Focusing solely on the "evidence" available to the viewers (which is limited, edited with bias, and/or available from www sources), IMO the most damning evidence in this case is the sum total of the evidence. Unless the perps are caught in the act or maybe on video, there is no slam dunk certainty -- even the Avery rape case illustrates the inexactness of what has historically been accepted as criminal science certainty ie the eyewitness.
Seems like a cop out. The sum total of evidence, which may be tampered with and is subjective in nature. Don' limit it to the documentary. Is there not even one solid piece of evidence that either demonstrates a motive or places the crime scene on the property, or Avert or the kid with the victim's body? We have a magically appearing car with a suspiciously obvious blood spatter generated from no known wound or action of the accused, and a burn barrel off the property. Both of which were missed by multiple targeted law enforcement searches. And this is a guy that was framed by local law enforcement before.
A 12-person jury of their peers convicted them, having heard everything you've mentioned. The latest court rejected these very arguments. That's how it works.
This may be true. And it may not be. But the only thing that's thus far been proven is that Brendan Dassey is guilty, and beyond any reasonable doubt.
That's what we are discussing. I'm asking what that evidence was that proved it in the legal non-float sense of the word. You he replied by restating that it was proven.
I said that's how it works. I didn't claim that it was an inerrant process, by any means. Let him appeal. We have stuff to handle those, too.
Like you, I didn't watch the entirety of his trial, and all evidence presented or arguments made. Unlike you, I'm not mistaking that trial with the content of that documentary.
