For Those Who Do Not Think Avery was Framed & Evidence Planted - Discuss

[CoolJ]

Wow, very hostile in this thread. I am merely trying to understand the point of view that Avery was not framed. I guess nobody wants to discuss it. I can understand that. Cheers!

 

[Madeleine74]

Wow, very hostile in this thread. I am merely trying to understand the point of view that Avery was not framed. I guess nobody wants to discuss it. I can understand that. Cheers!

If you start on page 1 in this thread, you'll see many people listed evidence they found compelling in the case. Most of us still posting have provided points of views and lists.

 

[CoolJ]

If you start on page 1 in this thread, you'll see many people listed evidence they found compelling in the case. Most of us still posting have provided points of views and lists.

Already done thanks. All my questions remain unanswered.

 

[Madeleine74]

Already done thanks. All my questions remain unanswered.

What are your questions and what poster(s) do you have questions for? We may all agree he's (SA) guilty of the murder, but we probably have different opinions of various aspects of the case.

 

[Saul Vesalot]

BBM

He wasn't just accused of murder, he was convicted of murder.

That's nice. Most of these claims were made during the time when he was accused. That is what I was talking about, him saying one thing and then another is..not all that surprising in the context of a dumb guy trying to talk his way out of something.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

ISHI Talk: EDTA Test Accurate, From OJ Simpson Trial to ‘Making a Murderer’

Though there was no standardized test for EDTA – and there doesn’t remain one now – the FBI scientists were accustomed to detecting for poisons, narcotics, and a wide array of other substances based on microscopy and a full retinue of techniques.

The EDTA test on the blood inside the car was a focus of the documentary, which prompted thousands to sign ineffectual petitions demanding Avery’s release. (The murder conviction of Brendan Dassey, Avery’s then-teenaged nephew, was tossed by a judge this summer).

Harmon told Forensic that the EDTA test works – and that it is a red herring by the defense looking for some way to cast doubt on the prosecution’s case.
“From 1994 to 2007, the only one new thing is that there was a new FBI lab,” Harmon said. “If you step back from all the criticism, you can address the confusion… This test can detect old EDTA.”

I've read here on Websleuths that the FBI rushed to develop a test for EDTA and that is cause to doubt the results. That is untrue. They tested blood for EDTA in the Simpson trial years before the Avrey trial.

https://www.forensicmag.com/news/20...est-accurate-oj-simpson-trial-making-murderer

 

[Karinna]

ISHI Talk: EDTA Test Accurate, From OJ Simpson Trial to ‘Making a Murderer’





I've read here on Websleuths that the FBI rushed to develop a test for EDTA and that is cause to doubt the results. That is untrue. They tested blood for EDTA in the Simpson trial years before the Avrey trial.

https://www.forensicmag.com/news/20...est-accurate-oj-simpson-trial-making-murderer

From what KZ said she is not relying on the EDTA testing though to prove planting.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

From what KZ said she is not relying on the EDTA testing though to prove planting.

I'm relying on it.

 

[Karinna]

I'm relying on it.

For what? Because it's going to be irrelevent to the ongoing case. The EDTA testing was only relevent at the past Trial, but not now.
If its just for the sake of your discussion then will leave you to it,

 

[Deleted member 39678]

For what? Because it's going to be irrelevent to the ongoing case. The EDTA testing was only relevent at the past Trial, but not now.
If its just for the sake of your discussion then will leave you to it,

The fact that no EDTA was found means that Avery's blood found in the Rav4 did not come from the tube held as evidence and therefore it was not planted by LE.

There's no getting around that fact.

 

[Karinna]

The fact that no EDTA was found means that Avery's blood found in the Rav4 did not come from the tube held as evidence and therefore it was not planted by LE.

There's no getting around that fact.

As i posted in a previous thread the tests that are being conducted by the experts are testing for the age of the blood. So if SA's blood was taken from his previous incarcerations and held in vials in an evidence room, then with the testing if its proven the blood is x amount of years old, yet the blood of SA's was supposedly deposited in 2005, but the age of the blood proves it is much older and proves otherwise, that would prove planting.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

As i posted in a previous thread the tests that are being conducted by the experts are testing for the age of the blood. So if SA's blood was taken from his previous incarcerations and held in vials in an evidence room, then with the testing if its proven the blood is x amount of years old, yet the blood of SA's was supposedly deposited in 2005, but the age of the blood proves it is much older and proves otherwise, that would prove planting.

I'm posting about what we know and not what may be found in the future.

That's why I don't think that Avery was framed and evidence planted. If Zellner gets test results that shows the blood is too old but no EDTA is found then she's going to have to explain the discrepancy. JMO

 

[CoolJ]

I'm posting about what we know and not what may be found in the future.

Thanks for this comment Ranch. Starting to get a better understanding of your thought process towards this case.

 

[CoolJ]

I'm posting about what we know and not what may be found in the future.

That's why I don't think that Avery was framed and evidence planted. If Zellner gets test results that shows the blood is too old but no EDTA is found then she's going to have to explain the discrepancy. JMO

If the tests show the blood is too old it is surely not Zellner that will have to do the explaining.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

If the tests show the blood is too old it is surely not Zellner that will have to do the explaining.

She will have to explain where the blood used to frame SA came from if it's been proven that it didn't come from the evidence vial. I guess she could claim that LE had a different sample of Avery's blood that didn't have the preservative EDTA in it. It wouldn't make much sense but some would buy into it. JMO

 

[IDK]

If the tests show the blood is too old it is surely not Zellner that will have to do the explaining.

:goodpost: You nailed it.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

:goodpost: You nailed it.

I think that post missed the target.

 

[IDK]

As i posted in a previous thread the tests that are being conducted by the experts are testing for the age of the blood. So if SA's blood was taken from his previous incarcerations and held in vials in an evidence room, then with the testing if its proven the blood is x amount of years old, yet the blood of SA's was supposedly deposited in 2005, but the age of the blood proves it is much older and proves otherwise, that would prove planting.

Another great post! WS isn't letting me post anymore emojis, so here you go,

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Another great post! WS isn't letting me post anymore emojis, so here you go,

Another post that falls short. The fact that the FBI didn't find any EDTA is a big problem for Zellner. JMO

 

[Safeguard]

Another post that falls short. The fact that the FBI didn't find any EDTA is a big problem for Zellner. JMO

EDTA degrades over time. The absence of it on those swabs means nothing. Particularly if you don't even bother to test the level of EDTA in the evidence vial. If the blood is found to be older than the time frame of the crime, it was planted. Nothing more is needed to show that.