Author Topic: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two  (Read 58253 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #165 on: October 29, 2018, 08:04:PM »

There was blood in four places in SAs pontiac. The rear seat, The top of the console, The gear stick and by the gear numbers.

Put your projector away. We had enough of it yesterday. PATHETIC!


Brendan brought up the calibre of murder weapon and the exact murder weapon. Not the police. Police saying "did he use a gun" does not feed Brendan enough incriminating information that he ends up giving them.

The authorities did not get the results of the Hood Latch DNA until two months after they had this conversation with Brendan. BUT what they probably did know was the fact the battery cables were pulled out from battery. Hence the killer must have opened the hood. Which is probably why they brought it up. Which would explain why Brendan then confirms his uncle did lift the hood since his uncle is the killer and the DNA later confirms Brendan was being truthfull.


I have already admitted the 1st series fooled me. I accept that. So I am not going to hold it against you if you do the same.  :)

Yes, all around the console next to the gear stick - which shows (unlike what you suggested) blood drips and doesn't stay on top if that's where the cut is!  ::)

Brendan would have known that Steven has a 22 they were a hunting family for gods sake! However he didn't mention her being shot until the police did. They tried to coax him by asking what happened to her head - he says all sorts until THEY finally TELL HIM she was shot!

You're easily fooled David because you rely on what others have said and you soak up their ideas. I suspect Scipio has some influence over your current position. You don't have to have an opinion on guilt or innocence to see that evidence is flawed.

Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #166 on: October 29, 2018, 09:58:PM »
So, the police tell Brendan that Teresa was shot. Then steer him into saying she was shot in the garage and  NOT outside as he initially states. The whole thing is just unbelievable - that they were allowed to get away with these interviews and present them to ANY court is a joke!

Even crazier, the day after the interview below, the prosecution made s statement to say that 'after; receiving information they were going to research the Avery residence - they told him what they wanted to hear - that's when they SAY they found the bullet ......... but that's another story!


« Last Edit: October 29, 2018, 10:06:PM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #167 on: October 29, 2018, 10:36:PM »
The following affidavit is self explanatory

AFFIDAVIT OF LUCIEN C. HAAG
Now comes your affiant, Lucien C. "Luke" Haag, and under oath hereby states as follows:

I. I am of legal majority and can truthfully and competently testify to the matters
contained herein based upon my personal knowledge. The factual statements herein are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I am of sound mind and I am not
taking any medication nor have I ingested any alcohol that would impair my memory of the facts
stated in this affidavit.

2. I am an independent forensic consultant with my own company, Forensic Science
Services, Inc., in Carefree, Arizona. I have consulted as an expert and testified as an expert
witness on the subject of firearms identification, firearms-related evidence, and the
reconstructive aspects of shooting incidents in numerous cases across the United States and in
other countries. l have also authored and presented more than 200 scientific papers, most of
which address various exterior and terminal ballistic properties and the effects and behavior of
projectiles. A current copy of my curriculum vitae is attached to this declaration as Exhibit A.
EXHIBIT
ll I 92

3. I published an article in the AFTE Journal (Volume 44, Number 2, Spring 2012)
regarding the forensic value of bone particles recovered from bullets. A copy of that article is
attached to this declaration as Exhibit B.

4. I was retained by Kathleen T. Zellner & Associates, P.C., to assist with the postconviction
investigation in the above-captioned case.

5. I was asked to review information and provide consultation and expert opinions
regarding the ballistics evidence in that case.

6. Kathleen T. Zellner & Associates, P.C., provided me with documents relevant to
the case, including transcripts of testimony, computer generated images, and photographs.

7. Based on the information I have reviewed, and past testing which I have carried
out, it is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty in the field of forensic ballistics, that the
damaged bullet recovered from Steven Avery's garage and purported to yield a full DNA profile
of Teresa Halbach ("Ms. Halbach") (Wisconsin State Crime Lab Item FL) shows no evidence of
having been shot through Ms. Halbach's skull. The bullet, which was identified as a .22 long
rifle bullet, was comprised of such soft metal that there would be detectable bone fragments
embedded in the damaged bullet if it had been fired through Ms. Halbach' s skull. Because no
bone fragments have been identified in the damaged bullet, Item FL, over the course of its
examination - including DNA and firearms/toolmarks analysis - at the Wisconsin State Crime
Lab, it is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty if the field of ballistics, that Item FL
was not fired through Ms. Halbach's skull.

