[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

One scientific experiment saying another is disproved by the defence? Not exactly rock solid in my view. Let's see how the prosecution deal with it with their own experts

But the prosecution didn’t do experiments? They just claimed the DNA was here, there and everywhere, the experiments done show that what they claimed isn’t possible without tampering

[Alf]

I think you should watch part 2 Niamh, and then come back and let us know what you think.

Watch it with an open, but also critical mind.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Smithy

But the prosecution didn’t do experiments? They just claimed the DNA was here, there and everywhere, the experiments done show that what they claimed isn’t possible without tampering

They cant claim theres DNA without a scientist testing it, are you saying the lawyers just said there was DNA with no tests? I don't think so

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Alf

I think you should watch part 2 Niamh, and then come back and let us know what you think.

Watch it with an open, but also critical mind.

I will do Alf. I watched 2 episodes but tbh it was a bit boring

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

They cant claim theres DNA without a scientist testing it, are you saying the lawyers just said there was DNA with no tests? I don't think so

No my point is that although they’ve tested for DNA and the DNA is obviously present the tests which have been done show that the levels of DNA present are what should be expected and are so far off the charts that it’s obviously planted

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Smithy

No my point is that although they’ve tested for DNA and the DNA is obviously present the tests which have been done show that the levels of DNA present are what should be expected and are so far off the charts that it’s obviously planted

According to the defences experts

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

According to the defences experts

No, according to independent individuals who conducted the experiments

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

They cant claim theres DNA without a scientist testing it, are you saying the lawyers just said there was DNA with no tests? I don't think so

They claimed there was human bones and it turned out to be a guess

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Smithy

No, according to independent individuals who conducted the experiments

Independent indeed

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Josy

They claimed there was human bones and it turned out to be a guess

Who says though?

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Josy

They claimed there was human bones and it turned out to be a guess

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Who says though?

The phone recording that was left on zellners answer machine by accident from Mark Williams.

They claimed for years they were in possession of a pelvic bone and the recording has him saying not to reply to zellner until they have a look to see if the bone is actually there.

[Josy]

The message was supposed to go to fallon but they called zellner by mistake

Hi, Tom. This is Mark Williams. Um, I’ll send you an email later today, but I don’t think we should do anything or respond to her [Zellner] at all until tomorrow, uh, when we look into the bag and–and see exactly the pelvic bones are in there or not. Um, so I–I would not respond, uh, until we look into the bag, uh tomorrow morning and then we can talk about it, uh, before we send a response. Thanks a lot. Bye.”

[Niamh.]

Guilty

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Josy

The message was supposed to go to fallon but they called zellner by mistake

Or was it by mistake? Maybe it was deliberate?

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Alf

Or was it by mistake? Maybe it was deliberate?

Why would they deliberately reveal themselves to be liars?

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Josy

Why would they deliberately reveal themselves to be liars?

I don't know, but why would they make that type of mistake?

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Alf

I don't know, but why would they make that type of mistake?

Panic? Due to being asked to hand over the bone and them not actually having it? who knows lol

[parmnion]

I need to re watch this documentary cause I had them all down as guilty but I don't think I've ever seen the whole video. .it's one if those where you have seen it a few times but only bits n bobs of it..

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Niamh educated Chuff, Glenn and Smithy.

No one educated me, I have my own mind

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Alf

I'm not gonna argue too much with Niamh on this, she's obviously done her research on this and I've only seen the documentaries. But from the documenteries, it's fair to say it's a very fishy case, and the law enforcement don't look good and could have done with some better cross examining of them. The officer I think called Link or lenk or something like that and the patrol officer with the glasses (I forget his name) were both very dodgy and didn't seem honest to me.

Yes they were bent for sure .. Im still waiting to see the blood on the bedding and mattress ,but it was never even mentioned and poor Brendan in prison because of Fassbender getting him to say they slit her throat and stabbed her

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

Yes they were bent for sure .. Im still waiting to see the blood on the bedding and mattress ,but it was never even mentioned and poor Brendan in prison because of Fassbender getting him to say they slit her throat and stabbed her

This is one that gets me. Other than the "confession" there is absolutely no evidence that her throat was cut or that she was stabbed, all of the evidence shows that she was shot, so to account for him "confessing" to the knife attacks in the bedroom the investigators had to claim that they stabbed her and cut her throat but she was still alive, so they then dragged her outside - with her throat cut - and shot her... leaving no blood trail. It doesn't make sense AT ALL... it's quite clear that the knife attack never happened, which makes it pretty clear that the rest of Brendan's statement is nonsense too. It should have been completely disregarded in the first place.

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

This is one that gets me. Other than the "confession" there is absolutely no evidence that her throat was cut or that she was stabbed, all of the evidence shows that she was shot, so to account for him "confessing" to the knife attacks in the bedroom the investigators had to claim that they stabbed her and cut her throat but she was still alive, so they then dragged her outside - with her throat cut - and shot her... leaving no blood trail. It doesn't make sense AT ALL... it's quite clear that the knife attack never happened, which makes it pretty clear that the rest of Brendan's statement is nonsense too. It should have been completely disregarded in the first place.

EXACTLY TS !! not a spot of blood anywhere

[chuff me dizzy]

Niamh you really must watch series 2 ,you are not seeing the "evidence" on which Avery was charged and found guilty on being ripped to shreds

[Vicky.]

I really really must watch this. Its something I have been meaning to do for a long time tbh...