Do we know that?

One of the many eye-opening things in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZH_nP8pX4Fg is that during a long questioning session the police will often introduce facts about the case to see if you recognize them, then forget that they did so, then hours later ask a different question and your knowledge of the facts that you were previously told BY THE POLICE is now evidence against you.

This happens frequently enough that I would want to know that an independent third party reviewed tapes of all questioning of Jay before concluding that he in fact had previous independent knowledge of any fact about the crime.

Yeah, like the child sexual abuse trials of the 80's. The children were fed facts that were later presented as information in the trial obtained from the children.

I do think this is the central question the retrial should deal with.

Children in particular are very suggestible. We had to learn how to question them without eliciting the response that we are priming them for.

This is the fact that I always come back to when I assert that I think Adnan is actually guilty.

Yup, so it was either him or Adnan. If you ever played a deception game, when someone falsely accuses you, you go mad. Adnan is not mad and not accusing Jay back. He is guilty but didn't want to disappoint his community by admitting it, because they were so supportive during the trial.