I've reviewed the cross of Alex again, and I'm just astounded at Waters' strategy.
He spent such an enormous amount of time hammering home that Alex is a thief, embezzler and liar--which backfired in my opinion because Alex did a masterful job enthusiastically admitting/owning his wrongdoing in all of that, he ultimately came off like a man who was repentant and accountable and Waters began to look like he was badgering a dude who was eagerly confessing his sins--and so little time, relatively, going after the sequence of events that night and how the circumstantial evidence appears to contradict Alex's *multiple* versions of what happened.
I know it's important to establish that nothing the man says is reliable in any way, but he went overboard attacking Alex's credibility and failed to box Alex into a corner regarding the murders and his contradictory statements/testimony.
Maybe Waters will knock it out of the park during closing arguments but at this moment I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if a juror or two feels they have a reasonable doubt.