8. I carried out tests to illustrate that bone fragments would become embedded in .22
long rifle bullets when fired through bone. I fired two (2) copper-plated, lead, CCI Minimag®
.22 long rifle bullets through approximately 2mm thick flat bone and into a soft tissue simulant
from which it was recovered. I fired two (2) additional copper-plated, lead, CCI Minimag® .22
long rifle bullets through one layer of approximately 2mm thick flat bone, then through 5 inches
of soft tissue simulant, and through a final section of approximately 2mm thick flat bone, and
finally into a soft tissue simulant as a means of recovering the bullet. Bone particles, embedded
in the soft lead, were readily visible under a stereo-microscope for both the bullets fired through
one thickness of bone and two thicknesses of bone. A copy of the experimental design of this
demonstration, along with diagrams and photos, is attached to this declaration as Exhibit C.
This demonstration supports my opinion that, to a reasonable degree of certainty in the field of
forensic ballistics, item FL was not fired through Ms. Halbach's skull because there were no
bone particles embedded in it when it was examined by Wisconsin State Crime Lab analysts.

9. William Newhouse ("Mr. Newhouse"), a Wisconsin State Crime Lab firearms
examiner, analyzed the damaged bullet, item FL, using a microscope. According to Mr.
Newhouse's bullet worksheet, attached to this declaration as Exhibit D, Mr. Newhouse
identified no trace evidence on the damaged bullet. If there were bone fragments embedded in
the damaged bullet, I would expect a reasonably competent firearms examiner to have identified
them during their microscopical examination. Based upon my review of Mr. Newhouse's trial
testimony, it is my opinion that Mr. Newhouse is a reasonably competent firearms examiner who
would likely have identified bone fragments embedded in the damaged bullet had they been
present. Because Mr. Newhouse did not note or describe any bone or bone-like particles
embedded in item FL during his microscopical examination of this damaged bullet, it is my
opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty in the field of forensic ballistics, that item FL was
not fired through Ms. Halbach's skull.

10. A definitive resolution and statement regarding the absence of bone particles in
the item FL damaged bullet would require a detailed examination for such particles under a
suitable optical microscope, or an examination by a qualified operator of a scanning electron
microscope (SEM) equipped with an energy dispersive x-ray analyzer (EDS) who is experienced
in the recognition and identification of bone particles in bullets. It is my understanding that Dr.
Christopher Palenik, PhD, ofMicrotrace, LLC, has conducted an examination of the damaged
bullet. I have been informed by Ms. Zellner that no bone was detected on the bullet, which
confirms my opinions stated above. I also examined the photographs taken by Dr. Palenik of the
damaged bullet and have confirmed that no bone fragments were visible in these photographs.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #168 on: October 29, 2018, 10:48:PM »

AFFIDAVIT OF CHRISTOPHER PALENIK, PhD - who tested not only those bullets fired by Hagg but the actual FL bullet from the Avery case.


I. Scientific Findings - Bullet #FL
Background and Approach

8. The purpose of this examination was to determine if evidence of bone could be detected
on the surface of bullet #FL.

9. The following analytical approach was utilized:
a. Perform the first in depth photo-documentation and microscopical examination of
the #FL bullet. This was conducted by a combination of stereomicroscopy and
digital video microscopy, the latter of which was used to produce a map of the
bullet surface and the debris adhering to it. The microscopes used were
manufactured in 2016.
b. Characterization of the bullet by scaiming electron microscopy and energy
dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDS). Using the digital images of the bullet
surface as a guide, specific areas were examined in detail and analyzed to
determine their elemental composition. The inorganic portion of bone is
composed almost entirely of calcium, phosphorous and oxygen, all of which are
detectable by this approach. The SEM/EDS equipment used was produced in
2016.

