Hahah , you are a funny guy . See you soon in one of the next situational awareness vids . 😀 <| sep |> That ' s a really nice ink <| sep |> It ' s the latest cuttingedge technology . <| sep |> Is an Android device required or is it just an option ? <| sep |> Original post by uLargeImagesBot in rLargeImagesnbspThis crosspost was performed automatically as a part of the ImagesOfNetwork . Learn more about the ImagesOfNetwork , how you can help , and other Frequently Asked Questions , or visit us on Discord ! Remove my post ! The bot got this one wrong ! Stop Crossposting My Stuff ! # match Chile <| sep |> So I guess red states don ' t matter because their safe red ? AlsoAltleftAHAHAHA <| sep |> I will explain a bit so we dont get lost in the minutiae of lab accreditation and protocols . The lab I am specifically referring to is the Wisconsin State Crime Lab . WSCL Madison Wisconsin . A lab that has a history of poorly handling evidence . The lab tech SC that handled and in a a few instances physically collected the Avery evidence . Blood swabbings from two separate motor vehicles . the alleged victims Toyota RAV 4 and the defendants Pontiac Grand AM . She was later told to put her in the garage or house , by lead detective , DCI Agent TF after the bullet frag was found in the garage 4 months after forensic teams had already processed the garage for trace DNA and physical evidence . Not one piece of evidence or DNA was ever found during the initial processing in November 2005 of the garage . The bullet frag was discovered in March 2006 , in the same garage . allegedly just laying on the floor under an air compressor . see CS photographs A net result of Brendan Dassey ' s , lets call it spirited confession in March 2006 , . where he stated that Steve had shot her TH in the garage . To get the victim into the house or the garage . the lab tech , SC developed a control to test the bullet for trace DNA . She contaminated that control , triggering her testing to be inconclusive . but still entered that inconclusively tested frag into evidence claiming that the victims nucleated cells were present on this frag , but so was her own DNA . The frag couldn ' t be retested so we are left with SC ' s word that the victims DNA was found on the bullet frag . As per lab protocol this frag should have been deemed inconclusive . However SC muscled her way around the systems roadblock by filing for a protocol deviation , one on which she not only signed herself , but had no other superior review or sign off on said deviation request . These are giant leaps this supposed unbiased technician is taking here . Would you not agree ? . was she operating on DCI TF ' s pressure to place her in the garage or the house ? Was she reactive to the fact it was Steven Avery whom she helped convict in 1985 for a crime he didn ' t commit , thinking well , I will nail him this time around ? These are troubling questions . SC , this WSCL lab technician , was involved , incidentally in Stevens 1985 Rape case by attributing a hair found on the victims clothing as being consistent with Steven Avery ' s hair Steve was subsequently railroaded by the MCSD and wrongfully convicted of this crime and spent 18 years behind bars , all the while LE at the time knew he was not the perpetrator of the crime and willfully deprived Steven of his due process and freedom . He lost every single one of his appeals up until the WIC picked up his case . SC ' s hair analysis helped usher Steven Avery into prison in 1985 . She will once again become a key figure in the 2005 investigation and 2007 trial of Steven Avery for the murder of Halbach . This is not about accreditation . Its about willful and negligent behavior in the state crime lab . Its about bias . A lab that worked closely with the court and law enforcement to ensure the conviction of murder for Steven Avery . Labs handling evidence should be walled off from the prosecution , walled off by law enforcement and walled off from receiving information regarding the cases they are working on to ensure a fair and balanced . unbiased interpretation of the evidence coming into the lab for scrutiny . Interestingly enough the segment in the link below clarifies my statement . It aired this morning on WHYY . Its a wonderful listen if you have a moment . publicmediaevidence