Gotcha. Not only a valid stance to take, IMO, but also a necessary one for some of us to take. In the days before his arrest, I had three main types of theories I was juggling and now have new theories about what will happen in this case.
I am fairly convinced by the high school companions (two of them) who have talked and been quoted by MSM as mentioning a serious problem with heroin. It fits with other things about his background, but it also fits with statistics about heroin use in our nation - it's more of a problem in high school kids in PA than I had realized. Where I live, it's mostly meth for high school students (and cannabis/alcohol).
We may never get any proof about his life history. Most of it won't be relevant at trial. So you may remain agnostic, which is an honorable thing to do. I think this guy will write his own story - but that won't be "proof" for me. I don't usually look for "proof," I am more about finding the best hypotheses (ones that may not have perfect proof, but have never been disproven.)
A never disproven statement is a fact, in my world, or at least the closest thing to it.
Every human child has two and only two biologic parents, things of that sort. That's never been disproved and is, IMO, a fact.
Do I know for a fact that BK's parents are his bio parents? Nope, I do not. But they are some kind of parent to him, as I also think it's a fact that all small children must have someone to raise them, and it seems they raised him and a sibling (according to MSM). I believe all of that. In my mind, it is a fact that BK's dad drove with him across the country, etc. If it's disproven, I'll revise.