You and I just differ in our understanding of the law. I feel the defense should be able to question the narrative put forth by the prosecution. As the prosecution should be able to question the narrative of the defense. Why should one trust the opinion of the investigators that the girls' blood wasn't drained, for instance? Trust me bro? The best way to find out Turco's opinion? Put him on the stand. Best way to find out what the FBI's conclusions are? Put a representative on the stand.
In an adversarial system, I don't expect every theory each side throws out to be 100% truth. It is somewhere in the middle more often than not.
ETA: we don't have to agree, but calling everyone a conspiracist that doesn't agree with a particular theory is not constructive in my opinion.
So you believe in the hanging from a tree to drain blood theory? I have never heard of any restraint injuries found on the girls' arms or legs.