What is included under the "reasonableness"

Even if you are going to use the beyond reasonable doubt standard, does the reasonableness also applies on the difference between proving whether someone committed a murder or not in comparison with proving defendant's claim as a reason for a murder he committed is false especially when that person unjustifiably chose to put himself in an environment that was a reason for the kind of interaction that happened?

In any case, I don't feel much faith in that there is an honest trial there related to that case in Florida. In fact, because of some signs and reasons, I have doubts that this trial is anything more than a show. Sufficient transparency in showing a real random selection of the initial jury pool and to whom they remained accessible along every step of the way to the time they make their decision with a proven best effort by the prosecution side to select just juries could have substantially helped in showing the honesty of the trial. Otherwise, trusting that every thing is going fairly in a case like this is like trusting that Saddam really conducted a fair election without watching every step of the way.

There is a well connected picture suggesting that this trial is fake.