I haven't watched the series...and I don't really intend to, as it doesn't really sound like my cup of tea...but what a lot of people forget is that a juror is supposed to feel like there is absolutely no doubt that someone is guilty. If there is even a little inkling of a doubt, you should vote not guilty. Despite this, there are tons of people that have been falsely convicted. I have no idea if this guy is guilty, but if there are slight doubts after the evidence is put forward, I question why he was convicted. Perhaps the jurors, in their position, felt the evidence was compelling...or perhaps they didn't hold up their end of the bargain...
You are right on all points. Unfortunately, sometimes the Prosecutor just has way more resources than the defense team can put together, and that allows them to paint a picture for the jury that creates the illusion of undeniable proof where there really is none.
In this case, we have a confession from a 16 year old mentally ill family member. A confession given after 4 hours of prodding and leading questions and false promises of "safety" if the kid were to "just tell us the truth. We already know what happened". There was no lawyer present during this interrogation, and as soon as the cops left the room and allowed the kid's mom to come in, he recanted the entire confession.
Much like in the OJ Simpson trial, there are theories here of planted evidence. Avery's new lawyer has hired blood spatter experts, DNA experts and forensic scientists to look at all of the "evidence" with an eye toward the planted evidence theory. Her experts suggest that the 6 drops of blood that were found in the victim's vehicle could not have originated from an open wound on Avery's hand while moving the vehicle. They are spread out, and isolated. If he was actively dripping blood there would be much more volume of blood spread around the vehicle.
They also tested the supposed bullet found in Avery's garage. After having an expert demonstrate how a bullet fired through the head would have bone fragment trace remaining on it, they then analyzed the actual bullet and found nothing but wood particles.
There is a lot of interesting information here, and enough that if his original defense team had hired a few experts to come on the stand, they may have gotten him off.
This is also a man who had already been in jail for 18 years for a crime he had not committed (DNA proof exonerated him in the end). He had won a 34 million dollar suit against the state of Wisconsin and was just about to receive a huge pay day when this murder occurred. Thus leading to the conspiracy theory that the state wanted to frame him for a crime to avoid that big payout.
Who knows where the truth lies in this case. But it sure is interesting!
In this case, we have a confession from a 16 year old mentally ill family member. A confession given after 4 hours of prodding and leading questions and false promises of "safety" if the kid were to "just tell us the truth.
Which we know causes false confessions all the time. Fight or flight kicks in and they get convinced the only way out is to "confess".
Who knows where the truth lies in this case. But it sure is interesting!
Even people who were there often have different "versions" of the truth. I kinda feel like cops and prosecution aren't really there to find "the truth". They investigate the crime, try to find evidence, then put forward hypotheses on how it could have gone down. Sadly, many forget that the cops are just guessing like anyone else.
They also tested the supposed bullet found in Avery's garage. After having an expert demonstrate how a bullet fired through the head would have bone fragment trace remaining on it, they then analyzed the actual bullet and found nothing but wood particles.
So he dug the bullet out after according to them? was he a hunter?
So he dug the bullet out after according to them? was he a hunter?
He owned a .22 rifle. I don't know if he was actually a hunter or not. The gun was left over from the person who had lived in the trailer before him. That person testified in 2016 that the gun was his and he often shot targets all over the property, including near the garage (where the bullet was found). Over the course of his time at the home he estimated he shot over 3000 rounds from the .22 on the property.
The prosecution alleged that the bullet was a through and through, entering one side of the head and leaving from the other, winding up on the floor of Avery's garage. (We don't have a definitive cause of death since the victim's body was burned and all that was ever found were bone fragments).
There are two forensics questions around the bullet.
does a .22 rifle have the power to go in one side of the skull, pass through the brain, and come out the other side. - The new defense lawyer brought a marksman expert to test the theory, who used two animal bones placed on either side of ballistic gel to replicate a head. The .22 he fired was unable to pass through both sides of the bone, instead lodging in the ballistic gel.
A bullet that passed through a body should have trace elements of calcium and phosphorus remaining even after full examination. They are blowing up the image so large that we are talking about microns in size. The bullet that was alleged to be the cause of death had calcium but no phosphorus. The defense expert says calcium can be picked up literally anywhere, you have to have both to show that the bullet passed through bone.
Eliminating the bullet as cause of death does not necessarily prove Avery is innocent, but it is the evidence that was put forth by the prosecutor to get him convicted. If you can demonstrably prove it is not the actual cause of death, then the prosecutors case seems to unravel.
But apparently the court of Wisconsin doesn't buy it, since the guy is still in jail.
Yeah, I was wondering if that's even powerful enough the moment you mentioned that it was a .22.
They're saying he got a headshot with a .22 and it went through his skull and into wood? Yeah, bullshit. Technically, he could possibly get some kind of special high load bullet...but even then, that's not something just a casual user gets. Headshot, then burned the body sounds like more than someone that just happens to have a gun left over from a previous tenant. Was there blood fucking everywhere?
Were these people fucking morons? A bullet does not go through something without having any trace evidence of what it went though on it.
Eliminating the bullet as cause of death does not necessarily prove Avery is innocent, but it is the evidence that was put forth by the prosecutor to get him convicted. If you can demonstrably prove it is not the actual cause of death, then the prosecutors case seems to unravel.
Yeah, clearly it had no relation to whatever the actual cause of death was.
The guy could have killed him for all I know, but I doubt with a .22, and I doubt even further with some random bullet they found in the garage.
But apparently the court of Wisconsin doesn't buy it, since the guy is still in jail.
Yeah, well, it's a lot harder to get out once you are in.
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
You just got a 3.01% upvote from SteemPlus!
