This. I think it was a purposeful move (likely someone else's call and they just told him to talk). Same with Waters. Why interject their opinion which may lead to a mistrial? Because the looting/burning can continue and the case can be tried again (vs not guilty) guaranteeing it never ends, thus continuing to use him and GF as pawns.
He's fanning the flames in hopes of a Not-Guilty ruling.
Making the bad guys feel like the victims.
This. I think it was a purposeful move (likely someone else's call and they just told him to talk). Same with Waters. Why interject their opinion which may lead to a mistrial? Because the looting/burning can continue and the case can be tried again (vs not guilty) guaranteeing it never ends, thus continuing to use him and GF as pawns.
If the jurors are properly sequestered, then it shouldn't make a difference.