I have been thinking about these witnesses who claimed to have seen GG and RG arrive at the beach and then leave. Witness's are mistaken all the time, dont actually see what they claimed to have seen, misinterpreted things etc etc. But, we should be able to test whatever they claim against any physical evidence that exists. The physical evidence is irrefutable, so if their testimony does not match, it is either distorted or wrong.
We know from video evidence the RG/GG left the restuarant at ~4PM, and that GG arrived back at 6Pm. That leaves two hours to account for.
We know that GG had been swiming in those two hours because (A) a witness claims to have seen his shoes wet; and (B) it is obvious from TV footage of the search that he had been wet and had not combed his hair before it dried.
People claimed to have seen them on the beach.
Now, if this was true, and they just came there, stood a round, and then drove off never to return, then there should be no physical evidence on the beach.
There should be no towel, no shoes, no dress, no blood.
If any of those things were on the beach, then the witness must be mistaken.