I was asking Jethro what were the issues with the sketch that could get identification thrown out. Your quote has mixed mine and J's posts together so I am repeating my question for clarification.
Lets say LE actually arrests someone. Lets say that BG doesn't look like the sketch. Any defense attorney will demand the alleged witnesses that contributed to the sketch and might even arrange a lineup. The point is that a defense attorney could use the very same witnesses to claim there is someone else out there that is responsible and not their client. LE had better have DNA.
The other scenario is even if BG kind of, sort of, or mostly looks like the sketch however not all or only one of the alleged witnesses can pick him out of a lineup. The defense attorney is going to use that fact to argue someone else is responsible.
The issue isn't with finding BG or arresting someone when it comes to the sketch but when it comes to the prosecution and the only thing that puts BG at that scene is the witnesses and not things like DNA, fingerprints, or phone records. What defense attorney is not going to like a situation where the alleged witnesses might all be describing similar yet different individuals rather than one, let alone the person arrested.
Superintendent Carter should probably stop talking unless he is actually going to provide useful information. This case has been hobbled by LE not providing useful information and the media being compliant rather than pursuing the story and putting pressure on LE. If left to Indiana LE I have very little confidence in their ability to solve this case. I am glad they are having GBI look into it and I only hope that Indiana LE learns something from it.