Is this the method to the madness? I am no estate planner, but could these people be this sick? I go back to their outrage about the jewelry, We want those back Jackie.
Excellent point, RR!!!
So, let's see. If Connor never makes it out of the womb b/f dying, then he doesn't inherit and no one can inherit from him.
If Connor DOES make it to birth b/f he dies, then... as you said, in this case, there is no way to tell if it was he or Laci who died first, and it appears they died in a "common disaster". In that case, I believe the legal presumption would be made that Connor predeceased Laci. So it all ends with: who is the heir of Laci's separate property(the inheritance)? (Dennis and Sharon, I think.)
So, as I think you are saying here, that legal PRESUMPTION that Connor died first must be overcome. So, they want to try to show that Connor lived some time after his birth, a fair time after his mother was dead. Then, as you said, when Connor died, SCOTT was his heir.
At first glance I figured Geragos was making this argument only with the specific intent of proving Peterson couldn't have murdered his wife. But if it's also being made underhandedly so that down the road if Peterson is found innocent he also claims his wife's estate then I'd say it borders on the sleazy, though some might call it good lawyering. ;^)