forensics will determine if the gun had anything to do with the crime. any fingerprints the cops can get might connect him. as far as the manifesto and the gun, depending on what that manifesto says, it could be a confession, but it doesn't matter what it says, but where it came from. i'd like to see chain of custody, and if his prints are on it. as far as everything else, it's circumstantial. the money. the gun (unless you can connect that gun to the crime in some way?). the foreign currency. some of it might be illegal if he had that on him, but it doesn't connect him with the crime. it definitely counts as evidence to support guilt, but not beyond a reasonable doubt. he's pleading "not guilty" and said something about his arrest being an insult to the intelligence of americans, so i don't know. i heard that he claimed, in court, that the cash was planted on him, and that it didn't belong to him. cops plant evidence. the cops could have found the evidence in the bag that was ditched at the park and hid it. maybe i'm being paranoid, but i've had too many interactions with police to trust them to obey the law or tell the truth. then again, maybe all the evidence has been bagged, tagged, photographed, logged, etc... by the book (i hope they release the arrest footage coming from the arresting officer's bodycams soon).
United States