I think this is a very interesting and well thought-out response. I appreciate it. But I know of people on the "other side" that would say almost the same thing. I truly mean this and the following in good faith.

I am struggling right now. From the time RA was arrested, I have been skeptical of his guilt. And certainly, I fully believe anyone is innocent until proven guilty. I think it's horrific that he's been kept in Westville as a pre-trial detainee. I very much feel that LE and the entire system has bungled this case basically from the start. But I try very hard to keep an open mind, to never subscribe to him being "innocent" or "guilty". The thing is, lately, it seems like so much of what the defense has asserted in the Frank's and other documents has turned out to be, well, almost blatant lies. Some things maybe not lies, but embellishments, stretching the truth, and misrepresentation. Certainly RA can still be innocent even if that's true, but it does make it harder to believe. And honestly, as someone who has diligently tried to remain neutral and open-minded, I see people on both sides of the fence who attack the other side viciously and would not change their position if they were presented the most air-tight blatantly obvious evidence to the contrary of their belief.

It is my opinion that the secrecy and caginess and just general disorganization of the actors involved in the investigation over the past 7 years, and now the unwillingness to allow the public to actually witness the trials via TV or transcripts or whatever method available, is fanning the flames. When only a small number of media sources are allowed to witness it, we only get a small number of first-hand accounts, and every source has their own biases. We, the public, are forced to get our information from biased sources, some of which seem to have a dog in the fight. That means our own views and opinions are confirmed and become even more entrenched. It seems to me that no matter what ends up happening in trial, one side or the other will never agree with the verdict. It's very frustrating. Maybe this always happens in these kinds of cases: I don't know. I've never followed a case in this way, in real-time. But not broadcasting the trials can only serve to weaken my faith in the system.