Plus, the "give it too his kid" excuse doesn't seem likely since it wasn't being used once he got his new phone.
To be clear, I am not saying he did it beyond a reasonable doubt. However, simply coming up with plausible excuses is not enough. What is most likely? Is that more likely than not what happened? I think there is an enough to show that, and frankly so did a group of experts paid to form an opinion.
I agree with Mr. sharpe. This isn't a criminal case so you don't have to prove reasonable doubt to get a conviction all you need is the preponderance of the evidence(which essentially means that it was more likely than not that something occurred in a certain way).
But Rodgers leads the league in frumpy expressions and negative body language on the sideline, which makes him, like Josh Allen, a unique double threat.