What seems evident to me from reading the old forums is that "VT must have done it because he pleaded guilty".
A number of posters point out discrepancies and inconsistencies (just as I do today, and other posters on this thread do too). However, these are completely dismissed out of hand by most other posters because VT pleaded guilty.
The old forum also explains (very well, I think) what happens at a trial, and what the prosecution and defence are looking for. Not the truth, apparently.
You have made your points here so lucidly and concisely that I hesitate to rush in where angels fear to tread, even to agree with you!
I desparately need a designation for the kind of intelligent person who reiterated, on the old forum, that "VT must have done it because he pleaded guilty". When someone online, or even face to face, accuses me of being a "conspiracy theorist", in connection with this topic or any other, I want to have a polite reply ready, such as "lemming", "indoctrinee", etc.
It is getting serious, because I came across an allegation (in the mainstream media, where else?) that "supporters of conspiracy theories are prone to mental health issues". I should have thought that people who cannot see, hear or talk about the elephant in the room are the ones who should consult someone about their mental health.
The mainstream media is also very preoccupied with what it calls "fake news", which it blames on the social media. Is there a difference between "fake news" and "false news"? I cannot hear the difference. In my opinion, "false news" is the same as "false witness". While there was nothing false about the verdict on VT itself, reached as it was by "twelve good men (m/f) and true", the rest of the case was peppered with false witness. The so-called chaplain's testimony, especially, was "false witness" - even though I don't believe you can catch him out in a lie.
In my opinion God's/Moses's/King James's phrase from the Ten Commandments captures the issue brilliantly.
Neither the prosecution nor VT's defence may have been looking for "the truth", but every witness was obliged to swear to tell it, so I think we are all entitled to believe that finding it was indeed the intention of the trial.