Understanding why someone committed a crime is not a requirement for determining one's innocence or guilt, but rather a fanciful way of satisfying the rubber-neckers in our society.
Nobody knows why Scott Peterson killed his wife - would knowing the reason why change the fact that he would get at least the minimum of a life sentence? According to this little game, he could please a 2 and get off with minimum damamge. Dead people don't talk, so he could claim the child belonged to another man.
This is jury tampering plain and simple.