The Tube of Blood

[MysticJynx]

Was checking in on new documents that may have been posted. Found some relating to what seem like the blood evidence. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/keydocuments/ for other documents see http://www.stevenaverycase.org and pick a category.

 

[andreww]

Well logically, if the allegation is that all 6 blood drops/smears from SA were planted, then 2 of them should be enough to trigger the alert in the test (assuming that EDTA test works as designed). I agree they should have tested some from the vial, just to validate their EDTA test, if nothing else.

Whenever you do a scientific test you need to do a control test to prove that the outcome is valid. As on the test of the bullet, they screwed up the control test and had no DNA to retest. That outcome should have been thrown out as well as they are simply denying the defendant the right of that safety net.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Justiceseeker35]

In the science field if you mess up the control the test is invalid. I find the behavior on her part suspect especially when you have a lead investigator telling you what you need to find in the result. *Place her in the house or garage*.

 

[Madeleine74]

Agree andreww

I'm not familiar with what the FBI did in terms of this EDTA test and whether this particular test passed whatever protocol standards might exist within the scientific circles.

That said, I do find it interesting that TH's DNA was found on a bullet fragment. Yes I realize the control was contaminated with the analyst's DNA, but purely from a case follower perspective, it's still an interesting find.

 

[MysticJynx]

Agree andreww

I'm not familiar with what the FBI did in terms of this EDTA test and whether this particular test passed whatever protocol standards might exist within the scientific circles.

That said, I do find it interesting that TH's DNA was found on a bullet fragment. Yes I realize the control was contaminated with the analyst's DNA, but purely from a case follower perspective, it's still an interesting find.

I agree an interesting find. They initially picked up shell casing in their first few searches of the garage but never found this bullet fragment or any other in the garage? How about anywhere on the property, If they had already been planting the evidence, someone on the lot could have picked up fragments and kept them for later. (Random Question would his DNA be on the bullet if he had touched it to load it into the gun?) I have heard it said that the first few searches were done as just sweeping it over to look for Teresa. However they did pull the snowmobile out of the garage so they could see UNDER it. Were they looking for TH there?

Then when they needed to get another search warrant, they coerce that poor learning disabled kid BD by feeding him information about the HOOD of the car and being SHOT 10-11 times, but Shot in the head, Shot in the head while she was in that garage. You may ask why they didnt want to place it in the house? Well the several searches and pictures of the place being more thorough in there those earlier days. Pictures already proving to me anyway that things were not done they way they testify to. No blood on mattresses and such. So they needed to place her in the garage. And all of a sudden in those exact two places, 4 months later they find this remarkable evidence. Remember these couldn't be the shots that came from the head, cause there was testimony that there were no exit wounds found in her skull remains. So he had to have shot her 10-11 times to explain all the shell casing that were found in the garage back in NOV 05. And the bullet fragment someone pocketed in Nov 2005. They had TH's car at Cal Co. by that time. I believe they did not even swab the latch till Apr 06. Which should have been swabbed by the WSCL cause they knew the battery was unplugged as well. The officer may not have changed his gloves after touching something belonging to SA and then unhooking the latch. The cells were not confirmed where they came from as far as it being sweat or just skin cells swiped onto that hood latch. Also in any other case the lab would have followed protocol and dismissed the evidence as inconclusive. Just another protocol they deviated from to make the evidence match the conviction they were looking for not the truth.

The cells on the bullet was never even proven to be her BLOOD, even after they deviated. They were only able to find the nucleated cells which contain the DNA. and being as it is supposedly a bullet that went through her body and landed on the floor under a compressor. SA did such a good job shooting that the blood on the bullet cleaned itself off leaving just a tiny little bit of DNA that cant be identified as blood. Then blood splatter of that flying bullet just evaporated in thin air?

Hmmmmm Nothing adds up.

Just another tidbit I had read somewhere was the FBI guy said something about the actual topper to the blood tube the seal of it was broken. Unsure tho still looking into this.

 

[Safeguard]

It's often claimed that the vial of blood top having a hole in it is the norm, but SA's lawyer, contacted the lab that took that sample and they stated that they did not do it that way. Gets tiring hearing that claim over and over.

 

[MysticJynx]

This FBI lab guy ML is hard to understand, he seems to do a lot of rambling about stuff he could just say yes or no to. Like the defense is trying to simplify the tests he has done and he just likes to hear himself talk in technical scientific terms some on the jury may not understand.

