I have been thinking about these exact same questions. My recollection from a much earlier thread is that those parking spaces were NOT assigned, but Dani did often park in that exact space. As Bette Davis has wisely said (sorry Bette. I paraphrase and please correct me if I misunderstand you) what we ‘know’ or believe and what we can prove in a court of law to a jury may well be 2 different things in this case. I also believe FG must have been stalking Dani to know where she lived and exactly where she parked. Proof? I have none. And there were no cameras at the apartments. I believe the same happened with his Hines Park victim. There’s an extremely creepy thought. Did he follow her? Out of the park? Proof? It will be helpful if she is allowed to testify as the victim was allowed in Worley’s trial, indicating FG’s behavior could have followed a pattern of abduction and violent criminal sexual misconduct that applies to Danielle. The burden of ‘proof’ to bind someone over for trial in a preliminary hearing before a judge is different from that required in a felony murder jury trial. I am certain the prosecution has more evidence we haven’t seen. But with the evidence we have seen right now, I wouldn’t be convinced enough of FG’s premeditation of murder if I was sitting on a jury. Of abduction, yes, but not murder. Not enough to sentence him. Not yet. However in Michigan a felony murder conviction can also include murder that occurs during the commission of other crimes: criminal sexual abuse, extortion, carjacking, kidnapping, etc. Most relevant to Dani I think is the abduction/kidnapping. Her family and friends testimony carries a great deal of weight — Dani would never have left her life willingly.