Yeah, of course you meant no offense. If you meant to offend you would have said it rudely. /sarcasm
"The phrases "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "beyond any and all reasonable doubt" are functionally the equivalent. If the word "reasonable" had been left out then your assertion would have merit."
No, the word "reasonable" doesn't have that effect.
What I explained and you've missed somehow is that it matters what you mean by "all reasonable doubt". You might have some reasonable doubts about particular bits of evidence, without having doubt about the ultimate conclusion. The lawyer repeatedly expressed it in a way (and I was not quoting all his repeated comments) to sound like any doubt about anything meant a not guilty verdict.
What I explained and you've missed somehow is that it matters what you mean by "all reasonable doubt".
Again, no offense, but you're trying to parse the phrase in a bizarre way to find a distinction but the phrases are equivalent.
No native English speaker would ever interpret that phrase as meaning, "if you doubt any piece of evidence then you must disregard all other evidence and return a not guilty verdict".