Yeah, I see a lot of people doing this. This and thinking that "beyond a reasonable doubt" means "beyond all doubt" are the two most common misconceptions when viewing something like this trial.
MS coming up with a *possible* story, isn't enough. To believe his story you have to look beyond a LOT of things:
1. The long documented lead up to the murder with MS being involved with the gun, the incinerator, and a lot of planning with the 'missions'.
2. That he claims something like 4-6 witnesses were lying on the stand.
3. That he can remember every single detail that implicates DM or casts himself in a positive light but not a single other detail.
4. That he went along with the clean up long past the night of the murder, and long past DM's arrest.
5. That he's actively cleaned up any evidence related to him from the murder: his clothes, his SIM card, the gun. All things that if his story was true would do nothing but help prove his story.
6. That his story of this just being a scoping mission doesn't actually make a lot of sense. The guys that showed up to test drive a truck would obviously be prime suspects if the truck was stolen later that night. That they hid their car but not their faces. And so on.
That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there are things I'm forgetting.
When taken together I don't see how anybody still has a reasonable doubt that MS was actively involved in the theft and murder.
Edit: The other thing that seems to happen here is that people dislike DM and NS (and especially NS's 'style') and let that influence how they view MS.
Not everyone is emotionally involved with this case or have any bias towards MS or DM. Or that we are just looking for the good in people. Just because some of us don't agree with the bandwagon or how a lawyer questions does not mean we favor one defendant over the other <modsnip> If you have to look beyond what has been presented to come to your conclusion then clearly what has been presented is not enough to convict.
1. not one text said anything about murder, only truck theft. Its one picture of a MS with a gun...no evidence to show he is the owner. where there has been evidence to show DM purchased a gun. SS built a homade incinerator, is he a murderer? previous thefts does not make him a murderer or proof he was in the truck at the time of the murder.
2. everyone here agreed before that every witness has lied and now thats changed. claiming ppl lie does not show or proof pre meditated murder or place him in the truck at the time of the murder.
3. nothing stands out except a few things that was discussed...location of the gun...if found today does not proof he was there at the time of the murder. the video of the trucks driving by - again does not proof he was there at time of the murder.
4. for that he deserves AATF, which he admitted too.
5. u mentioned that in question 4 already, finding his clothes does not proof he was in the truck, there is so much text evidence already and none of it mentioned murder or kidnapping or hurting a victim or even a victim involved so I cant bring myself to assume the missing sim card has 100% proof he was in the truck, the gun does not proof he was in the truck. all together is not enough for murder one.
6. never heard MS outline the whole scoping part, as of now there is now explanation to what was going to happen at the end of the test drive..how they would part ways with TB. could be a simple explanation but we dont know and because of that does not proof he was in the truck at the time of the murder. hide the yukon, wear dark clothes gives LE much less of a lead...LE would not pull cell tower info over a truck theft.
all together does not proof he was in the truck.
of course all mho