Post by Mitchell on Jan 11, 2016 13:15:48 GMT
That was in the documentary. There was no existing lab test for determining if dried blood has once contained EDTA. There had been testing methods in the past but they were all deemed too inaccurate and did not stand up to peer review. The FBI created a whole new testing procedure and methodology in order to test the blood samples in this case. Out of four samples collected and sent to the FBI to be tested, they tested one. It showed no presence of EDTA. There wasn't any peer review. No peer review. No statistical sampling for accuracy. Nothing. It's in the documentary. A whole episode was about this because it was such a big deal. Netflix offers a free trial subscription. Free for a whole month. You should check it out.
There are many articles and other information available on the internet about this case...for free...you should check it out. And, yes, I have watched the entire Netflix soap opera.
I doubt the FBI were trying to specifically frame Avery. To the contrary, the were supporting state and local law enforcement through whatever means neccessary. It's just what they do.
People keep posting they same "article" about things left out of the documentary(here and elsewhere). They characterize it as a "news story" or "article" which, if you didn't know better, suggests that it's journalism. Written, fact checked, sourced, vetted, then given editorial approval. It's an email written by Kratz. He cites no sources. These are merely unsubstantiated claims. He has ZERO credibility.
Police corruption and misconduct happen. It is commonplace. In this case that doesn't mean that they killed Halbach, stashed her ride on that property, and planted her remains in Averys burn pit. They were guilty of not controlling the crime scene, allowing people to enter the crime scene who had an obvious conflict of interest, planting at least the key in Averys room and the phantom bullet in the garage, not doing a proper grid search of the fire pit, coercing a confession from a retarded 16 year old, attempting to prejudice a jury pool by making inflamatory statements, engaging in backroom deals with Dassey's public defender, etc...
They found no evidence which would corroborate Dassey's confession. The prosecution's theory of the crime was wrong and they had to have known it. Yet they still presented it as fact. They wanted to convict Avery at all costs. Willfull misconduct and corruption.
Someone on that expansive property killed Halbach and it may very well have been Steven Avery. Now we don't know and probably never will. They should have actually investigated her murder and they may have actually solved this case.