This guy has bonafides. All the prosecutor needs is to give the juror a reason to believe the other bug guys might be wrong and the subject will remain on the physical evidence which unless the defense can show that some kids actually got in the RV.
Secondly, why should a juror believe that one entomologist that differs is better than two that concur?
Remember that it's very likely that not one juror knows anything of the science beyond what they are hearing in the courtroom.
Lastly, do not forget that Feldman doesn't make the big bucks for nothing. This is his thing. For all you know he may damage Goff pretty well and may highlight the prosecution's depseration in the process.
Do not forget that Faulkner was HIRED BY THE PROSECUTION.
It is reasonable to assume that all the jurors don't see all evidence and experts the same. You act as if each will see it through your eyes. That's an unwise assumption, to say the least.
All we need to do to be reminded of poor decisions on Dusek's part is to think back on 180-Frank. I'm putting my money on Feldman's experts (one of which reported first to Dusek & Co.) looking best in the end.