Nobody ever produced any evidence to the contrary. I've read hundreds of blog posts saying he 'must have' been murdered by powerful political figures on the basis that powerful figures have means, motives, and opportunities that are not available to most ordinary folk, and therefore that mere possibility is sufficient to be considered a probability. The absence of evidence is thrown back as 'proof' of a cover-up.
The point is more that the local police said it was likely a robbery gone wrong when there's no evidence for that and every media outlet repeats it as fact and "nothing to see here". The would-be robbers didn't wind up taking anything from him and it's not a neighborhood known for a high crime rate. There's also tons of other "but but but" coverage, including extensively in the Wikipedia article on the topic, that completely misses the point.
The person who published the DNC leaks said it was an inside source and that it wasn't a foreign government. No one seems to believe this despite no evidence to the contrary (and other groups having access to the same information is not evidence, since it was proven that multiple groups did)
Anyway it's too much to cover here and is off topic and I'm not going to change any minds, so i'll leave it there
