So here's the situation. We're prosecuting a babysitter for capital murder. And despite the temptation, I have not brought out her long, long history of child abuse.

She has an older daughter who is expected to testify today that she never saw any evidence of abuse on the younger kids or on the babysat kids when she was in the house with them and the Defendant.
Here's the rub. That older daughter testified in a custody hearing in 1992 in which she heartbreakingly recounted a huge number of abusive incidents the defendant inflicted upon her when she lived with up until the age of about 8. (yes, she lost custody).
I've heard through the grapevine that she has recanted this testimony to others and said that other family members put her up to it.
I have a written statement she gave after the murder basically saying that she never saw abuse on the other kids and that it was like night and day between how the defendant treated her vs. the younger kids.
So who would cross her on the prior testimony, and how?
Seems to me if she really recants it, I ought to be able to get into the fact that she's admitting perjury.
If she doesn't recant, I'd sure like to ask her about what she said back then....
6 days of testimony, 4 trial briefs, and an entire day with Bayardo later, my brain is pickled, so any ideas or input from the trenches is greatly appreciated!

Lisa, I hated seeing your post without any input from the trenches. You have long completed your case and I am interested in hearing what happened during trial.I would have tried to impeach with the prior testimony. Sometimes you never really know what the truth is but that is the reason we have juries. You know your defendant was abusive so why not use all there is to convict her.Can't imagine reversible error.Hope you got a good verdict and a decent nights sleep! Martha

After thinking long and hard on it, I didn't use the prior testimony.
The daughter really didn't hurt us too bad, so I figured why put this obviously dysfunctional, abused young woman through it, AND more importantly, why give them another issue to write about on appeal.
I had already gotten the judge to keep out two of their most critical defensive witnesses (love that strawman line of cases!) so I didn't think I should go to the well too often.
Jury came back with capital in about 4 hours, they'd already connected the dots and figured there was a lot more out there. They were aghast when they found out just how much there was!
Thanks for asking
Lisa