Where is the evidence?

So, the brutal murder of a beautiful young girl has been avenged, the murderer in jail, justice is served. Hallelujah, amen...

Not so fast. Not. So. Fast...

The County Press 10-28-2015 edition finally brings up some of the questions that almost everyone on the defendant's side were asking, and so do two letters to the editor. And I've got a few questions myself for the state, the judge, the prosecutor, and the jury:

And the major, number 1 question: Where is the evidence?

I've been around the edges of this whole mess for 4 years, heard all the theories, all the rumors, all the charges, all the lies, and screw ups by the police - and yet, in 4 years I had not heard ONE piece of evidence against the defendant, not one thing that said "Yes, by God, he did it". All I've heard is that there was a statement that the cops coerced out of the kid, a statement the judge originally threw out, a statement that the appeals process (the state) in its infinite wisdom reversed and said no, the state can do what it wants, a statement he wrote while being harassed, screamed at, and deprived of his attorney for hours, a statement that after he signed he told the cops "this is bullshit and not true", a statement where he says he didn't kill her.

Ok, so they start the trial, and the thought goes through my head that maybe there is something that will come out then? Something that nobody had heard yet? A bombshell?

Nope. Even after the trial there still isn't anything pointing to the defendant as guilty. People coming out of the trial at the end of each day are saying stuff like "clearly he is innocent" and "its going so good its scary, too good". The defense doesn't even call any witnesses because it is absolutely clear to everyone in there that he didn't do it. So WTF?

So lets ask a few things: who's DNA is under the poor girl's fingernails? Not the defendant's. There was the defendant's DNA on the passenger side of the car (they were dating after all and she drove) but why isn't there any DNA of the defendant on the driver's side of the car? Or the back of her chair, where there is someone's DNA. Not the defendant's. On the other chair? Not the defendant's. ANYWHERE? Not the defendant's. THERE IS NO DNA pointing to the defendant, yet there is OTHER DNA ALL OVER THE PLACE. Whose? And fingerprints. Not the defendant's. And why didn't these facts alone get the case thrown out of court?

The cops stepped in the blood and in general made a mess of the crime scene but where's the blood on the defendant? The defendant should have had blood on him if he's at the crime scene. There wasn't any. The cops messed up the chain of evidence and the one hair they found, according to their own witness so we're told, could not have come as a result of the defendant being at the scene when she was killed. WTF?

Where was the gunpowder residue? In fact, WHERE'S THE DAMN GUN? Where is the stolen merchandise? Where is the stolen ATM card? Who actually used the stolen ATM card? Who is the guy in the ATM video using the card? Where is the black jeep or SUV seen in the ATM cameras and whose is it? Not the defendant's. The prosecution had no answers to any of this, just conjecture and theories, no proof. Conjecture and theories get you convicted these days?

If he in fact DID do the crime, there STILL ISN'T ANY EVIDENCE. WHAT? We are supposed to believe that the kid is a master criminal and got rid of all the evidence, all the blood, all the DNA, wiped down the car, got rid of the gun, got rid of all the stolen merchandise, and did it all so perfectly he didn't leave a trace? Really?

Jurors: apparently you're ok with the cops getting a statement out of someone the way you saw them do it in the video? BTW, why is there no sound on the video for the last 10 minutes, when the defendant told the cops the statement they had just wrung out of him is bullshit?

Or was it something else? Please don't tell me this is just you folks can't stand a defense attorney who is very good at his job, maybe even "slick"? Please tell me this isn't jealousy or "putting it to the rich kid" bullshit. Please tell me you didn't take the prosecution's narrative and deem it to be evidence. Please tell me that they didn't get the most ignorant or biased of the jury pool to sit on this case.

Rumor is now getting out that 11 of the jurors were ready to convict 5 minutes into deliberations and other interesting tidbits of what happened in that jury room, and now afterwards other news as well. And they convicted him BASED ON WHAT? The evidence that ISN'T THERE? So just what the hell did you convict this kid on? What the hell could you possibly have heard or seen that hundreds of people in and out of the court room didn't? You believed everything the cops said, even after it was proven that they intimidated and used controversial tactics short of beating a statement out of the kid - which most of the statement was not even consistent with the actual crime scene - screwed up the evidence bags and in general were incompetent and screwed up in their investigation?

Anyone got the answers?

The murder of this young girl was a tragedy beyond comprehension. It has stunned two families, countless friends, and an entire community, even county. However, locking up the wrong guy for her murder is even worse and only compounds the tragedy. This verdict is wrong and needs to be put right - now