https://static01.nyt.com/images/2008/11/19/nyregion/18metroc...
The case was founded on claims by a witness:
The witness, who has not been identified, said
Corey Jones was arguing with the man and accused
him of being a “snitch.” A short time later, the
witness said, Corey handed Jason a gun, and Jason
fired shots, killing the man. A call to 911 was
made at 12:21 a.m., records show.
None of those data points is really an hour from the other, as the crow flies. These a bike ride-able distances, within the time stamps given.
Not knowing any of the names involved, or having a substantial axe to grind, I can just look at those point on the map and say that it would be trivial to hand someone a metrocard and have them swipe it somewhere else, to construct an alibi, and then get it back to me after I'm done with a premeditated crime.
The MTA didn't show a video frame capture of any specific person in a particular place.
The check-cashing branch had the video still. But look at the time stamps. There was nearly a solid hour to displace, and have someone else fabricate the metrocard swipe. You know, maybe the kind of favor a girlfriend might carry out?
Really, there's only one crucial detail that forges the integrity of the evidence: The accused did not warily supply his own evidence. Someone else fished it out and asked questions.
The only thing that really lends credence to the extra facts is that the individual might not have opted to seal the alibi air tight of his own volition. The detail might have sat there unused, but for external, and (most-likely) objective advocacy. The trustworthy face of the former detective offering assistance.
But really, those metrocard swipes have all the integrity of a wi-fi IP address. Theoretically, a motivated individual could make a metrocard that contradicts real events.
It's really not more substantial than a thermal paper receipt.
Perhaps interesting on it's own. But only if incidental and used to support stronger facts.