3 ms·
> It's not clear how they could use that blood to place DNA under the hood of the car without it testing positive for blood. They had full control of his entir
by 1024core 11y ago
> It's not clear how they could use that blood to place DNA under the hood of the car without it testing positive for blood.
They had full control of his entire property for more than 8 days. They had access to his bedroom for that entire time. It would be trivial to just grab a used sock and swipe it on the latch.
- tptacek 11y agoThat is true of virtually ever murder case ever.
- gizmo 11y agoNo fingerprints anywhere. None of the victim's blood found (aside from the car trunk). Evidence that the remains had been moved. No murder scene. All the evidence they had against Avery could easily have been planted. That's very very unusual.
- tptacek 11y agoWhen you say "all the evidence", you mean "all the forensic evidence taken from the site". There is other corroborating evidence. These kinds of arguments seem thematically identical to the ones used against Hans Reiser.
- gizmo 11y agoWhat other corroborating evidence? You've been asked elsewhere in this thread to substantiate that claim. (As for Reiser: he told the prosecutors where he buried the body, so his guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt)
- tptacek 11y agoHe told the prosecutors that long after he was convicted of murder!
- JupiterMoon 11y agoBut there is not usually such a clear motivation. Also there are not usually so many things that are "interesting" about the police's handling of the other evidence.