The “Making of a Murderer” saga continues to demonstrate the power of official accusation. Once the finger has been pointed the object never truly escapes. There is a not insignificant group of people who will never, ever accept an exoneration. It is a ready resource for law enforcement to tap into.
Esquire magazine, apparently trying to tap into the Netflix series national frenzy, announces “new revelations” that “may change everything”.
What are they?
The needle hole in the cap of the blood vial in the evidence room was made when the blood was put in.
Possibly. If that’s the way every other blood vial in the evidence room looks it’s a fair point. But even if it’s true, the seal on the box being broken is a big problem. A very big problem.
The victim’s blood was found only in the back of her vehicle.
First do not, when the allegations are that evidence was deliberately planted, use the word “found”. It’s like changing the subject.
Second, the “explanation” for this, assuming it really needs to be explained, is that this is consistent with 16 year old mentally challenged Brendan Dassey’s “confession”.
Seriously? Is this how law enforcement reasons? Ugh.
They found the victim’s phone and camera on the Avery property
“Found”? The use of this word in this context is so – frankly – stupid it’s difficult to maintain one’s composure. A particularly corrupt group of evidence planting cops with whom I am familiar, unfortunately, actually used the declarative sentence “Look what I found!” as a code word to each other during a “search” that they had planted the supposedly found evidence.
Steven Avery’s use of *67 to obscure his identity on two phone calls to to victim, but not on the third and final phone call.
This, as we have said, is extremely suspicious and potentially damning evidence if there isn’t some more innocuous explanation. Even if there is a more innocuous explanation, it is still suspicious. But this is not a “revelation”, as in something that has come up in the last few days. Obviously.
Avery specifically requested the victim.
This, again, is not a recent revelation. And it seems adequately explained away by Avery’s lawyer:
“They’re trying to make it sound like he was luring Teresa Halbach to his auto salvage yard where he could commit this dastardly crime,” Buting says. “She was the only photographer for Auto Trader for that whole area of the state! So, he doesn’t say, ‘Send Teresa Halbach.’ He says, ‘Send that woman you had out here to take pictures. We want to put another vehicle in your magazine.'”
All of this is either: a) not a new revelation; or b) scores no points for the “he’s guilty” camp, or both. That’s the objective interpretation. Only those who have some sort of emotional need to uphold the conviction would trot these out as some kind of game changer.
Bottom line: that this was a seriously compromised investigation, prosecution and conviction is not a debatable point.