I thought this was interesting
Unless you have been sitting in the courtroom and have had the opportunity to hear all of the evidence, it is really not possible or fair to second guess the jury verdict. Clearly the documentarians here had a point of view and skewed their presentation to support only their point of view. We are getting only that evidence that they want us to see, and that bolsters their belief that SA is not guilty. Folks, this was never intended to be an unbiased, objective presentation, otherwise why not include the finding of DNA evidence on the hood latch, why not include the fact that SA specifically requested Teresa when he booked the appointment, that he called her three times that day -- twice using *67 to hide his identity, why not mention that the bullet found in the garage matched a .22 rifle in SA's house, etc.
I get that and I have said that I would say it's probable he killed her. The problem is the inconsistencies. The same guy who knew enough about crime scene cleanup also left blood in the vehicle (but no finger prints) and kept the key to the vehicle? That's not to mention he parked it on his property when he had everything he needed to get rid of it.
The bullet is a good point but there was no blood, just DNA and the expert that testifies did something she's never done to give the finding she did. Then Colburn gives the plates but supposedly isn't looking at the vehicle. Then COlburn and Lenk are the ones who find the key on the 4th sweep of the house and it's sitting in the open. Then you have someone with their throat slashed, stabbed and shot in a garage but there is zero blood anywhere?
To me, the message to be taken here doesn't have as much to do with if SA is guilty. It's that in at least some form, the police made him the murderer. There is zero doubt in my mind that key was planted and there's zero doubt in my mind that the story Brendan gave that the DA went off of was incredibly false. I hadn't heard about the DNA under the hood. Didn't they say in the documentary there was no other SA DNA on the vehicle?
Him requesting her to come do the work is not evidence he killed her. It may mean he's creepy, but it doesn't mean he killed her. IMO, the DA messed this up giving the story to the media they did for emotional effect. That story did not happen.