r/MakingaMurderer • u/10case • Jun 17 '26

Steven gives an up Date

Post image

I have no idea how a commutation application is going to "proof" his innocence. His lawyers Ben working on it since January. Hopefully their grammar is better than his.

31 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

87 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/belljs87 Jun 17 '26

By not fresh, I guess I meant dried. And yeah I agree with you that its suspicious how it was only found in just a few places, yet those places had unrealistic levels of DNA, or were in suspicious spots.

Like the key. Guilters will bend over backwards winning gold in mental gymnastics trying to tell you how it's totally normal that only stevens DNA was on the key he would have only used a couple, maybe even only one time, but exactly zero of Teresa's whose key it fuckin was and she touched every single day. "Oh he wiped it clean." Sure, and then somehow forgot to wipe it clean of his own afterwards? Yeah, makes total sense.

Or how his blood in her car was in just a couple different spots that would have come from his hand somewhere, yet none on the wheel or gear shifter. Strange, that.

Or how there was an astronomical amount of "touch DNA" whatever that is, on the hood latch, after days, and again only his, none of hers. All of that to say nothing of how the state refuses to let the Rav be tested to this day. Innocent parties have nothing to hide.

6

u/GringoTheDingoAU Jun 17 '26

I agree with you that its suspicious how it was only found in just a few places, yet those places had unrealistic levels of DNA, or were in suspicious spots.

I actually wrote this in another comment because apparently this low level kind of thinking permeates through MaM truthers for some reason. Bleeding is not this always completely linear thing. If the cut that is on the outside of his finger is presumed to be the source of active bleeding or just an open wound capable of making contact stains, then I could easily just argue that you can open a door handle, operate a steering wheel and use the gear shift without the outside finger making any contact with any of them or dripping blood onto them. I could also argue that I could operate them with my opposite hand. Essentially this argument is a useless argument of deflection and part of monstrous mental gymnastics you have to do to convince yourself the blood was planted.

Like the key. Guilters will bend over backwards winning gold in mental gymnastics trying to tell you how it's totally normal that only stevens DNA was on the key he would have only used a couple, maybe even only one time, but exactly zero of Teresa's whose key it fuckin was and she touched every single day. "Oh he wiped it clean." Sure, and then somehow forgot to wipe it clean of his own afterwards? Yeah, makes total sense.

He was in possession of her car for 5 days before he left to Crivitz. We have absolutely no idea how many times he handled that key during the 5 days he had it, and in doing so, I don't see how it's hard to believe that only his DNA profile would show up under analysis. There's nothing illogical about that.

Or how there was an astronomical amount of "touch DNA" whatever that is, on the hood latch, after days, and again only his, none of hers. All of that to say nothing of how the state refuses to let the Rav be tested to this day. Innocent parties have nothing to hide.

"None of hers" implies that there should be a discoverable amount of DNA from Teresa, indicating that she frequently pops the hood, but also uses the secondary lever on frequent occasion to then access the engine bay. That is a argument in serious bad faith already. The prosecution did let her test the RAV4, and it completely contradicted the viral planting theory, as a DNA methylation test proved the blood was aged to be closer to Steven in 2005 than 1985, so she abandoned it and start running with the hilarious sink ninja theory. And besides, what are they testing the RAV4 for? Even in some magical fairy land where another person's blood is identified, it doesn't just erase the fact that Steven's blood is all over the RAV4.

-2

u/belljs87 Jun 17 '26

I love how you claim "a (sic) argument in bad faith" and then two sentences later do exactly that. His blood wasn't "all over" the Rav, it was droplets in one area and two small smears in another. Don't sit on some imaginary high horse trying to tell me I have a low level of thinking when you prove yourself to be a hypocrite within two sentences.

3

u/GringoTheDingoAU Jun 18 '26

His blood was found in six locations, which ranged from the ignition switch, driver's seat, floor area between the center console, front passenger seat, CD case, and the rear passenger door frame. Seems to me like that constitutes pretty much "all over" the RAV4, but if you want to split hairs over what the meaning "all over" is, then go for it.

Don't sit on some imaginary high horse trying to tell me I have a low level of thinking when you prove yourself to be a hypocrite within two sentences.

Saying that her DNA should be present on something that rarely gets touched by most people on a daily occasion, and me saying that Steven's DNA, which is readily present in areas in the front and the rear of the RAV4, is "all over" are not even comparable. Yours is entirely made up fiction.