You're the one who made his position dependant on the idea that the Fall was an adequate explanation for death and suffering. And that is why - for the purposes of this disucssion - you should care about it.
There are 3 possible positions
1) The existence of death and suffering can be reconciled with the existence of the sort of God you are discussing.
2) The existence of death and suffering cannot be reconciled with this sort of God.
3) The existence of death and suffering can only be reconciled with this sort of God only if evolution is rejected.
The first position refutes your claim.
The second position removes any significance from the issue of accepting or rejecting evolution.
Only the third position then can really support your case. The Fall is your only candidate for such an explanation. If it is inadequate then your argument fails.