Is he guilty? Is the Missing evidence shown on Dr.Phil real?
What do you think?
http://www.drphil.com/videos/evidence-omitted-from-making-a-murderer-is-steven-avery-guilty/
Thoughts.. nancy grace is literally clueless. "They could plant blood, they could plant hair.. but there is no way they could plant sweat!" - first of all do they have access to steves clothes? Yes. then they have access to his sweat. Secondly THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SWEAT DNA. There is dna in sweat but it is simply carrying the same dna found in all your skin cells. The fact she is talking about sweat on the hood latch removes her credibility as an objective commentator.
shareThe talk of sweat on the hood latch is such nonsense. It was apparently touch DNA and could have been left by the tech who did not change gloves.
It's one of the lesser claims in this case. They found no DNA on the outside of the hood, or on the inside hood release, apparently. How did he leave DNA on the hood latch without leaving it elsewhere? Did he take off his gloves to touch the hood latch?
The places they found evidence in and around this vehicle boggles the mind. Either they did a piss poor job "investigating" and examining this vehicle or evidence was found only in selective places. No blood or fingerprints on the camouflage items around the vehicle, none on the outside of the vehicle, no DNA on those, either. So, whoever did all that, if bleeding, must have constantly been putting on and taking off gloves.
They also -- apparently -- didn't find any prints or blood or DNA on the license plates or on the blinker assembly in the back of the RAV. At least they didn't find Steven Avery's blood or fingerprints or DNA....because if they had, you can be sure KK would have mentioned it.