I found the defence lawyers investigator even worse than the lawyer if that were possible. Even in his testimony seemed pleased to be basically testifying for the prosecution. Like tighty said - it was just jaw droppingly obvious that Brendan had no clue what was going on when he asked if he could leave the police station in half an hour
Yeah, the co-erced police confession was bad enough but when he was trying to tell the investigator the truth and the investigator told him to change the story and draw pictures it is pretty unbeleivable how this can be on video and not have more weight with the jury. FWIW, in the UK Brendan would not have been prosecuted like any normal person as he would be classed as having learning disabilities. Feel bad for him even just for the amount of time he has done in jail already.
Loads of stuff just doesnt add up if he actually did do it, like the blood in the car, if he went to the bother to clean the car to the point there was none of his DNA or fingerprints inside the car elsewhere then surely he would see and clean the blood? If he was wearing gloves or something then there wouldve been no blood as the only cut or scratch he had was on his finger. If he supposedly killer her in the garage and then cleaned up all the blood after, then how is there no trace of the blood but the garage is still filthy? It obv hadnt been cleaned or it would be clean!
It just seems incredibly stupid for someone about to win millions in a lawsuit and is engaged to kill someone like that at that stage in their life, especially after wrongfully doing 18 years in jail already and knowing exactly what jail is like. And if he did do it it seems beyond stupid to just park the car on the property and keep her stuff lying around.
The majority of the evidence just doesnt make sense, nothing absolutely pins the murder on him and with the wrongful involvement of the police etc I find it crazy that a jury could find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Apparently after using all their veto's in the jury picking process the defence were left with included the wife of 1 of the county sheriffs and someone that worked in the justice department. According to the excused juror, the initial vote they took had 3 thinking he was guilty, 7 innocent and some undecideds. It sounds like probably those jurors were convinced he was guilty from the start and were never gonna change their mind and the other jurors eventually compromised/changed their decision just to get the trial over with as they had been debating it for days without hope of the initial 3 changing their mind.
The scariest thing is just how much the law can get away with if they chose to screw you over and the lengths people will go to to avoid blame for something, the people involved in the original case have potentially sent an innocent man to jail for the 2nd time, ensuring he will spend more than half of his total life behind bars and sending a 16 year old to jail for the majority of his life too just to avoid being pointed out as not doing their job correctly in 1985. Avery had a lawsuit that couldve potentially bankrupted the whole county as the insurance didnt cover it, the conspiracy to set him up couldve really come from higher up than the police force........