One of them clearly didn't, as he surprised everyone by saying that the evidence was compelling if not overwhelming (or whatever the words,I'm sure you've read the same thing). He took the evidence at face value, and that colored his opinion.Let me let you in on a secret. The Judges know there's doubt.
Throw in just a small sample of a reason to doubt that evidence, something quick yet compelling, like the selective memory on the gauges, including the obviously intentionally misleading pictures with the ruler and all that, something just enough to grab their attention and give them reason to doubt the whole thing from the beginning.
The way you're talking, it's like you think they know it's bullshit and don't care. I don't buy that for a second. I think 2 out of the 3 judges saw the evidence, accepted it, and thought Brady was just some rich white celebrity trying to lawyer his way out of a mess. But, if you crack the base of that pillar, the whole thing comes tumbling down.