If you read the decision in the Chris Dawson case, outcomes were based on multiple pieces of evidence. The phone call to the kiosk as an example had several witnesses that were used in conjunction to prove that if there was a phone call based on the evidence of the girl from the kiosk that said she got an STD call for either Paul or Chris in January 1982. The combined circumstances proved that the phone call did not happen that day. That was just one example. What you hear in the media is a very condensed summary of what the evidence is.The Chris Dawson conviction was very flimsy and should (and probably will be) overturned on appeal. This case is much stronger in evidencd though i reckon.
I would like to hear all the evidence in this case. I think we are just getting the bare minimum.