Well, if they admit the CEO photos don't confirm the presence of bay markings that's the nail in the coffin for their case really. If the CEO photos don't show any markings and they haven't supplied any other photos showing them, how can they possibly know that the markings are there?
There are three possible explanations:
1) The author of the rejection has personally visited the location and seen the markings for himself,
2) The author of the rejection has some photos which he's not seen fit to share with you, or
3) The author of the rejection has no idea whether the markings are there or not and he's just made it up.
Call me a cynic but I very much suspect it's option 3.