How have defense counsel in a murder case argued that there was intent to kill regardless of the identity of the accused?

As we observed above, counsel does not render ineffective assistance by choosing one or several theories of defense over another. (People v. Thomas, supra, 2 Cal.4th 489, 531-532, 7 Cal. Rptr.2d 199, 828 P.2d 101.) By arguing as they did, defense counsel were able to focus upon the failure of the witnesses to identify defendant correctly as the killer, while at the same time seeking to undermine the assertion that there had been intent to kill regardless of the identity of the killer. The alternative approach that defendant here advocates, in effect, would have conceded defendant was the killer, in contravention of the chief defense theory. Defense counsel justifiably selected the former approach.