That list is also way more wrong and misleading than Kratz's. Not going through the whole list, but here's a few examples:

He also testified that they placed everything back before taking the picture.


This is either untrue or misleading. One of the bullets he couldn't conclusively link, but the other one he could.



This is just false.

The day when they found the bullet fragments was the first day they pulled stuff out of the garage. And both fragments were hidden.

Ok, but if the contamination isn't the same on both samples.. Doesn't that conclude that the bullet fragment with TH dna wasn't contaminated? The contamination of the negative control is not consistent with the contamination of the bullet fragment. So me personally, I don't understand the big deal here but perhaps you can explain why it matters.

Lost, yes.. I would like the best example you can find of police corruption or framing with this much evidence.

the conclusion is that she suck at her job and the chicken she ate for lunch could have been a suspect of the investigation as much as avery with such a pro running the test

I think you guys will find interest in this. These were just posted but haven't read them yet.

http://stevenaverycase.com/avery-fam....RBbx0EuF.dpbs

Interviews of the aver family from november by police including SA.

http://jobs.aol.com/videos/what-its-...ase/518687575/

They like planting bullets in Wisconsin.

No that's not the conclusion. TH's DNA was on the bullet found in SA's garage.

They had what 89 contaminations out of some 50k tests? You do realize these are human beings not machines.

FWIW she's the same person who conducted the test that exonerated SA the first time. And she had to use the entire sample in that case also. She testified that had the control sample been similarly contaminated with her own DNA in that instance, she would have filed the same deviation request, for the same reason... because the actual evidence sample was not contaminated, and because she had no more sample to conduct another test.

Let's say she had more of the original sample from the bullet, so that she could re-do the test from the beginning. Do you think TH's DNA would no longer be found on the bullet? If you think so, you have a serious misunderstanding of exactly what happened.

She is the one that send him to jail in the first place

The November 6th interview with Steven is great.

He describes the details of his Monday and doesn't mention having a bonfire once on that day or the rest of the week.

He claims the last time he had a fire was 2 weeks ago.

He also admits he stopped working at 11am that day, and that this is the first time he ever stopped working early.

He also explains that he doesn't really use the car crusher, it's mainly an outside company that does it or Earl, and sometimes he helps Earl.

Good points, why would he lie about the bonfire if there wasn't something to hide about the bonfire?

Ms Zellner DID NOT delete her tweets....

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/video/lawy...-case-36625478
Looks like some people are taking this seriously.

WHOEVER DELETED ZELLNER'S TWEETS IS THE REAL KILLER!!!!

K. You find one where the cops had this degree of motive, means and repeated, documented history. Deal?

None of the cops who found evidence had any motive.

So you to poorskillz are taking this man's side?
https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/...f&seqNo=113968

I believe that K.K had a drug problem for quite a while before becoming addicted so therefore he was a DA while being a drug abuser, sexual offender but you believe that this did not affect his ability to perform to the best of his ability lol.

At least his ex-wife filed for divorce & won, he then lost his job,car & had to file for bankruptcy because of a 23k bill. LOL

CASH I tell Ya'll its the cash.
http://jobs.aol.com/videos/what-its-...enc/519140412/

Yo Lost, Look at the pdf I just posted and near the bottom you will see that it was alleged K.K forced the woman to have sex. But also these court doc's reveal some interesting stuff.

Motive for the cops? Haha. Like that's really necessary.

Cops ROUTINELY plant evidence just to make quotas. Getting a conviction vs. almost no chance of ending up like the guy below is motive enough.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crim...ticle-1.963021

So whatever happened to the Keith Morrison, Investigation Discovery epic MaM counter?

Fraleyight?

Obviously best quote of the document.

WTF??? They tried to just close the case and dropped all counts against Kratz until a reporter broke the story and they were forced to do something. Then further allegations of forcing sex on women that he had prosecuted in the past by threatening them. His punishment? 6 months of vacation. Un-real. Van Hollen deserves some sleuthing IMO.

Ep 2 is up

https://soundcloud.com/real-crime-profile

Whether or not the bullet was a key piece of evidence should play no bearing on the scientific process.

Regarding the bolded, I'll assume you have some way of actually knowing that TH's blood found on the bullet was not through contamination.

Also, I don't think anyone was arguing that it was illegal. We were saying there was a conflict of interest, and the person with a conflict of interest botched the test.


You have no way of actually knowing what they did/did not consider.

They're scientists, they're supposed to follow process.

How many of those 89 other contaminations were deviation reports filed for?

Why would Lenk lie about the time he arrived on scene of there wasn't something to hide about what time he arrived on scene?