Following Making a Murderer Netflix show like Serial Page 12

  • Oh-Bollox 15 Jan 2016 08:15:59 6,513 posts
    Seen 4 months ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    @gravearchitecture in any context. The FBI literally stopped using it because it does not reliably detect EDTA. Hence the whole argument in the documentary about the testing. A reliable test did not, to the FBI's knowledge, exist.

    testing for trace chemicals is something most labs could do.
    This is irrelevant unless the test works. If a reliable test does not exist, you have to develop a new one, maybe using the old test as a starting point, maybe not. You then have to develop controls for the test. All this takes time. Even in America, I don't think they can go to any chem lab they like and ask them to do forensic testing, the lab has to pass certain standards, and if that lab doesn't have an alternative test, they'll be using the one the FBI discontinued, which is equally worthless.

    It's possible the FBI came up with a new, better test. It's not possible they properly developed the controls for it, and used them, not in the timeframe given (days, IIRC). EDTA precipitates into crystals, so there's an additional complication there if you're swabbing dried blood.
  • Deleted user 15 January 2016 09:23:56
    I don't like Steve's beard, I think he's hiding something and should therefore never be set free
  • chopsen 15 Jan 2016 09:50:03 20,406 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    But I like his accent. So maybe he's innocent?
  • Deleted user 15 January 2016 09:54:48
    @Oh-Bollox
    The FBI literally stopped using it because it does not reliably detect EDTA. Hence the whole argument in the documentary about the testing. A reliable test did not, to the FBI's knowledge, exist.
    you're taking the defence lawyers' words (outside of court) to be gospel here. if that was provable, the evidence would be inadmissible. this is an argument used by the defence, not a fact.

    this whole "test is unreliable" or "FBI stopped using it" is total lawyer-speak. the test had been used once before in court - the OJ case. it was admissible there and it's admissible here. they "stopped using it" because it hadn't come up since. remember that every time a lawyer speaks they're trying to get you to see it a certain way.

    if the EDTA test was guff then the defence would have leapt straight on that after verdict and arranged a new test, like they mentioned in the film. they didn't, or did yet didn't get the result they wanted.

    it's one of many things that bugged me about the amount of airtime his defence lawyers get in this show. like the stuff about the blood vial - ALL vacutainers have puncture marks like that in the top when they're filled, yet we didn't get to see the prosecution presumably shooting down their argument that it suggested tampering. plus the ripped tape - given that we saw nothing of that from the court i can only assume that it wasn't suspicious, yet they have that as a major 'plot point' in the show.

    Edited by gravearchitecture at 09:56:26 15-01-2016
  • Youthist 15 Jan 2016 10:58:39 13,551 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    It was massively suspicious and we have read nothing to suggest it wasn't subsequently. Unless you have found something? The jury decided it wasn't enough to sway their decision (which remember was - 7 found not guilty, 3 guilty and two undecided as deliberations started).

    And as for the EDTA evidence - read that blog I posted.
  • Deleted user 15 January 2016 10:59:22
    His beard, Youthist. Look at it again
  • Youthist 15 Jan 2016 11:05:18 13,551 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Reddit is a good one discussing it too
    https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xli3j/testing_for_edta/
  • richarddavies 15 Jan 2016 11:21:44 6,557 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    PES_Fanboy wrote:
    His beard, Youthist. Look at it again
    I can't believe you keep talking about his beard when his eye's are shifty as fuck.
  • UncleLou Moderator 15 Jan 2016 11:59:26 39,892 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    @richarddavies It's his gait. Just watch him walk.
  • richarddavies 15 Jan 2016 12:01:17 6,557 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I had to google what gait means so thanks for that. Just learned a new word for the day.
  • chopsen 15 Jan 2016 12:15:39 20,406 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    From a foreigner.....
  • Deleted user 15 January 2016 12:16:50
    Underneath the beard is the DNA evidence and some uncooked bones
  • mrpon 15 Jan 2016 12:59:28 34,914 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Finished it last night, boy Brendan tucked into the donuts huh?!

    Nice to see Kratz squirming though.
  • challenge_hanukkah 15 Jan 2016 13:03:33 9,216 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    mrpon wrote:
    Finished it last night, boy Brendan tucked into the donuts huh?!
    I wonder if that was to deter Bubba?
  • Decks Best Forumite, 2016 15 Jan 2016 13:06:24 17,420 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    More cushin for the pushin
  • Deleted user 15 January 2016 13:09:48
    Tossing salads
  • TheSaint 15 Jan 2016 13:11:53 18,197 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    gravearchitecture wrote:
    if the EDTA test was guff then the defence would have leapt straight on that after verdict and arranged a new test, like they mentioned in the film. they didn't, or did yet didn't get the result they wanted.
    Wouldn't that have been a bit pointless seeing as every appeal seemed to be heard by the same judge that proceeded over the original trial?

    It seemed crazy that the appeals were not heard by a new judge.
  • mrpon 15 Jan 2016 13:14:21 34,914 posts
    Seen 8 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    He misses his Nintendo.

    Aww bless.
  • Deleted user 15 January 2016 14:10:24
    TheSaint wrote:
    gravearchitecture wrote:
    if the EDTA test was guff then the defence would have leapt straight on that after verdict and arranged a new test, like they mentioned in the film. they didn't, or did yet didn't get the result they wanted.
    Wouldn't that have been a bit pointless seeing as every appeal seemed to be heard by the same judge that proceeded over the original trial?

