One co-defendant admitted to being involved and is willing to testify against the 3 other co-defendants. One declines being there and the other two said they were there. This robbery has been labled as a prank robbery since one of the employers set this up. Will it be better to try them all seprate or the 3 against one. How would it look if the 3 co-denfendants stories are all the same and the one who is testifying is different and similar to the victim?