[gemy]

I want to look at for a moment just Brendan. Having worked with the developmentally challenged I do know how vulnerable and susceptible they are to persons in authority. Also many folks just want to please or give the answer that they think you want.

That taped interview was appalling. The system removed his original lawyer because he allowed his client to be interviewed by police without legal representation.... How then was the *confession* allowed into evidence???? The apparent working of the defense team with the prosecution is not only puzzling but troubling and more troubling all this came out and yet a mistrial was not allowed? At the minimum the law should require all persons identified with diminshed capacity be provided with an advocate.

Having said all the above - to me there was something I believe that Brendan was hiding and or ashamed about. What it exactly was I don't know. THere is the fact of losing 40lbs after the victim was found. That is a lot of weight to lose. In later interviews there was just something off or that I found inconsistent....

Where was the proof that the bones were actually burnt in and on their property. Was the burn areas capable of producing heat hot enough to create the degree of charring found on the bones? I might of missed this but where was the testimony that a) asserted all the bones found were human b) sexed to female c) and congruent or consistent with only one female body? d) and then consistent with the skeletal structure of the victim?

I also found it interesting that Brendan when pressed for what he saw in the fire - he replied toes! It is extremely difficult to identify toes unattached to a foot for the layperson who has never ever seen a skeleton. In otherwords without a refernce point ie toes attached to say the foot - why did he select toes?

And then we get to the DNA testing on the one tibia bone. The control sample was contaminated. What is the impact of a contaminated sample? Why was the testing done which was going to eliminate once done the ability of the defense to do their own DNA testing without an expert from the defense present during that testing? That would seem to be an item of procedure that should be required by the prosecution to follow.

Overall though is our law supposed to get to the *truth* of the matter? Or is the juggernaut of the system we have created once activated is incentivized to proceed blindly down this person is guilty without a doubt because we have charged them with this crime? Where are the checks and balances for our justice system?

Why do we need such a thing like the *Innocence Project*? How many folks are imprisoned for crimes they did not committ? Disturbing thought to say the least.

In Brendans' and Stevens case if they are innocent then there is some presumably male out there who has gotten away with murder!