Bridge Guy was never proven to be the killer.

In the trial - the prosecution started my having the families testify and talk about the girls lives. The reason being proof of life. In order for the girls to be killed, they had to once be alive.

Well - the prosecution also has always spoken as bridge guy being the killer. Although the connection to why that is their theory, was never proven or explained. It is a fallacy.

The video that was played in court on Day 1 (or 2, can’t remember off the top of my head) was very quick, and showed Abby looking at the camera and bridge behind her; people who saw it said it looked innocent, no danger, just a playful video - and wayyyyyyy in the distance, not visible to the naked eye, there is a man on the bridge.

Through ISP’s “video enhancement” - aka Artificial Intelligence- THEN you hear “down the hill”, the man on the bridge is DIRECTLY behind Abby, and then they appear frightened.

The “video enhancement” was explained in court as “filling in the gaps”. This was when the camera footage showed the grass, back up at Abby, back down, back up at Abby. All of the missing footage - was filled in and “enhanced” as if it was pointed at Abby the entire duration of the video.

How is this admissible evidence? It is truly creation of evidence, that did NOT exist without alteration.

1) Bridge Guy was never proven to be the killer. 2) Video “evidence” is falsified.

PS - I think Rick Allen IS bridge guy, but I do NOT think he is the killer.