The statements by the attorneys for the As and KM do absolutely nothing to convince me of their innocence. They seem to be highly skilled defense attorneys, and are doing everything they can for their clients -- as they should. But their statements to the Sun-Sentinel just emphasize that they are thinking solely like defense attorneys preparing for an argument before a jury, with a single goal: creating reasonable doubt in the mind of at least one juror. All they have to do in that context is poke holes in the state's case. The burden of proof always remains on the state, and the defense is under no obligation to tell a convincing story (or, actually, to say anything at all).
But the public reading these articles (and this message board) are not jurors. We're entitled to think like normal human beings who simply want to know: What happened? What's the truth here? The evidence seems indisputable that SG and LR drove from Miami to Tallahassee and murdered DM. Given that truth, why? There was no robbery. SG and LR had no direct relationship with DM. They were not doing a drug deal with him. They had no reason to be angry with him. The pair's only connection with DM was that SG's ex was romantically involved with CA, whose sister used to be married to DM, and whose family had a motive to get DM out of the picture so that WA would be free to move to Miami with her kids.
I'd love for these reporters to ask the attorneys for the As and KM: What is your theory for why SG and LR killed DM? Why did they do it if not for the benefit of the As? There's been some speculation that they will argue that it was some sort of plot to extort the As. But how would that work? SG and KM plot to kill DM without the As' involvement, and then, once it's done, go to the As and demand payment in return for their silence? But that's absurd. For the extortion threat to be real, there would need to be a credible threat that the plotters would turn in the As to LE if they didn't pay. But the problem with that theory is that it would require the plotters to implicate themselves, thus subjecting themselves to lengthy prison sentences or even the death penalty. That's ridiculous. Again, the only remotely plausible theory for DM's murder that's been floated is that it was done for the benefit of the As. (I should say that, while I think it's possible that WA was involved in, or had foreknowledge of, the plot, the publicly-released evidence of such is extremely thin at this point, and certainly not enough for the state to obtain a conviction.)
Again, the attorneys for the As and KM have no obligation to tell a coherent story of DM's murder. But their utter failure to do so is telling, and, as people looking at this situation as human beings rather than jurors, we are perfectly free, based on their failure, as well as the extensive evidence that's been released to date, to draw conclusions of guilt.