"The GPS coordinates from your getaway car that we received at the beginning of your incarceration show that you were nowhere near Funk & Wagnalls. But this parking stub from the garage on Frenulator Avenue shows you parked for twelve minutes. What did you do there?"
Again, hence, plausible.
They were in Chicago last night. After hiding the briefcase, drive within a few blocks of Ditka's Bar & Grill, stop for a couple of rounds of Angry Birds, and tell them you put the case under a table where four guys with the same bushy moustache and sunglasses were sitting. No, you didn't talk to them, because you didn't want to be subject to the rule where accomplices have to be available for questioning.
Do not deviate from that story. Ever.
"You're lying! Our people went there and found nothing!"
"Not my problem. Tell Craft Services to bring me a sammich on the way out."
For every other stop they ask you about, you tell them you stopped the car and played Angry Birds. Man, that game is addictive!
I agree with the points about the rest of the evidence being potentially useful, but I see not one reason a plausible alibi can't be drummed up based solely on location, and no reason AT ALL to cooperate with an interrogator who is threatening you, because that approach is utterly pointless when it's Just A Game. If they can find it using the rest of the evidence, fantastic, they would have had that anyhow, but it's trivial not to help them through the questioning, and for the sake of drama, the program they present places a LARGE emphasis on the interrogation angle.
I agree with Matt, they simply found morons for contestants where anyone with a modicum of sense should win the game handily. And that to me isn't interesting television. The part they emphasize, for my money, is absolutely the weakest part of the show.