/trials/westerfield/070902_ctv.html
The defense wants to add the option of second-degree murder so the jury won't have to choose between acquittal and first degree.
The prosecution doesn't want the option.
It looks like the defense is more worried about their case than the prosecution is about theirs.
IMHO of course.
Dusek has not said that explicitly. I agree with that.
Now, that the prosecution has rested (well, kinda), what others are asking about the opening statement is
DID HE ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS HE POSED?
ON a item by item list, the answer is NO.
That is why they say he failed to make his case.