I hope I have this right, but I think you have totally missed the context in which this mole has appeared.
All we have at the moment is an assertion that the computer evidence will show this. None of us have seen this computer evidence. No computer evidence that is going to be presented can definitively show that there was human interaction in such black and white terms that no interpretation is required. The log may say that the screensaver activated, or did not activate at certain times, that certain files last access times fall during the crucial period. All of this requires interpretation, just like the knife, the bra clasp and everything else before any kind of agreement (if such things are possible) can be reached on what it means.
As I may have said before, I long ago ceased to hope for agreement with the-community-who-think-on-the-whole-that-guilt-is-proved-beyond-reasonable-doubt. Agreement can be forestalled forever by the other participant simply refusing to agree regardless of the evidence or arguments presented.
For example one might say "Yes, well, we have proof of human interaction with a computer. But that proof
requires interpretation. For example I could interpret it to mean that Raffaele and Amanda killed Meredith with a remote-controlled knife using the internet. Take that, inference to best explanation! Your interpretation is no better than mine!".
There's really not much to say to a person who has been cornered into that kind of blatant irrationality. All you can do is highlight the problems with their position and move on.
But didn't Raffaele say that he could be sure that Amanda went out because he was asleep. The point that I think your mole was trying to make before you waked it was that you seem to be claiming that Raffaele could be sure if Amanda went out the following morning, around 7am say, as he was asleep. Is this what you think he means?
What else do you think he could have meant?
Bear in mind that Raffaele, if he is innocent, doesn't know Meredith's real or alleged time of death until he hears it from the police. It's just bad luck for the community-who-might-or-might-not-believe-whatever-they-read-at-TJMK that Raffaele's big "admission" has no relevance at all to the murder since he wasn't asleep at the time Meredith was actually murdered.
Is it agreed by the guilters that there was a conspiracy beforehand to commit murder, or are you being a bit silly?
Well of course not. Have you forgotten that the guilters (I borrow your term) have no coherent theory of the crime at all? They cannot all agree that the murder was premeditated if they cannot all agree on any theory at all.
Speaking broadly the guilters are caught in a bit of a fork when it comes to premeditation. The murder was typical of disorganised and unpremeditated crimes, the sainted Massei and Mignini plumped for fairy stories that labelled the murder as unpremeditated and there's not the slightest skerrick of evidence of premeditation or indeed any contact at all between Amanda and Raffaele on one hand and Rudy Guede on the other. Thus they have strong reasons to go with various stories that make the murder spontaneous and unpremeditated.
The problem though is that if the crime was unpremeditated the guilters have an impossible task in explaining away the computer evidence, including the fact that Amanda and Raffaele claimed that they watched Stardust that night and handed over proof to the police, who erased the data and then destroyed the hard drive for good measure. Maybe if Raffaele was a clever computer hacker who planned out the murder in advance he could have faked all that, but if the crime was unpremeditated and there is computer evidence putting Raffaele and Amanda somewhere else at the time of the murder then it becomes very hard to see how they could possibly have been involved.
I've seen a few of the lunatic fringe guilters speculating about rape plots hatched between Rudy and Amanda in advance, but there's zero evidence of any such thing.