Exemplar Bullet Examination - Proof of Concept

10. In preparation for this examination, four exemplar bullets, fired through bone by L. Haag,
were examined at our laboratory.
a. The exemplar bullets were initially examined and photo-documented by a
combination of stereomicroscopy and digital video microscopy to assess the
overall condition of the bullet. This initial examination showed the presence of
white, translucent particles, consistent with the appearance of bone, on the surface
of or embedded in each of the four exemplai· bullets.
b. After the initial examination and documentation, the bullets were individually
packaged and submitted to Independent Forensics for DNA extraction, to simulate
the process to which the #FL bullet had been subjected. Independent Forensics
Laboratory Supervisor Liz Kopitke placed each of the damaged bullets in separate
test tubes and submerged them in buffer fluid. Ms. Kopitke then shook the test
tubes in her hand.
c. The post-extraction exemplar bullets were again examined and photo-documented
by a combination of stereomicroscopy and digital video microscopy. This
examination showed that white, translucent particles, morphologically consistent
3
with bone, remained on and embedded in each of the four exemplar bullets. That
is, the DNA extraction conducted by Independent Forensics, which was meant to
simulate the the extraction process #FL was subjected to, did not cause the white,
translucent particles consistent with bone to fall or become dislodged from the
exemplar bullet
d. SEM/EDS analysis of debris on two of the exemplar bul_lets showed, as expected,
the co-occurrence of calcium, phosphorous and oxygen in areas identified by
digital video microscopy as containing white, translucent particles that appeared
to be fragments of bone.

11. This study of exemplar bullets demonstrates the following:
a. Particles consistent with bone were detected on each of the four exemplar bullets
that were studied.
b. This approach using a combination of stereomicroscopy, digital video microscopy
and scanning electron microscopy was shown to be suitable for the in situ
documentation and identification of bone on a bullet. If indications of bone were
detected by these methods, further analytical approaches could be applied to more
specifically confirm its presence.
c. Particles consistent with bone were detected on the exemplar bullets after they
were subjected to a DNA extraction process meant to simulate the DNA
extraction performed on #FL.
Bullet #FL Analysis

12. On 23 May 2017, a bullet (M05-2467 #FL) was hand canied to Microtrace by Special
Agent Jeff Wisch of the Wisconsin Depai.tment of Justice.

13. The bullet remained in the custody of SA Wisch during the analysis performed at
Microtrace.

14. The bullet was opened, photo-documented, and examined using a combination of
stereomicroscopy and digital video microscopy.
15. This examination revealed that the bullet surface was covered in debris exhibiting the
following characteristics:
a. A waxy substance covers a significant portion (-40%) of the leading surface of
the bullet. This material may be related to the waxes used by a firearms analysts
to orient and hold bullets during their analysis. Fmther analysis of the waxy
material could clarify this point.
b. Numerous, fine red flakes are on or embedded in the waxy substance.
c. Numerous fibers are observed adhering to the waxy substance. Most of these are
colorless; however, red and black fiber fragments were also noted. Other white
fibers not associated with the waxy surface were observed in association with the
bullet. These fibers could be more specifically identified after isolation and
fmther analysis.
d. Numerous wood fragments are present in, on and/or under the waxy substance.
Further analysis could elucidate their specific relationship to the waxy substance.
Other wood fragments appear to be directly adhering to or embedded in the lead
of the bullet. This later observation suggests that at least some of the wood was
deposited when the energized bullet encountered a wooden object. Some of the
fragments observed are individual particles of wood. One particle appears to be
an agglomeration of woody fragments, possibly originating from a manufactured
wood product such as chip or particle board. Isolation and analysis of these
particles would be required if their specific identity ( e.g. species, type of wood
product) is of interest.
e. A rounded red droplet (-.073 nml) adjacent to a smaller red droplet (-0.005
mm2) is present on one side of the bullet. The identity of this dried liquid is
presently unknown. Based upon its color and the fact that the bullet was
previously extracted for DNA, it seems unlikely that this is blood. The color,
texture, and shape of the deposit suggests that the material may be paint.
Regardless of it identity, the texture of the bullet in the area where the droplets are
observed strongly suggests that the droplet was deposited after the bullet was fired
and came to rest. This material could be identified if subjected to fmther analysis.
f. No particles consistent with bone were detected by an examination using
stereomicroscopy or digital video microscopy.

16. Note that the criteria for classification each material described above is based upon in situ
observations and are not necessarily inclusive of all particle types that may be present. A
more thorough examination would require the physical isolation of the debris for a more
detailed analysis.

17. The sample was examined without any further preparation in a JEOL 71 00FT field
emission scanning electron microscope with a 50 mm2 Oxford SDD EDS detector.
a. The base of the bullet was fixed upon a piece of conductive, double sided, carbon
    tape.
b. An image of the bullet was obtained at 20 kV. The sample was examined by a
   combination of backscatter and secondary electron imaging at magnifications
   ranging from -50x to 2000x.
c. Elemental maps were collected from various areas on the leading surface of the
   bullet that showed surfaces with exposed lead (i.e., away from the waxy deposit).
   The elemental maps were examined for areas with elevated levels of calcium and
   phosphorous. Each area analyzed was rotated toward the EDS detector to
   increase the number ofx-rays detected.
d. No areas with elevated levels of calcium and phosphorous were detected,
   indicating the absence of detectable bone.
e. A few silicon-rich areas were noted, which may suggest the presence of silicate
   compounds (e.g., minerals).
f. No particles consistent with bone were detected by SEM/EDS analysis.

18. Following the analysis, the bullet was repackaged, sealed and retained by SA Wisch.
Conclusions

19. Based upon the our analyses, there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet passed
through bone. In fact, the particulate evidence that is present strongly suggests an
alternate hypothesis, which is that the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden
object, possibly a manufactured wood product. Furthermore, the presence ofred droplets
deposited on the bullet suggest that the bullet had picked up additional contamination
from its environment at some point after coming to rest (i.e., droplets of potential red
paint or a red liquid).


20. Based upon these findings, it is our understanding that an investigator was sent by the
Zellner Law Office to the Avery garage to review the area for possible sources of the
particulate types described above. It is our understanding that the following possible
sources were identified:
a.    Particle board in the garage with apparent bullet holes.
b.    Red painted surfaces including a ladder in the garage and a red painted ceiling.

21. Each of the above listed materials observed on the bullet could be identified specifically,
if their actual identity, is of importance to the investigation. This may provide ftn1her
constraints or refinement of the hypotheses I have advanced. To facilitate this, specimens
would need to be isolated from the bullet and analyzed individually. Isolation and
analyses could be conducted using only a small portion of the material available. The
potential sources for the particulate matter that were recently collected from the A very
garage could be directly compared to materials on the bullet.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #169 on: October 29, 2018, 11:38:PM »

19. Based upon the our analyses, there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet passed
through bone. In fact, the particulate evidence that is present strongly suggests an
alternate hypothesis, which is that the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden
object, possibly a manufactured wood product. Furthermore, the presence ofred droplets
deposited on the bullet suggest that the bullet had picked up additional contamination
from its environment at some point after coming to rest (i.e., droplets of potential red
paint or a red liquid).



It was never argued at Avery's trial that this bullet passed through bone. However we do know she was shot to the left of the head because the forensic anthropologist found bullet traces in parts of her skull consistent with gunshot damage.

Brendan tells the investigators that she was shot multiple times. They find "10 or 11" shell casings at the scene. 

"A Exhibit 225. Again, another .22 long rifle shell
casing found on the, uh, floor in the garage. Tent
number 15.
Q Okay. And, finally, Exhibit 226?
A Be tent number 16, another .22 long rifle shell
casing found on the, uh, floor in the garage.
Q Now, Deputy Kucharski, um, I think we've seen --
is it six photos of shell casings?
A Yes. Six photos.
Q How many .22 long rifle shell casings did you
find that morning?
A Um, 10 or 11 we found.

"

And so, We have 10 or 11 shell casings found. But only one bullet with no traces of bone on. From these facts we can infer that this particular bullet did not come into contact with bone. It passed through a fleshy area of the victim hence exited out her body and into the ground were it was later found. Were as the other bullets remained inside the victims body and melted beyond recognition while in the burn Barrel.

In 2017 Steven Avery decided to claim that people would just fire the .22 into his garage floor for no apparent reason. So this man non only has people shooting into his garage floor but also stealing fresh blood out of his sink? Common sense tells me this is man making things up to try and make his latest defence theory work.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2018, 11:41:PM by David1819 »

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #170 on: October 29, 2018, 11:56:PM »
Why did Making a Murderer not mention the blood in Steven Avery's Pontiac? Because it proves guilt.

Why did Making a Murderer not mention the EDTA in the first series? Because it proves guilt.

Why did Making a Murderer only show snippets of Brendan's confession? Because it proves guilt.

Why did Making a Murderer not mention the blood spatter expert from Stevens trial? Because it proves guilt.

Why did Making a Murderer do some crackpot pseudoscientific "Brain Fingerprinting" instead of a polygraph? Because Avery would fail a polygraph.

Why does Making a Murderer resort to personal attacks against Kratz. They have no valid arguments.

Is Making a Murderer the most unethical and manipulative documentary of all time? Probably.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2018, 11:57:PM by David1819 »

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #171 on: October 30, 2018, 12:08:AM »
7. Based on the information I have reviewed, and past testing which I have carried
out, it is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty in the field of forensic ballistics, that the
damaged bullet recovered from Steven Avery's garage and purported to yield a full DNA profile
of Teresa Halbach ("Ms. Halbach") (Wisconsin State Crime Lab Item FL) shows no evidence of
having been shot through Ms. Halbach's skull. The bullet, which was identified as a .22 long
rifle bullet, was comprised of such soft metal that there would be detectable bone fragments
embedded in the damaged bullet if it had been fired through Ms. Halbach' s skull. Because no
bone fragments have been identified in the damaged bullet, Item FL, over the course of its
examination - including DNA and firearms/toolmarks analysis - at the Wisconsin State Crime
Lab, it is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty if the field of ballistics, that Item FL
was not fired through Ms. Halbach's skull.

Again it was never claimed that this particular bullet found is the one that passed through her skull!


All these experts Zellner has hired have been fed a false premise. Its also become apparent to me that Stuart James was never informed about the blood in Stevens Pontiac!

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #172 on: October 30, 2018, 12:50:AM »
It was never argued at Avery's trial that this bullet passed through bone. However we do know she was shot to the left of the head because the forensic anthropologist found bullet traces in parts of her skull consistent with gunshot damage.

Brendan tells the investigators that she was shot multiple times. They find "10 or 11" shell casings at the scene. 

"A Exhibit 225. Again, another .22 long rifle shell
casing found on the, uh, floor in the garage. Tent
number 15.
Q Okay. And, finally, Exhibit 226?
A Be tent number 16, another .22 long rifle shell
casing found on the, uh, floor in the garage.
Q Now, Deputy Kucharski, um, I think we've seen --
is it six photos of shell casings?
A Yes. Six photos.
Q How many .22 long rifle shell casings did you
find that morning?
A Um, 10 or 11 we found.

"

And so, We have 10 or 11 shell casings found. But only one bullet with no traces of bone on. From these facts we can infer that this particular bullet did not come into contact with bone. It passed through a fleshy area of the victim hence exited out her body and into the ground were it was later found. Were as the other bullets remained inside the victims body and melted beyond recognition while in the burn Barrel.

In 2017 Steven Avery decided to claim that people would just fire the .22 into his garage floor for no apparent reason. So this man non only has people shooting into his garage floor but also stealing fresh blood out of his sink? Common sense tells me this is man making things up to try and make his latest defence theory work.

You're talking nonsense - they found wood splinters in the bullet tip, certainly not consistent with having been shot through soft tissue

d. Numerous wood fragments are present in, on and/or under the waxy substance.
Further analysis could elucidate their specific relationship to the waxy substance.
Other wood fragments appear to be directly adhering to or embedded in the lead
of the bullet. This later observation suggests that at least some of the wood was
deposited when the energized bullet encountered a wooden object. Some of the
fragments observed are individual particles of wood. One particle appears to be
an agglomeration of woody fragments, possibly originating from a manufactured
wood product such as chip or particle board. Isolation and analysis of these
particles would be required if their specific identity ( e.g. species, type of wood
product) is of interest.

20. Based upon these findings, it is our understanding that an investigator was sent by the
Zellner Law Office to the Avery garage to review the area for possible sources of the
particulate types described above. It is our understanding that the following possible
sources were identified:
a.    Particle board in the garage with apparent bullet holes.
b.    Red painted surfaces including a ladder in the garage and a red painted ceiling.

Brendan didn't even mention that she was shot until he was told, then he said she was shot twice, the number of shots changed when it was clear the investigators weren't happy with his answer. Brendan tells the investigators that there are usually casings all over the place so it's consistent with randomly firing to 22.

You talk about Julie being coached on extremely flimsy guesswork but when it's right under your nose, you try it play it down  ::).
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #173 on: October 30, 2018, 12:53:AM »
Again it was never claimed that this particular bullet found is the one that passed through her skull!


All these experts Zellner has hired have been fed a false premise. Its also become apparent to me that Stuart James was never informed about the blood in Stevens Pontiac!

There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop! It's a random bullet, with traces of wood splinters linked to Teresa by some VERY dodgy interrogation tactics!

It was part of the trial - of course he would have been informed!  ::) You know about it don't you? It's HIGHLY unlikely that YOU would know and he wouldn't. The blood in the Pontiac is in a place you would expect to find it!
« Last Edit: October 30, 2018, 12:56:AM by Caroline »
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #174 on: October 30, 2018, 12:58:AM »
There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop! It's a random bullet, with traces of wood splinters linked to Teresa by some VERY dodgy interrogation tactics!

It was part of the trial - of course he would have been informed!  ::) You know about it don't you? It's HIGHLY unlikely that YOU would know and he wouldn't. The blood in the Pontiac is in a place you would expect to find it!

Oh and some DNA, just as Avery's DNA was found under the hood - the hood that was also fed to Dassey.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline notsure

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1684
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #175 on: October 30, 2018, 06:26:AM »
It was also interesting that the hood latch swatch had not a single particle of dirt orgrease a completely sterile swab ! How odd when your swabbing a car that none of that is found.

It’s useless trying to debate with David on this as he has dismissed watching series 2 so is constantly quoting from the trial etc

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #176 on: October 30, 2018, 11:30:AM »
It was also interesting that the hood latch swatch had not a single particle of dirt orgrease a completely sterile swab ! How odd when your swabbing a car that none of that is found.

It’s useless trying to debate with David on this as he has dismissed watching series 2 so is constantly quoting from the trial etc

I think he's watched it but it's pointless trying to debate with David on anything - he just ignores things he can't answer or acts like they don't exist.
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #177 on: October 30, 2018, 02:19:PM »
Oh and some DNA, just as Avery's DNA was found under the hood - the hood that was also fed to Dassey.


So you arguing the people at the lab took Avery's 2003 buccal swab from the Sheriffs office and planted it on the hood latch to match Dassey's statement.


While the "real killer" took Avery's fresh blood from his sink and planted it in the Rav4.


This is a double frame up where by the real killer plants evidence against Avery and the police/lab staff then plant even more evidence on top of that.

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 27075
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #178 on: October 30, 2018, 02:39:PM »

So you arguing the people at the lab took Avery's 2003 buccal swab from the Sheriffs office and planted it on the hood latch to match Dassey's statement.


While the "real killer" took Avery's fresh blood from his sink and planted it in the Rav4.


This is a double frame up where by the real killer plants evidence against Avery and the police/lab staff then plant even more evidence on top of that.

Am I? Where did I say that? I haven't actually said I believe Avery is innocent - you've assumed that - I SAID there is something wrong with the evidence, especially the interrogation of Brendan Dassey.

Just so you know, I don't buy the sink theory - where did the blood come from? Who knows but that is also an issue for the Bamber case because it certainly didn't come from Sheila's underwear!
Few people have the imagination for reality

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #179 on: October 30, 2018, 03:09:PM »
There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop!

Teresa's DNA was recovered from the bullet you xxx xxx xxx!

Through a more detailed search of the garage, two bullet fragments were found in Avery's garage. One of those bullet fragments, after going through Teresa Halbach, included Teresa's DNA. And so as a matter, through Mr. Gahn and through his experts, you will learn that Teresa helped you too, that she left behind some evidence for you to consider in this case. Teresa left behind her DNA for you to consider on one of the bullets that's found in the defendant, Mr. Avery's, garage.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2018, 06:36:PM by maggie »