For what it's worth I'd like to express my extreme disappointment with the prosecutor's case-in-chief.
If I were charged with determining whether or not a person is GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT of kidnapping and murder, by this point in the case I would expect to know:
(1) When and how that person kidnapped the victim.
(2) When and how that person murdered the victim.
(3) When and how that person disposed of the body.
The prosecution has rested and I still don't know the answers to any of the above. In fact, except for the idea that Danielle MAY have been suffocated, I don't even know what the prosecution thinks are the answers to the above.
I do not know if DAW is innocent or not, but I certainly would have a tough time finding him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
*Henrietta, The first part, #1 - 9...states the accusations..known information. The special notes are just comments, but not meant to be represented as facts so I can modify that title to reflect it. P. Henry's post can be used for what you suggested for sure, rubutted by defense, then countered by prosecution's side. That's a good idea Henrietta. It's not actually "old" info, it's info that the jury has to use, correct? So...I'll update that with the rebuttles etc. from various resources before I post it again. (using posts, testimony etc)
*bolthead (your handle cracks me up) yes, the prosecution has rested, but they can call rebuttle witnesses after the defense rests..if it's important to their case...the purpose is to clear up potential confusion caused by defense, and counter damage or misleading info/statements etc by the defense...the closing statements are important too.
You said: "by this point in the case I would expect to know: (1) When and how that person kidnapped the victim.
(2) When and how that person murdered the victim.
(3) When and how that person disposed of the body. "
Just know, at risk of being misunderstood, I'm not being sarcastic at all. I don't think it's that simple in every case....if that were true, we wouldn't need a jury system would we? I know I've said this before, but what about those cases in which a body was never found, but the defendant got convicted? I don't think it's too late for the prosecution to connect some of the pieces together..