Hes talking about the blood that is 10 years old and how EDTA may degrade inside the tube after so long. He says he does a test of his own blood putting into the purple top tube, and mixes it then takes a sample from that tube, and takes a sample from the tube that was in the clerks office of SA's and takes an example from that. Then he compared those. According to him this indicated that the actual EDTA in the tube hadn't degrade to not be seen in his whatever machine hes using for the test. the microscope. The defense is trying to find out if he did a test of how EDTA may degrade in the sense of how the sample from the RAV4 outside of the tube dried. I don't think they ever did this kind of test. I could be wrong. but I needed to take a break from this testimony. I can hear this guy in my head as I read and I think, this guy has some ego, and likes to hear himself talk. How dare anyone question his testing.

Oh and one of the things he said was... "The standard operating procedure that we DEVELOPED for the analysis of EDTA in dried blood stains, SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS CASE."And something about how he did follow the standard procedure that he himself just developed.

He just made up this test and was rushed to do so, you know so he could once again hear himself speak. This was big a big case, big for him as head of his unit. EDTA had not been used since the highly public OJ case, and he wasn't on that one, but now he opportunity to be in this high profiled case. Ego.

 

[missy1974]

I have been following some threads on reddit that have some scientific (way smarter than me) people on it MysticJynx that are still trying to figure it all out LOL What I have gathered is..... the test was done in the OJ case..... not done again until this case .. BUTTTTTT it's not really for any reason than it's really not needed that often. So there is no standard for doing this test, because it's not something that is done all the time, makes sense, right? So I will give that to the EDTA guy. That being said, I have read different opinions, and they go both ways, some say it's good, some say nope.
Also.... I wonder if the defense knew anyone or could have found someone that could have done their own testing? From what I understand, the only one to have ever done it before was that FBI lab. Maybe Zellner will find someone now that would be able to do their own independent testing.

 

[Cymbaline]

Okay, so for reference, I took a picture of a tube I just drew. I haven't done anything with the tube at all except draw blood into it. This is the size of the hole made by a standard 21 G venipuncture needle. Keep in mind, this is a 10mL tube whereas the one in the evidence box was either a 4 or a 6. (I didn't have a small tube with the same kind of top).

For the record, I just finished the series and I believe evidence was planted. I just wanted to show that the hole in the top of the tube didn't necessarily mean anything.

Can you email a mod and get verified? Thanks for the input and pic!!!

 

[andreww]

I have been following some threads on reddit that have some scientific (way smarter than me) people on it MysticJynx that are still trying to figure it all out LOL What I have gathered is..... the test was done in the OJ case..... not done again until this case .. BUTTTTTT it's not really for any reason than it's really not needed that often. So there is no standard for doing this test, because it's not something that is done all the time, makes sense, right? So I will give that to the EDTA guy. That being said, I have read different opinions, and they go both ways, some say it's good, some say nope.
Also.... I wonder if the defense knew anyone or could have found someone that could have done their own testing? From what I understand, the only one to have ever done it before was that FBI lab. Maybe Zellner will find someone now that would be able to do their own independent testing.

Usually independent testing of forensic evidence by the defence is not permitted simply because there isn't always enough of a sample to do tests multiple times. I believe that the defendants experts are allowed to sit in on the prosecution's testing to ensure proper procedures are followed. However, I don't think Averys defence budget was big enough for those kinds of expenses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Cymbaline]

Something is wrong with the alleged SA blood in the car. Do we even know if it's actual blood? I'm starting to think it's a red fluid with SA's DNA embedded.


Ryan, Ryan, Ryan.

MOO.IMO.JMO

 

[Justiceseeker35]

Something is wrong with the alleged SA blood in the car. Do we even know if it's actual blood? I'm starting to think it's a red fluid with SA's DNA embedded.


Ryan, Ryan, Ryan.

MOO.IMO.JMO

I'm actually wondering how many forensics experts committed this crime. Certainly two men with around 70 IQ didn't do this. The red fluid is a little far fetched. A slide stain can easily prove human blood. But.. do we know if this new defense team can perform their own independent testing? There's plenty of things in hind sight should be tested and retested. Unfortunately the bullet...

 

[missy1974]

I'm actually wondering how many forensics experts committed this crime. Certainly two men with around 70 IQ didn't do this. The red fluid is a little far fetched. A slide stain can easily prove human blood. But.. do we know if this new defense team can perform their own independent testing? There's plenty of things in hind sight should be tested and retested. Unfortunately the bullet...

I don't think it took forensic experts. I think it took 1 or maybe 2 LE (plant evidence I mean, not commit the murder). Then after that it just takes a bunch of biased people doing their jobs with tunnel vision IMO
From what I understand, all the evidence is in storage. I would be shocked if Zellner doesn't have experts lined up and ready to do some testing. I wonder if she would have to get a court order to do that? I think so... and in that case, we will eventually see that request.

