Personally I think it’s a mistake unless the only way she could testify truthfully would mean she would have to admit criminal liability in her daughter’s death. And if that’s true, then it is indeed “astonishing” as commenter April has said, that a plea deal wasn’t reached long ago.
There’s already been a lot of vituperation from the media over this decision, insisting that the defense came up empty on delivering what was promised in the opening.
Now, that is not necessarily true at all. The pundits have been so deaf to anything favoring the defense that there might be a lot in evidence, and no one has yet guessed what it might mean. And they won’t know until the closing arguments, when Baez or whoever closes brings these things up. And even then the media might not accurately report on it.
One good thing that happened here is that a lot of people got to see what it’s like when the judge is biased, and there have been many complaints. I can tell you from a lawyer’s perspective it is extremely frustrating and it always seems there is little you can do about it.
The fact of the matter is that it’s a lot more likely that a jury will find guilt when the defendant doesn’t testify. They are warned not to infer anything from it, but it is human nature that you want to see the defendant, well, defend themselves.
We have a prosecution rebuttal case to go, but it’s hard to see what would be in it, or what they feel they have to rebut. After that, unless a sur-rebuttal is allowed, which would be unusual, the closing arguments and then the jury has it.