Replies

I think they will end strategically with the strongest evidence so it is freshest in the jurors' minds. However, I think the tedious-seeming testimony of MH maneuvers and and time he picked it up and left again is absolutely critical. Evidently some think evidence could be planted in order to frame DW, or that Danielle had access to the MH in the past. The prosecutor has to show this is not possible. Having numerous witnesses corroborate their observations of the MH(before they had a chance to "compare notes" or have the full picture via media, of DW's statements and such) is necessary to the State's case. Bottom line: No stall, just dotting i's and crossing t's.

Having numerous witnesses corroborate their observations of the MH(before they had a chance to "compare notes" or have the full picture via media, of DW's statements and such) is necessary to the State's case.

Granted. But are they 'tying it together' with the timelines? I've heard several who didn't seem to match up but I didn't get to hear all of it. Hopefully, before the case goes to the jury there will be charts of timelines and all the other stuff that seems confusing to me right now.