I respectfully disagree. The findings are all specified by the judge to be under the applicable standard for probable cause. The judge anticipates a Rule 50 appeal of his decision and is leaving as little room for misrepresentation of his opinion as possible.
I suspect that the defense anticipates a decision denying bail, and sees an opportunity to argue that BM should be eligible for bond because Colorado abolished the death penalty - therefore there are no longer "capital offenses" under the state constitution and all defendants are eligible for bail. This would be the first case to offer an opportunity for the Supreme Court to provide guidance on that issue, and they may well want to take it up.
I believe the presence of distinguished appellate specialist Sean Connelly at this early stage can only mean that BM has committed all his resources in a
"balls to the wall" effort to get out of jail early and stay out, and that he will appeal the judge's probable cause determination as well.
Anyone interested in how Rule 50 works may be interested in this Colorado Lawyer article,
Certiorari Before Judgment, an Examination of C.A.R. 50.
