That pretty much sums it up. So obviously a fit up. An incompetent one at that.
This is a quote from the same expert that was shown in season two (DeHaan):
It was impossible for the body to be burned in the alleged time frame and it wasn't possible that the fire went for the necessary time (and even then the chances of the fire being hot enough to destroy teeth is very small). Not to mention that the same expert was sure the tyres and the body were not burned together. More reasonable doubt than you would require to drive a fleet of buses through.
Why was it impossible for the fire to go for over 4 hours?
If the police narrative of events is to work at all they needed the various witness statements they used to work together. If the fire was for 6 or 8 hours their narrative doesn't work.
What's the source for this? Another 99 reg Toyota rav 4 was seen parked in foliage right near the area she went missing sound like a hell of a coincidence.
Would be interested to see which statements from witnesses make it impossible for the fire to last 6 to 8 hours. All I can recall is Brendan saying he returned home at 11 and the fire was still on.
EDIT: With names not edited:
There's no mention of a make and model in that link, just says a "unit." So how do you surmise that this is the same car the trucker mentions as he is quite specific it is a green Toyota rav 4? (I accept he could be lying of course!)
The trucker isn't the same, it's a different person. The place he reported is apparently the same (as Zellner suggested). I can't confirm whether it was or was not Teresa's car as I wasn't there, can only go by what had been reported and admitted by witness in this case.
So Swap the first 2 events around, its still just as suspicious.
And for the bolded, this was testified under oath during trial:
So basically you are trusting one and not trusting the other.
But you can't just swap two events around. If you assume he finds the car first and it is then reported a day later, it just makes little sense as it would mean Colburn found the car and put it in plain sight. The other way around made perfect sense but it also did not happen. The easiest explanation here is the one we have been offered i.e. Colburn called in to confirm the plate numbers he received (in missing persons report) were correct. This is normal. He also asked if its 99 Toyota, he wouldn't be able to make it out by looking at the car and would not have that detail by just standing next to car.
I agree with you there, I wasn't trying to goad you in any way, I genuinely enjoy debating the case with people. I'm also unsure on it myself but definitely see spurious accounts from either side.
There's lots of shit 'documentaries' nowadays, it's never been easier to pitch a conspiracy theory and it's perfectly fair to question what you are presented on shows like this. Half my friends and family believe vaccinations are bad.
It’s fine mate. To be fair I am very biased on this subject too and probably wrong about many things because it’s not possible to know everything with so much information available. I’m definitely not of the opinion that everything is clean and sound about this case (its not, Brendan’s sentence for instance was a joke), just that there is much less wrong about it than suggested on the show. I also think second season was unnecessary and focused on making as much money as possible rather than finding the truth.
It's a never-ending circle, the whole show is pretty much exactly your statement...based on the conspiracy theory that the police planted evidence to make sure these guys went down for it, and perfectly fair for the defence to question what they are presented with.
There's lots of shit 'documentaries' nowadays, it's never been easier to pitch a conspiracy theory and it's perfectly fair to question what you are presented on shows like this. Half my friends and family believe vaccinations are bad.
To be fair you'd have to say Steve could have done it as well, whether he was framed or not. I'd guess the police strongly suspected Steve did it and certainly had a part in making sure he went down for it.
Except that isn’t fiction, but anyway.
Do you know them to be innocent? What was on Bobby Dassey’s computer is extremely disturbing. None of the evidence theory presented in S2 is nonsense by the way.
Lawyers providing a defence makes it a fictional show? What?
Have you seen the whole series 2? She very cleverly involves experts in the associated fields to assess the evidence collected at the crime scene. What they find is the story put forward by the prosecution is implausible. It was also quite likely that the DNA was planted due to the incredibly high amounts of it vs what you would expect to see in reality.
Yup, doesn't mean she isn't excellent. I think it is clear she honestly believes this is a rather disgusting setup job on Avery.
She has to criticise his defence, it is part of her building the case for a retrial. Just part of the 'game'.
Her head is annoying and bobs around too much. Although maybe that's a good thing in some circumstances.
It's not quite as straight forward as that.
It is unlikely they would risk their integrity as scientists to lie or put forward a biased view on a subject. Whatever the evidence it is clear the prosecutions story of how she was killed is incorrect which casts enough doubt on Stevens guilt. He also doesn't strike me as the most intelligent guy but he's been 100% consistent in his behaviour and his assertion that he is innocent. Whatever the truth there's just too many instances of incredibly suspicious behaviour by law enforcement to trust this verdict, most likely he's been framed is my own conclusion. How exactly that was done is a bit of a mystery.
I'm sure I've read that Steven's lawyer is trying to bring that phone call into evidence and the Facebook posts after which contradict everything.
