I think you question is what identifies him as the leaker, yes? There is evidence other than his murder, that associates him with Wikileaks. he leaked before he was murdered, that evidence has to exist.
The way you are viewing the case, if Rich's murder was in fact a random act of violence, then he couldn't have been the leaker. I find that to be logically nonsense.
Where?
Assange and Kim Dotcom certainly haven't produced any.
The way you are viewing the case, if Rich's murder was in fact a random act of violence, then he couldn't have been the leaker.
No, not at all. I'd just don't think the fact that he was murdered is any indication that he was the leaker.