That's the thing. With these now unsealed documents, all we really see is that RA gave enough in his own statement to the CO to warrant another interview with LE and a search of his home. What they collected from the home was more or less related to what he already admitted to having on him (blue jacket, head covering, jeans, boots, and his phone), weapons he admitted to owning, and swabs from the vehicle he admitted to driving there that day.
The witnesses were all shown a photo of the man on the bridge (not photos of RA), and they all agreed this was who they saw. There was really nothing earth-shattering, imo. The RL affidavit was more interesting to me, because it gave some possible insight about the CS: animal hair, fiber evidence, digital data, taking trophies, blood loss on scene, moving and staging, etc.
If we apply what was in the RL affidavit to RA, it makes me wonder if there is more to it than what we see strictly in the RA documents. I don't mean that RL was involved (I don't think he was), but just the information we could gather from the affidavit had to be included for a reason, so how might it apply now, to RA?
And I'll admit, I'm still curious if KAK knew anything about the murders, either before or after the fact... It bothers me endlessly that the names were not redacted in these released documents. When MS first put out the 2020 KAK interview, there was a last name (related to the ski mask incident), that they missed redacting, but quickly fixed. That last name is the same as one of the last names in the RA arrest affidavit (not a witness). KAK was wading around in the same pond as some of these girls in Delphi, of that I have no doubt. Probably unrelated, but one of the juvenile witnesses was interviewed, according to the SW PCA, in 2020. Makes me wonder if they went back to her for a reason related to KAK's arrest. Just random questions.