The Coroner, Deb Kakatsch, was barred from participating in the investigation. And she was probably the only one that did NOT have a conflict of interest.
Hi, Missy. Do you have a link for this interesting bit of information.The Coroner, Deb Kakatsch, was barred from participating in the investigation. And she was probably the only one that did NOT have a conflict of interest.
Haha, well they do get a little bit tired sometimes,You're going to wear out your fingers, Karrina lol🙄
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
Hi, Missy. Do you have a link for this interesting bit of information.
TIA.![]()
:seeya: Thanks, Missy!
Hi, Missy. Do you have a link for this interesting bit of information.
TIA.![]()
None of the coroner's entry being blocked caused a jury to doubt that it was TH's remains (they were able to use her most recent PAP test and match the DNA profile to some muscle tissue on one of the bones), none of that gave the jury doubt that TH was murdered, none of that was part of the appeal, so it's an issue that MaM viewers raise, but not one that impacted legally either at the trial court level or the CoA level.
SA's defense didn't suggest the remains were someone else--someone not TH. SA later for a time blamed his brothers and suggested one of them murdered TH, thus conceding those were TH's remains and those remains were in fact on Avery property.
So wonder how they explain that high heat temps. destroys DNA fairly quickly, within about 20 minutes of a body burning from the forensic article i linked to throughout a couple of these threads. Maybe their forensic study was wrong?
None of the coroner's entry being blocked caused a jury to doubt that it was TH's remains (they were able to use her most recent PAP test and match the DNA profile to some muscle tissue on one of the bones), none of that gave the jury doubt that TH was murdered, none of that was part of the appeal, so it's an issue that MaM viewers raise, but not one that impacted legally either at the trial court level or the CoA level.
SA's defense didn't suggest the remains were someone else--someone not TH. SA later for a time blamed his brothers and suggested one of them murdered TH, thus conceding those were TH's remains and those remains were in fact on Avery property.
You've asked that same question like 3 times now. And no one here can possibly answer it. If you want to know how 'they' would explain it, then contact them (Manitowoc County or WI DOJ) and ask. They all have email; maybe they'll surprise you and answer. The evidence is what it is. The trial record and testimony is what it is. Muscle tissue was found and was tested and according to the tests, it matched TH. I use the trial record as the basis for the evidence.
SA conceding that the remains on the Avery property were TH but that someone must have planted those remains there is an interesting gotcha because if the convicted says it's her...but someone else killed her... well that removes the "it's not really TH" suggestion, or it should.
And the jury never got to consider that the Coroner was blocked from going to the scene. It wasn't allowed. It's in the transcript that I linked. Personally, for me (and Jaiddie LOL), it's a big deal, I don't think we are alone. JMO