Spoiler Can someone please tell me why the the state had dismissed Steve's blood vial as possible evidence? I mean seriously, that right there could mean the difference between being guilty and innocent. Nothing was explained as to why the box was tampered with or the hole in the vial itself. I was pissed off at this point along with all of the defended motion that was denied by the judge. I honestly think that whole town is IN on all of this to make sure he's found guilty. So much inconsistencies in the evidence that it just disgusted me that no one is held accountable ( The towns police dept.). I honestly not sure if Steve is guilty or not, but the fact of the matter is, there's no conclusive evident beyond a reasble doubt to convict him period. Also may God put Brandon under his watch.
They basically made the leap from, no EDTA in the blood samples, so the evidence tampering doesn't matter I guess. Did they dismiss the blood vial? I thought they used the tests to "prove" Avery actively bled in the Rav4, and the blood was not from a vial. I have to assume they talked further on it, but didn't include it in the documentary. Alone it's not enough to create reasonable doubt to me, but along with everything else it does.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...umentary-s-subject-steven-avery-a6790546.html It's about to go down.
I'd be inclined to underestimate Anonymous' impact or overestimate the consequences of tangling with law enforcement and/or the judiciary process. Ultimately the individuals who advocate and administer justice are swayed by a lot more than a single documentary.
Watched with your dog? Ya boy. There's a lot missing from the transcripts and show. I watched it all and am now just waiting to see what happens.
not sure what anon can really do to make an impact. remember in the final episode, the Avery lawyer said they would need somebody to come forward or a new test to prove there wasn't any edt in the blood found in the car. some pretty good theories gathered from the reddit. i'm leaning towards bobby and scott did it http://fusion.net/story/249427/netflix-making-a-murderer-what-happened-theories/
While I 100% think there's more than enough reasonable doubt to have kept Avery free, if we think Avery is too "dumb" to have cleaned up the murder scene, then whey do we think 2 Manitowoc County Officers are smart enough to plant the blood?
Why wouldn't they be? They are law enforcement so they would know what evidence would be necessary to charge and convict, ie blood stains, even if there's zero logic behind why blood smears (but no fingerprints) would even be inside the car.. Sounds totally like something they would do.
Am about to finish the last episode. Even if I only saw part of the trial through the documentary, it established considerable reasonable doubt in my mind. Because of that, if I were a juror, I would be wrong to vote guilty. The end. There should be no further discussion of it. This guy should be free. Our justice system, which I used to think of as unflappable, is largely not. It makes you think about a lot of things in regards to it.
I still don't get why Sgt. Colburn was on the stand saying he essentially saw the car after Nov.1, but before it went "missing". And verifying it's plates, make, and model. Like how does this not get more attention?