    It seemed crazy that the appeals were not heard by a new judge.
    what was wrong with the judge? you can't just pick new judges because you didn't like how it went last time.

    besides, he has lodged an appeal, but it's mad and doesn't seem to have any new evidence: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/making-a-murderer-s-steven-avery-appeals-conviction-in-halbach-case-a6809586.html

    everything points to the edta test being legit otherwise it would be the perfect smoking gun to lodge an appeal, or better make it inadmissible during the case.

    Edited by gravearchitecture at 14:42:05 15-01-2016
  • UncleLou Moderator 15 Jan 2016 14:16:55 39,892 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    @gravearchitecture I think you're a bit off the track with the whole EDTA topic and the importance of the negative result. Like quite a few tests, the negative result doesn't prove much. It certainly doesn't mean it's "fine", but it's also not a "smoking gun".

    It would have exonerated him had it been positive, but the negative result doesn't prove anything beyond what was already known, that his blood was in the car. Even if the test was inadmissible, it's still his blood in the car.

    Edited by UncleLou at 14:20:02 15-01-2016
  • Deleted user 15 January 2016 14:22:45
    @UncleLou like i said, it's a "smoking-gun" for the defence if they can prove there is edta in the blood, as it's proof it has been planted (or at least a very strong argument). that would have been their first route for an appeal.

    (i'm ignoring the alleged DNA of his found under the hood from sweat as i'm not sure if that was in the trial or what)
  • UncleLou Moderator 15 Jan 2016 14:34:37 39,892 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 17 years ago
    gravearchitecture wrote:
    @UncleLou like i said, it's a "smoking-gun" for the defence if they can prove there is edta in the blood,
    Yeah, of course. I know what you meant.
  • Decks Best Forumite, 2016 15 Jan 2016 22:12:20 17,420 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    Something that's been driving me crazy every time I watch it is what his mother reminds me of. It may be something out of Labyrinth. Although David Bowers recent passing maybe putting that into my head. It's definitely some kind of 80s puppet though. Any help will be appreciated.
  • challenge_hanukkah 15 Jan 2016 22:15:19 9,216 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    RoyBatty wrote:
    Something that's been driving me crazy every time I watch it is what his mother reminds me of. It may be something out of Labyrinth. Although David Bowers recent passing maybe putting that into my head. It's definitely some kind of 80s puppet though. Any help will be appreciated.
    This?

  • Deleted user 15 January 2016 22:18:26
    David Bowers? Wasn't he in Another Level?
  • Decks Best Forumite, 2016 15 Jan 2016 22:20:47 17,420 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    @challenge_hanukkah

    Haha that's it!!
  • challenge_hanukkah 15 Jan 2016 22:22:32 9,216 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 5 years ago
    I think the visible nipples peeping through the clothes on that puppet are a really nice touch.

    Edited by challenge_hanukkah at 22:22:46 15-01-2016
  • Decks Best Forumite, 2016 15 Jan 2016 22:25:52 17,420 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 3 years ago
    PES_Fanboy wrote:
    David Bowers? Wasn't he in Another Level?
    Auto correct innit. My search history is littered with "Dame Bowers big toe"
  • Youthist 20 Jan 2016 13:58:06 13,551 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    Guardian article :
    http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2016/jan/17/making-a-murderer-netflix-steven-avery

    Also - worth reading the comments from folks at the bottom of the article. Here was one:

    Pro-defence evidence that was left out of the case.
    1, The DNA under the bonnet/hood was preformed by a guy who used the same gloves he was using inside of the car.
    2, The BULLET was not proven to be from Avery's gun, only it came from a .22.
    3, The woman who did the test for Teresa's DNA on the bullet, and messed up her one job, was also the woman who testified that a hair found on Avery's shirt was consistent with Penny's hair ( Penny is the victim from the 85 rape case ).
    4, The KEY which didn't have Teresa's own DNA on was not the master key but the spare key.
    5, A anonymous letter was mailed to MTSC, found in Green Bay Post Office, which claimed a body had been burned in the smelter at 3 AM on Friday
    6, A propane delivery truck driver (John Leurquin) saw a green SUV leaving the Avery property.
    7, A active volunteer for the Sheriff's department was on the Jury. He was also the father of a Sheriff. A county clerk's husband was also in the Jury ( she works at the same place Avery's blood was tampered with. ).
    8, There was deer blood found in the garage debunking the Avery cleaned the place up with bleach theory.
  • Oh-Bollox 20 Jan 2016 18:46:09 6,513 posts
    Seen 4 months ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    everything points to the edta test being legit otherwise
    @gravearchitecture Quite simply, no. Only total ignorance of chemistry allows you to say this. Here's a great post that discusses the EDTA test and results in detail, and says it better than I ever could.

    For the lazy, here's the tl;dr:

    They said that the limits of detection are 13 mg/L, and that EDTA can be detected in a 1 microliter drop of an EDTA blood sample that is subjected to the analysis (presumably a 1 microliter drop of a sample with the 1000-2000 mg/L EDTA level they quote as typical in these samples which is then diluted to 200 microliters as described in the above paper). But what about an unknown amount of blood that has been lifted onto a swab, a small (and apparently arbitrary) amount of which is snipped off the swab, placed in a microfuge tube, then vortexed with 200 microliters of buffer? That does not give us enough information to calculate what the EDTA concentration would be, even assuming that the swabbed blood was fresh and not, as you point out, left to sit out for a month. And thus we do not know if the concentration of EDTA would be above the quoted lower detection limits.

    Again, the result is totally meaningless.
Log in or register to reply

Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.