

Not really; without the items that were seized, they don’t really have much of anything that would link him to the location, aside from some bad security camera footage that, IMO, doesn’t really look like him. Insisting that he needs an alibi is reversing the burden of proof; it’s saying that, unless he can prove he was elsewhere, then their claim must be correct. But they have so little without the evidence seized at the arrest that the case would be very thin.
Look, if you asked me where I was when The Asshole Brian Thompson was shot, I’d have no fucking idea unless it was something that was a big enough deal that I noted it in my calendar. I don’t even remember where I was when 11 Sept. happened.
I doubt that they would show their hand publicly; they don’t want to poison a jury pool.
On the other hand, if they had better video of the shooter, I’m sure they would have released it, because they were trying to get people to ID the killer. One shitty video of half of a face doesn’t really help a lot.