Thanks for the post - I'm always interested in hearing opposing views.
First of all, who is the witness you mention? Whose father was this?! I didn't hear about anyone that claimed that they actually saw NH at the scene of the crime. I discount the guy changing his tire in the parking lot, since it's obvious he was going to change his story years later & lie on the witness stand - probably for $.
I'm doing more research on the case, and just finished the Dateline "The Accused" episodes re: this case. "The Accused" is less pro-defense, and does go over info. that wasn't in the HBO doc. However, I still think NH is innocent.
To those who still think NH committed this crime:
1) Note that there is 0 physical evidence (blood, fingerprints, definitive DNA, etc. ) tying him to the crime. Also, again - no one saw NH go into TC's apartment building, or leave the building.
2) The abrasion on his ankle looks minor. Also, again - I didn't see any evidence of him limping in any footage right after the crime - as the authorities attested.
As far as who else could have done this, again - it could have been someone that GP surprised in the apt. when he went home that day. This person may not be anyone that has been mentioned in connection to the case - up to this point. It could have been a random burglar/drug addict looking for cash/valuables; it could have been someone stalking and/or fixated on TC, etc.
Something else to think about: If NH did indeed commit this crime, why did he bring a civil suit against the Postdam authorities for his horrible treatment when being questioned right after the crime?! Sure - whether he were innocent or guilty, I can see why he would state he was innocent & call his lawyer, etc. - as he did. However, if he were indeed guilty why bring the civil suit - which just caused the Postdam PD's lawyer to question him in detail about the crime (which I suspect he knew would happen) & which ultimately led to his being arrested & having to go to trial.
I.e.: Note that prior to the interview NH had with the PD's lawyer in early 2014, the authorities were not 100% sure it was GP's car in the parking lot of the high school - leaving after GP went by on his Ripstick. So, if he were guilty - he was just digging his own grave by going ahead with the civil suit against the PD, and having to confirm the things they had suspected before - but weren't sure about.
Conversely, if he is innocent (which I believe) his bringing the civil suit makes perfect sense - given the way he was treated.
Just my .02