[Valpal1]

I'm thinking that Feldman wanted SCOTUS to suppress the 1st day of interview as well as the 2nd day that Mudd did suppress. Which would have effectively caused at least a mistrial, since all that testimony would then be pulled from the official transcript and instructions given to the jury to disregard it. (At this point, a bad thing for defense).

So, I do not think there will be new information coming out. Unless Dusek gets an e-mail from SCOTUS unsealing the second day (not likely, IMO).

I am going to admit now, PUBLICLY, that Pfingst screwed up big time by arresting and charging the suspect so early in the investigation. Had he waited, prosecution would have had much more time to develop its case, as is, he gave the advantage to the defense.

I will say that the defense needs a NOT GUILTY verdict. If there is a hung jury/mistrial and the prosecution gets a second crack at doing this, they will get a guilty verdict the second time around. I imagine this in in Dusek's daily prayers to the patron saint of prosecutor's.

[UCANSEE2]

I agree that PFingst screwed up big time.

Even if DW is guilty, he could get away with it.

If they get a mistrial/hung jury, I am not so sure they can win.

I think that it is possible police may decide to explore/develop the leads they ignored, and may get somewhere with them. If that leads back to DW, so be it.

If it leads somewhere else, that will be interesting.

My hope is that the results of this total fiasco will be that eventually they find out who really did this.

[Freedom2specul8]

They might have worried he could be a flight risk

[truth_seeker]

I will say that the defense needs a NOT GUILTY verdict. If there is a hung jury/mistrial and the prosecution gets a second crack at doing this, they will get a guilty verdict the second time around.

It takes ALL 12 to Convict; it takes ALL 12 for Not Guilty. Any other jury conclusion results in mistrial, and the strong probability of another trial of DW.

So far, the murder was committed by:

1. David Allen Westerfield,
2. Someone from among the Van Dam household and visitors,
3. Unidentified "outsider."

Notwithstanding the Wednesday testimony, the greatest amount of evidence remains against DAW. Wednesday may have eroded the strength regarding the child-porn on the computer, but did not touch the other evidence pointing to DAW.

I predict at least one juror will hold out for conviction of DAW, based on the physical evidence (blood, DNA, fibers). Result: Retrial.

[bvw]

If there is a hung jury/mistrial and the prosecution gets a second crack at doing this, they will get a guilty verdict the second time around

Since I'm not anywhere near SD to guage public opinion, my opinion on this has to be classed as specualtion, but even so I think you underestimate the "popped balloon" effect. The overinflated demon Westerfield balloon has been popped, it will not reinflate for a retrial.