RSBMBTW your ending statement about ARCCA is woefully out of date. This trial is different, in that ARCCA is now working with the def, not the feds. The def does have every bit of evidence and will have provided ARCCA all of it to consider and analyze its fit (or to figure out how it doesn't) in doing testing, reports, and testimony. The cw was not allowed to withhold anything, so ARCCA has it all.
You were referring to their evidence being exculpatory as at the date of the hearing I posted. Which was just before trial 1, and that was what I was also referring to, to demonstrate how they didn't have all the facts then, and the commonwealth's reasons for not accepting their evidence.