Awhile back, someone (I apologize for not remembering who) had posted the Car Fax for BK's white elantra. They'd noted that BK had put a lot of miles on in the short amount of time since he'd purchased the car. The D would be able to compare the miles on his car at the time it was seized by LE, as well, subtracting his move to WA and Christmas break trip back to PA. My guess is the mileage will be significant towards them showing he drives around a lot.
We know of at least 12 times BK's phone was within cellular resource range of King Rd prior to the murders, but the D could come back with the mileage and say, "but that only accounts for a small fraction of what he's put on his car, because he goes for drives frequently, and takes a lot of different routes." There wouldn't still be camera footage from all his time in WA, so how do you prove or disprove anything? And what if turning his phone off was normal for him? Phone records could show that, as well as previous drives he took, not in Moscow, with his phone on. What we're seeing as a pathetic excuse for an alibi might actually jive with his normal behavior, and the D could then try to use that to their advantage.
And, once again, from the evidence we've seen per the PCA, there isn't any footage of the white elantra in Pullman actually entering or exiting Moscow. The PCA says the footage from WSU was the footage the FBI used to analyze the vehicle. Well, they aren't denying that the car in Pullman was BK. But what about the white elantra in Moscow? Was that analyzed by the FBI, too? Is there more footage than we know about, showing it entering or exiting Moscow? What's the proof it's the same white elantra other than a missing front plate in a college town with lots of out-of-staters? They could show photos of other vehicles in Moscow that only have one license plate because they come from states that don't require two.
My point isn't that I believe BK is innocent. But, IMO, it will really come down to the knife sheath DNA. After all, there was no victim DNA anywhere in BK's car, apartment, etc. So, if the D can give just enough reasonable doubt to BK's actual whereabouts that morning (poor guy was just on a habitual late-night drive to clear his head...haven't we all been there?), then the goal would be to get at least one juror to question the veracity of the sheath DNA evidence, and that's if the D can't get the DNA suppressed to begin with.
All JMO.