To get higher upvotes, earn more SteemPlus Points (SPP). On your Steemit wallet, check your SPP balance and click on "How to earn SPP?" to find out all the ways to earn.
If you're not using SteemPlus yet, please check our last posts in here to see the many ways in which SteemPlus can improve your Steem experience on Steemit and Busy.
You just got splashed by @rewards-pool. For more information on delegating to the @rewards-pool click the following link.
https://steemit.com/steemsilvergold/@rewards-pool/introduction-to-rewards-pool
@rewards-pool where a small delegation can get you a big splash.
I haven't watched the series...and I don't really intend to, as it doesn't really sound like my cup of tea...but what a lot of people forget is that a juror is supposed to feel like there is absolutely no doubt that someone is guilty. If there is even a little inkling of a doubt, you should vote not guilty. Despite this, there are tons of people that have been falsely convicted. I have no idea if this guy is guilty, but if there are slight doubts after the evidence is put forward, I question why he was convicted. Perhaps the jurors, in their position, felt the evidence was compelling...or perhaps they didn't hold up their end of the bargain...
You are right on all points. Unfortunately, sometimes the Prosecutor just has way more resources than the defense team can put together, and that allows them to paint a picture for the jury that creates the illusion of undeniable proof where there really is none.
In this case, we have a confession from a 16 year old mentally ill family member. A confession given after 4 hours of prodding and leading questions and false promises of "safety" if the kid were to "just tell us the truth. We already know what happened". There was no lawyer present during this interrogation, and as soon as the cops left the room and allowed the kid's mom to come in, he recanted the entire confession.
Much like in the OJ Simpson trial, there are theories here of planted evidence. Avery's new lawyer has hired blood spatter experts, DNA experts and forensic scientists to look at all of the "evidence" with an eye toward the planted evidence theory. Her experts suggest that the 6 drops of blood that were found in the victim's vehicle could not have originated from an open wound on Avery's hand while moving the vehicle. They are spread out, and isolated. If he was actively dripping blood there would be much more volume of blood spread around the vehicle.
They also tested the supposed bullet found in Avery's garage. After having an expert demonstrate how a bullet fired through the head would have bone fragment trace remaining on it, they then analyzed the actual bullet and found nothing but wood particles.
There is a lot of interesting information here, and enough that if his original defense team had hired a few experts to come on the stand, they may have gotten him off.
This is also a man who had already been in jail for 18 years for a crime he had not committed (DNA proof exonerated him in the end). He had won a 34 million dollar suit against the state of Wisconsin and was just about to receive a huge pay day when this murder occurred. Thus leading to the conspiracy theory that the state wanted to frame him for a crime to avoid that big payout.
Who knows where the truth lies in this case. But it sure is interesting!
Which we know causes false confessions all the time. Fight or flight kicks in and they get convinced the only way out is to "confess".
Even people who were there often have different "versions" of the truth. I kinda feel like cops and prosecution aren't really there to find "the truth". They investigate the crime, try to find evidence, then put forward hypotheses on how it could have gone down. Sadly, many forget that the cops are just guessing like anyone else.
So he dug the bullet out after according to them? was he a hunter?
He owned a .22 rifle. I don't know if he was actually a hunter or not. The gun was left over from the person who had lived in the trailer before him. That person testified in 2016 that the gun was his and he often shot targets all over the property, including near the garage (where the bullet was found). Over the course of his time at the home he estimated he shot over 3000 rounds from the .22 on the property.
The prosecution alleged that the bullet was a through and through, entering one side of the head and leaving from the other, winding up on the floor of Avery's garage. (We don't have a definitive cause of death since the victim's body was burned and all that was ever found were bone fragments).
There are two forensics questions around the bullet.
does a .22 rifle have the power to go in one side of the skull, pass through the brain, and come out the other side. - The new defense lawyer brought a marksman expert to test the theory, who used two animal bones placed on either side of ballistic gel to replicate a head. The .22 he fired was unable to pass through both sides of the bone, instead lodging in the ballistic gel.
A bullet that passed through a body should have trace elements of calcium and phosphorus remaining even after full examination. They are blowing up the image so large that we are talking about microns in size. The bullet that was alleged to be the cause of death had calcium but no phosphorus. The defense expert says calcium can be picked up literally anywhere, you have to have both to show that the bullet passed through bone.
Eliminating the bullet as cause of death does not necessarily prove Avery is innocent, but it is the evidence that was put forth by the prosecutor to get him convicted. If you can demonstrably prove it is not the actual cause of death, then the prosecutors case seems to unravel.
But apparently the court of Wisconsin doesn't buy it, since the guy is still in jail.
Yeah, I was wondering if that's even powerful enough the moment you mentioned that it was a .22.
They're saying he got a headshot with a .22 and it went through his skull and into wood? Yeah, bullshit. Technically, he could possibly get some kind of special high load bullet...but even then, that's not something just a casual user gets. Headshot, then burned the body sounds like more than someone that just happens to have a gun left over from a previous tenant. Was there blood fucking everywhere?
Were these people fucking morons? A bullet does not go through something without having any trace evidence of what it went though on it.
Yeah, clearly it had no relation to whatever the actual cause of death was.
The guy could have killed him for all I know, but I doubt with a .22, and I doubt even further with some random bullet they found in the garage.
Yeah, well, it's a lot harder to get out once you are in.
Thank you for your continued support of SteemSilverGold
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
Hi, @mikepm74!
You just got a 3.01% upvote from SteemPlus!
To get higher upvotes, earn more SteemPlus Points (SPP). On your Steemit wallet, check your SPP balance and click on "How to earn SPP?" to find out all the ways to earn.
If you're not using SteemPlus yet, please check our last posts in here to see the many ways in which SteemPlus can improve your Steem experience on Steemit and Busy.