Donald Fear (Tracy's defense attorney)

As the state said, this is purely a circumstantial case.

She was arrested in the first 36 hours in a homicide case, and that's just unheard of unless it happens to be standing there with the smoke and gun screaming, I did it, I killed him.

You have a detective corporal who wants to be a detective sergeant. A high-profile homicide case comes across his desk. Make a quick arrest, make a quick case, you look good, you make sergeant.

Where did she kill him? They tore the house apart and if she killed him in there, she had white carpet. Miami CSI needs to hire her to show how she can defeat all possible scientific trace evidence, dragging a body across a house through vehicles and then out on the ground.

No, I found her confused. You saw interrogation questions aimed at trying to make her look bad and trip her up.

And she looked bad. And she looked bad. And that's how it's supposed to work. Break them down. Who knows? Maybe they'll pull a Perry Mason. I did it. I killed him. God help me. They didn't get that, so you just keep beating on her. And it worked. It worked real well.

I think where y'all come from, they call them Shylocks.

And he had $25,000 cash on him. that he took from the bank to buy the boat.

Not a thing. But the first ex-wife did. What are you suggesting? I'm suggesting stating a fact.

She's secondary beneficiary, but in all reality, as her son is the primary beneficiary, she got the money. Tracy Frame got nothing. So who stood to gain the most?

We cannot get a handle on even what their theory of the crime was.

Tracy Frame is the only person on the planet that would absolutely not have killed David, that would have put money into getting him a bodyguard if he had been threatened, because the only way she was ever going to get her money back out of the thousands she'd spent on him was to keep him alive and selling houses.

You know, we're going to show you the smoke and mirrors for two weeks, and you're just going to be overwhelmed by so much smoke. There must be a fire somewhere.

It was all inference, coincidence, could be, maybe, looks good. Well, that isn't enough to convict somebody of murder.

Actually, we're confident that we're going to be successful, and the jury will say that clearly my client is not guilty. As a lawyer, who knows?