This has to favor the defense right? They've now seen every bit of evidence the state has and can more precisely target the holes. Just from skimming this has to be more emphasis on what the plow guy didn't see, more cross examination & emphasis on the impact, car when & where the tail light broke and/or shattered, whatever antagonism they can show between victim and others at bar/party.
It isn't the defense's job to come up with an alternate theory, but the sale of the house, disappearance of dog, phones discarded etc. do make it hard to pinpoint what exactly happened.
That said I'm still not on either side: 50% - BOTH - she hit him with car and they beat him up inside, 25% just her, 25% just beat up.
Yet Also no clue how a juror could have NO reasonable doubts, unless a clear choice to selectively believe some info & discard other.