a reply to: eluryh22
As far as the key, yes your right, it is possible it was there the whole time and they never saw. One thing you didn't touch on was the fact that when
the key was tested for DNA ONLY Steve Avery's DNA was found. Think about that for a minute, an item that was used and in the hands of the victim for
years failed to show any evidence of her DNA on it. To me that is completely ridiculous, take a look at your own car key or house key, i bet it is
dirty and full of your DNA. Look at the groves of the key in the videos and pictures, to me that key is way to clean and shiny to be a key that was
used daily by the victim.
As far as the car, there is no evidence that supports the theory that Avery put the car there him self, blood was found in the car but the fact that
Avery's blood sample was tampered with in his old case kit is very troubling, and consider that they only found his blood in the car (the hood latch
could have been contaminated after officers admitted to touching the car inside and then the hood without gloves and without proper forensic
procedures) and no other physical evidence, no prints, no hair, no fibers, no shoe imprints, saliva, nothing else but Avery's blood.
I understand why you would doubt a conspiracy and why people would get involved but look at history, water gate, CIA coc aine smuggling, and
other conspiracies that turned out to be true also where unbelievable at the time and the amount of people involved is ridiculous but certainly
and lets clear this up for everyone since it seems to be happening often. The defense never accused anyone they were merely trying to prove that there
were inconsistencies, and possible alternatives that may have included planting of evidence by a person or officer. The police never looked at anyone
else not even the ex-boyfriend and the room mate. The defense couldn't prove foul play, but sure had enough evidence to give the jury Reasonable Doubt
which was their goal because with reasonable doubt you shouldn't convict someone specifically because of the reasonable doubt. Avery giving a list of
possible suspects, the theory that evidence could have been planted especially by a department that was being sued for 36 million are not two
situations that Avery say's happened he is merely trying to establish reasonable doubt. Then again you say you cant have it both way's, your saying
that it is not possible that someone else killed her and the police (not involved in killing her) found evidence didn't know who it was but thought it
was most likely Avery and decided to make their jobs easy and point evidence at his direction. If your saying that is not in the realm of
possibilities then you know a lot more then many of us and should share your theories and evidence.
The fact that the cop knew the plates year and model of the car before it was found is troubling and i agree i would like to see how the prosecution
handled that situation but i haven't been able to find his trial videos, anyone have a link?
nonetheless not evidence of either or so still stuck in murky waters with this
Your final random thoughts:
1) Your Assuming she wasn't killed by some rapist or killer and left in her car and someone with motive to frame Avery found her and her car and
planted evidence and burned the body to hide what really happen to her. Your assuming that the cop that called in her plates and described her car 2
days before hand had nothing to do with this, is it not possible he found the car and her body and decided to frame Avery?
2) One of the family members could have been the killer and seen her that day, or maybe someone had been watching the Avery's lot plotting to frame
3) And maybe they didn't know he had a bonfire that night, maybe someone merely knew he had a fire pit and decided to burn her body and throw the
remains in his pit, remember she went missing the 31'st and found the 5th thats a couple days to burn body and plant it, like wise with the car.
not at all saying this happen, just demonstrating that there are a lot of possibilities and that only evidence should hold any weight and the fact
that some of the evidence in his old case was tampered with, the fact that a department that was being sued by Avery was so eager to help after being
told to stay out of it, the fact that the boy was coerced, the fact that they gave this detailed story of what happen to Teresa to the media before
trial and during trial couldn't prove any of the statements made to the media even after Kratz has said to the media "the EVIDENCE establishes" what
evidence established a tied women to the bed, with cut hair and a cut throat where is all the blood.
and did you really ask how Avery's blood got into the car? did you watch the whole series? The vial of blood that was tampered with? The magic EDTA
test the FBI provided on top of their testimony of its accuracy, the defense bringing up another chemist specialist that disagrees with the FBI.
Think about it, the only cut Avery had was on his hand and if he is bleeding and leaving that all over i find it hard to believe he didn't leave any
finger prints behind as well.