Show me the EVIDENCE Steven Avery was FRAMED – 011


The public outcry is LOUD. People are saying the subject of Making A Murderer, Steven Avery, was framed by police.  They talk about the Rav 4 key, the blood, the clean-up, the searches and the civil lawsuit.  Many say the police engaged in a conspiracy to make this once wrongfully convicted man once again wrongfully convicted.

Framing someone else for a crime IS A CRIME.  So with all these accusations flying around it’s time to ask one simple question: “Where is the evidence that Steven Avery was framed?”  I am not talking about evidence of reasonable doubt that Avery is a killer.  I am talking about evidence that the crime of framing someone else for a crime was committed.

Anytime we accuse people of a crime we evaluate the evidence of that alleged crime.  Well, the same standards apply here.  Police are being accused of a crime, so it is time to show me the EVIDENCE Steven Avery was FRAMED.

In this podcast independent forensic expert, Dr. Lawrence Kobilinsky, from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice tackles the evidence brought up in Making A Murderer.  Dr. K has no ax to grind, no horse or dog in the race.  He is truly an independent expert calling it as he sees it!

7 thoughts on “Show me the EVIDENCE Steven Avery was FRAMED – 011”

  1. He was not framed. He’s a monster. There is more evidence than what was in the documentary. Show it all. Show the cops side!

  2. I’m not the least bit skeptical. Guilty is as guilty does. I’ve not been able to cross that line and believe the police framed this murderer.

  3. I have a difficult time accepting the info here about the EDTA test performed by the FBI. Other experts have said that test could not have found the low levels in this case if it was in fact present. Proving a negative? Give me a break, doesn’t happen.
    A key magically appearing POOF! No way after multiple searches not only 2 as your expert states.
    Police had his skin cells but there was never information that it was skin cells on the hood…..etc., etc., etc. He should have done his homework first.
    Where does this expert get his info??? Totally flawed Vinnie, try again.

    1. You are so right! dr. K may be a forensic expert, but not a forensic expert in this case. When talking about DNA on hood latch dr. K fails to mention the tech admitted during trial that he didn’t change his gloves after examining other of Steven’s personal items. Sherry culhane contaminated the DNA on the bullet fragment with her own and used up the entire sample so it couldn’t be retested. I can go on forever, but if interested there are entire trial and investigation transcripts online. They didn’t prove their case beyond reasonable doubt. I’m not saying he’s innocent(although I do believe it) but he shouldn’t have been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *