Making a Murderer

I got that episode, what I mean is that there was no edta found in the blood which means it wasn't from the vile. That being said, the test they did for edta wasn't really conclusive so there may have been some in there.

That is what the expert from the FBI said, but the expert with the defense said that the absence of EDTA did not mean it wasn't from a test tube. From what I could understand that test is only good for proving that it was from a test tube if it is present, not the other way around.

But we will never know any better because for some reason they used the entire sample for this test.

There is so much suspicious activity on this case I don't see any way around a conspiracy.

Here is a good reddit thread on the blood. It looks like the EDTA should have been detected if the blood was from the tube, but who knows about tampering or the validity of the test.

That is what the expert from the FBI said, but the expert with the defense said that the absence of EDTA did not mean it wasn't from a test tube. From what I could understand that test is only good for proving that it was from a test tube if it is present, not the other way around.

But we will never know any better because for some reason they used the entire sample for this test.

There is so much suspicious activity on this case I don't see any way around a conspiracy.

Here is a good reddit thread on the blood. It looks like the EDTA should have been detected if the blood was from the tube, but who knows about tampering or the validity of the test.

all the test does is confirm the presence of edta. however, the test is not reliable so just because they didn't find any edta that doesn't mean that there was none there. as you say, it doesn't rule out that there is no edta in the sample, just that the test was not able to detect it.

and yes, way to much suspicious/inconsistent activity on the case to be able to offer a builty plea imo.

what i found startling is one of the jurors said that at the start of deliberations, 7 were fro not guilty, 2 were undecided and 3 were strongly for guilty. it sounds like those 3 had already determined his guilt and were set on convincing the others to vote that way. it seems the other jurors were simply worn down and had enough so they decided to vote guilty just so they could get it over with.

well this looks like a good follow up to the netflix series:

WISN's Dan O'Donnell originally covered the Steven Avery trial as a news anchor and reporter and is releasing a 10-part podcast series rebutting many of the claims made by the Netflix show along with presenting other facts as to why Steven did it. You can hear Episode 1 for free below.

Read more: http://news.iheart.com/articles/national-national-news-104668/rebutting-a-murderer-hear-the-other-14263826/#ixzz3x0A1MVww

What really bothered me about the series is that Steven Avery didn't own any underwear.

What really bothered me about the series is that Steven Avery didn't own any underwear.

Underwear is for the weak!

From what the coworkers have told me, two people (or more) clearly had an agenda which pretty much equates to, gasp, a conspiracy.

There is so much suspicious activity on this case I don't see any way around a conspiracy.

Shiiiiiiiit… we agreed on something..

TEOTWAKI?

Conspiracies exist Shogun, I just need more than motive to start believing in one. Even in the Avery case I am not sure he didn't do it, but it seems the cops were hell bent on making sure there was evidence.

well this looks like a good follow up to the netflix series:

WISN's Dan O'Donnell originally covered the Steven Avery trial as a news anchor and reporter and is releasing a 10-part podcast series rebutting many of the claims made by the Netflix show along with presenting other facts as to why Steven did it. You can hear Episode 1 for free below.

Read more: http://news.iheart.com/articles/national-national-news-104668/rebutting-a-murderer-hear-the-other-14263826/#ixzz3x0A1MVww

I listened to a little and will probably listen to more, but so far he doesn't say much we didn't know, he just draws different conclusions from it and is clearly of the mind that cops are good guys and to suggest these cops are not good guys is a sacrilege.

so brendan dassey's conviction in this whole thing has been overturned…

http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/2016/08/12/dassey-wins-ruling-teresa-halbach-murder/88632502/

About time, imo. That interrogation was ridiculous. They led that poor kid straight to the answers they wanted.

About time, imo. That interrogation was ridiculous. They led that poor kid straight to the answers they wanted.

now you have to wonder if steven avery's conviction is going to get overturned. there's a lawyer currently working on his appeal.

Yeah?

yup

yup

Indeed

now you have to wonder if steven avery's conviction is going to get overturned. there's a lawyer currently working on his appeal.

Since they didn't use Brendan's confession to convict Steven, that would be unlikely. They're going to have to come up with some new evidence unfortunately.

My understanding is that they're currently trying to figure out a way to test the blood stains from the car for traces of cotton, which could prove that a cotton swab was used to apply the blood to the ignition. That could earn them a re-trial.