You're obviously right. But clearly the victim's friend is speaking with his heart filled with emotion. And, his letter was posted on Facebook, not here, so it's a different set of rules. For example, Personally, I make it a point not to comment on WS on cases where I might know those involved. In early August, a young woman I knew from Queens NY, Karina Vetrano, was sexually assaulted and murdered in broad daylight. The story has made national headlines. For a second I thought about looking it up here, but I changed my mind. I'm sure it's listed on Websleuths. But I knew I wouldn't be able to handle reading commentary from people who didn't know her, the boroughs or anything about the real story, and I was also afraid my emotions would cloud my judgement and ability to be objective. That is why you can't expect this author on FB, Joeys friend, to view the crime as we do here.
Additionally, Everything you point out holds true, yes, however, the author, IMO, does make a very very good point about JRs attorney, speculation into how JR is paying for that attorney, speculation into their relationship, and distancing himself for the sake of salvaging his public persona.
Based on all the reporting and details released thus far, when this goes to trial, I'm expecting the elder Rackover to at least be called as a witness if the following does end up being true: his car was used to transport JCs body to NJ and he had some kind of contact with the suspects/ had been at the crime scene (supposedly to walk the dog) the day JCs body was brought was buried.
It's not a coincidence that the elder Rackover has carefully managed to avoid media coverage - however, his part, or lack there of in the case, is still being determined.