I am going to refrain to opine on that as all I know is from legal TV shows and movies (I include big "trials of  the century" as TV shows ) and that this kind of thing is often a tactical choice

Speaking of "trials of the century," didya see the "Three Centuries of New York Scandal" issue of New York Magazine last week? There was a lot of thought provoking stuff in it from guest writers.

This from Nora Ephron, on the Scarsdale Diet Doctor case, really struck me as crystal clear pop-culture wisdom:

This is how it is with great murders: At the very beginning, you know only the basic outline, the tabloid headline on the first-day story; so you have the maximum ability to apply your theories, your insights, your own particular life lessons—in short, your narcissism—to what happened. Every murder is a Rorschach, and the Rorschach is at its most powerful before you know too much, before the inconvenient facts get in the way, before the people involved turn out to be people after all.

I thought the prosecutor seems a little batshit too Des, only my opinion was formed because she said something to the effect of: "Please keep prayin' for us around the country so we can win our case." Prayer, you'd better more than that with you to win this case.

I have no idea if second degree is over-reach or not, I would love to see the evidence the prosecutor has tho'.  I hope her charge sticks.