There are some pretty grainy photos with a partially obscured face that also don’t depict the person in question actually comitting a crime. In any other case they would be circumstantial evidence and probably not even enough to hold someone on.
(its been a while since I saw the photos so a quick google search might not be all of them)
Is it common sense? I’ve seen no evidence that he did it other than the police saying he did and a gun/manifesto in a bag that broke chain of custody.
deleted by creator
There are some pretty grainy photos with a partially obscured face that also don’t depict the person in question actually comitting a crime. In any other case they would be circumstantial evidence and probably not even enough to hold someone on.
(its been a while since I saw the photos so a quick google search might not be all of them)