Not sure it is farce.
Sounds like the framework for an entrapment defence, especially as the judge may very well throw out all that silly cunt's "investigative" shit, which is full of leading questions and prompts. It's all hugely prejudicial and there's plenty of previous instances of OPL getting so wrapped up in troll attempts even to his detriment in the past that an easy defence is "he made it up to please her."
There was a famous failed prosecution here ( Rachel Nickell murder) where an undercover cop was sent in to pander to the fantasies of a sad little man in the hope of getting a confession. She did, but it was so tainted the whole lot was slung out. And in this case, the persona this Bella has spattered all over the internet is depraved enough that any sad little man who'll say whatever he thinks a woman wants to hear could easily lead to invented stories of equal/greater depravity.
We know it's not a story. But we're not an impartial jury whose never heard of any of this. I dunno how many roofies it'd take to keep CWC quiet but if he can be prevented from interrupting his own defence it's a pretty thin prosecution. Dunno the rules of entrapment in the US but it is a thing. We got any law bods?
@AnOminous ? Can you give us any insight on this, pretty pliz?