 

[Cymbaline]

It's in the shape of the letter S and doesn't look like the right color.

I'm actually wondering how many forensics experts committed this crime. Certainly two men with around 70 IQ didn't do this. The red fluid is a little far fetched. A slide stain can easily prove human blood. But.. do we know if this new defense team can perform their own independent testing? There's plenty of things in hind sight should be tested and retested. Unfortunately the bullet...

 

[Limaes]

FBI report confirming no EDTA.

No EDTA = No framing

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[IDK]

FBI report confirming no EDTA.

No EDTA = No framing

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

What's interesting to me in this report is that specimen Q49 is listed as "liquid blood sample from Steven Avery" and was found to contain EDTA, as would be expected.
But, samples Q46-Q48 which did NOT contain EDTA, are not listed as Steven Avery's blood. They are only listed as being from the crime scene.
So how does this prove that the specimens without EDTA actually were Steven Avery's blood ?

 

[NSS]

EDTA was found in the sample taken directly from the lavendar topped tube.

(At what concentration did it show? If it is just a trace, this is not a very sensitive test)

Q46 - 47 and 48 didn't not show EDTA, but they were swabs taken from the crime scene (vehicle I believe). Does this acid dissipate/evaporate when smeared and left for some time?
I'd have liked for a control test of blood removed from the tube, smeared on a similar surface, and then tested. I'd be better able to trust this (long since denounced as unreliable and no longer used) test.

I like my proof to be proof not an educated opinion.

 

[Limaes]

What's interesting to me in this report is that specimen Q49 is listed as "liquid blood sample from Steven Avery" and was found to contain EDTA, as would be expected.
But, samples Q46-Q48 which did NOT contain EDTA, are not listed as Steven Avery's blood. They are only listed as being from the crime scene.
So how does this prove that the specimens without EDTA actually were Steven Avery's blood ?

It was tested previously. Btw this thread is for those who DO NOT think he was framed. There is another one for those who disagree.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[missy1974]

What's interesting to me in this report is that specimen Q49 is listed as "liquid blood sample from Steven Avery" and was found to contain EDTA, as would be expected.
But, samples Q46-Q48 which did NOT contain EDTA, are not listed as Steven Avery's blood. They are only listed as being from the crime scene.
So how does this prove that the specimens without EDTA actually were Steven Avery's blood ?

EDTA was found in the sample taken directly from the lavendar topped tube.

(At what concentration did it show? If it is just a trace, this is not a very sensitive test)

Q46 - 47 and 48 didn't not show EDTA, but they were swabs taken from the crime scene (vehicle I believe). Does this acid dissipate/evaporate when smeared and left for some time?
I'd have liked for a control test of blood removed from the tube, smeared on a similar surface, and then tested. I'd be better able to trust this (long since denounced as unreliable and no longer used) test.

I like my proof to be proof not an educated opinion.

Hi IDK and NSS :wagon:

IIRC in LeBeau's testimony, they didn't even test to make sure it was BLOOD.... and definitely didn't test to see if it was SA's blood. He's a chemist, not a serologist LOL Buting even asked LeBeau about the part of the swab they used, how could they be sure that it had blood on it. Let's not mention that LeBeau gave an opinion about 3 other blood stains that were not even tested

I haven't researched too much about the EDTA test (way above my pay grade haha) But just reading the testimony, if I had been sitting in that jury seat, I would have questioned the validity of it. JMO

 

[NSS]

I did go on a Google fest to find out what the 'standard' was for testing that was to be presented in court. I found way too many cases to link, but hearings are often held to see if certain scientific evidence can be admitted.

Long story short, I found that the Judge can be baffled by bullstuff as easily as the rest of the populous. Judges rely on juries to decide what is good science or junk science based on the prosecution and defence presentations. Unfortunately juries often assume that because a 'scientist' said it, it must be true, unless a defence can really go hard to show otherwise.

I didn't find the answer to my question as asked here though. All IMO but maybe someone needs to ask the hard questions of the officials in this instance.

30+ years ago, the police at a football match (here in the UK) besmirched the names of many victims of a major crushing disaster. There was false testimony, changing of notes, falsifying documents, and many appeals over the years. Recently the courts found that LE had in fact lied and covered up in order to protect their 'good name'. Even LE are human and feel fear, hate and anger, and they do let this cloud their judgement. The entire area force has been called into question following this and several other major incidents of failures......and it all started with 1 cop who didn't want to take the fall for failure to act appropriately to prevent a disaster. It happens.