The woman on the second floor who said she saw one of the gunmen go in said he appeared to be heavyset. Which might be attributable to the vest and accoutrement. But it doesn’t make sense that he would let the woman go in first, if it was just two of them. Maybe, I guess, if she was the original radical out of the two, but it seems odd. Don’t really have anything else to disprove what they’ve said. I could understand mis-witnessing (is that a word?) two vs. three in the midst of an attack. But I find it confusing that a number of people could get it wrong like that who were in the room.
I can’t get away from no witness in the building during the shooting saying “one of the shooters looked small and like a woman.”
So why would the lawyer say she was so small when size can easily be proved. And all this happens the day that “Ooops” we opened up their apartment and compromised the evidence.