Transcript for Lotto Winner Murder Trial: Evidence Against Dee Dee Moore
For more, now, let's bring in our legal team. Nancy grace and dan abrams, "gma" legal analyst. Good morning to you both. Good morning. So much to work for prosecutors. So much evidence. What do you focus on when you head into trial? Well, you know, as we're going into trial, I think the first thing that the state's got to do is humanize the victim, abraham shakespeare. He was uneducated, ill literal. And he got a quick pick ticket and his life changed forever. You think everything's going to be great. And then, he runs into dee dee moore. I would immediately then hit on her four stories that his lawyer killed him. That her 14-year-old son killed him. That a drug dealer killed abraham shakespeare. And that she killed him in self-defense. You know what? One of those stories would have worked, dee dee. But not all four. Beyond that, you've got her statements. You've got her actions. You've got ballistics. You have a gun. You have surveillance. You have just about everybody type of evidence that would be relevant in a case here against her. Very often, we will be covering these cases and say, there's no kn motive. There's a motive here. There's no ballistics. We have ballistics here. This seems like a slam-dunk case for the prosecution. This is a very strong case for the prosecution. This is florida. You never know what's going to happen. After the tot mom, casey anthony,ct, yu don't know what's going to happen. She is very convincing. Her lawyer is not going to let her take the stand. She tried to claim mental incompetency. She might overrule her lawyer and take the stand. I can't wait to see that. Let's talk about how the defense deals with all of this. It is a tough case for them to defend. I don't know how they're going to defend it. They're going to have to attack -- what they're going to have to do is attack each, individual piece of evidence, right? They have to say, the ballistics aren't that definitive. And let's separate that out, from the surveillance tape, which doesn't necessarily show her buying incriminating items. Just duct tape and other items that might have been relevant. The statement says -- when's the last time you bought duct tape and sheet metal at the walmart? Never? How about she doesn't contest the evidence. How about she accepts the evidence. Embraces the evidence and goes with self-defense? That would be a lot easier row to hoe for the defense attorney. This is a first-degree murder case. Prosecutors are not seeking the death penalty. Why do you -- why wouldn't they? I don't know. That is a mystery, wrapped in a conundrum for me. Not only did she kill him, according to the state. But catch this. She tortured his family by saying he went into hiding. And she would send these fake texts and letters to the mother, even call -- putting somebody up to calling the mother, state's witness number one, and pretending to be the son. She tortured the family, all of these months, nearly a year it could be a death penalty case, and death penalty-eligibi penalty-eligibility, doesn't mean you have to seek the death penalty in every murder case. She is cold-blooded. I will quote my friend, timothy. The love of money is the root of all evil, dan. I have to say, seeing in florida, in a case where they don't seek the death penalty in a murder case, can be refreshing. We'll leave it at that. Appreciate it. Time to get a check of the
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.