Certainly there is a preponderance of circumstantial evidence that does concern me and points to RA’s involvement. I was only speaking about the “van-as-detail-only-the-killer-would-know. It’s a point I’d expect the state to make; if someone frequented that bridge area, they may have seen a van there, possibly even on more than one occasion.
If I were a defense attorney, that is a point I would make. I can’t speak to RA’s innocence or guilt, only to some things that cause me to doubt, and for the moment that’s how I would try to defend the van detail.
The “stock ticker/cell phone exclusion from geofence” evidence is, yes, very damning. As is the BG video where we can’t rule out it being RA in the frames, his placing himself at the scene, and his saying “I did it” to KA and JA. I just happen to think the van detail is impeachable.