I reckon the park bench is part of his story, and after he told them he (or they) was there they went down pronto and tested it. In fact, as that testing was done quickly and under cover of darkness, is it possible PR actually took them to it?
In all honestly, everything he says happened up until the moment of her disappearance is probably nicely backed up by forensics and in some ways is a moot point. e.g. (and imo):
Yes, the CCTV showed her willingly getting into his car
Yes, there is evidence she was in the passenger seat, alive
Yes, there is evidence of sexual activity on the bench
No, she was not in his car deceased
No, she was never in his car boot or his house
Aside from the police saying homicide I don't honestly think I could (as a juror) convict him of anything. I'm still pretty certain he knows more and it would be interesting to know just how much he has told the police about that night. My gut says whatever evidence they have matches his version of events.
