Steve Avery’s defence attorney Dean Strang and former Calumet County prosecutor Ken Kratz appeared on Fox News to address questions about the trial covered by “Making a Murderer.”
The men, who interviewed with Megyn Kelly separately, addressed two questions many viewers of the Netflix series have been asking.
To recap, “Making a Murderer” follows Steve Avery, who was released from prison after serving 18 years for a crime he didn’t commit. He and his teen nephew Brendan Dassey were then arrested and convicted of the murder of photographer Teresa Halbach.
First, the lawyers addressed the lack of blood evidence. According to the prosecution, Avery and Dassey shot Halbach in Avery’s garage. But there was no blood or DNA evidence from the victim found there.
Kratz told Kelly that Dassey had told police that he and his uncle cleaned the garage with bleach and even provided evidence to back that up.
“In fact, Brendan turned over to the police, and we presented it as evidence, his bleach-stained jeans he was wearing that day,” Kratz pointed out. “So, you could see the splashes up from the bleach, which were absolutely consistent not only with the blood evidence being cleaned up, being removed because of the bleach, but also the statement by 16-year-old Brendan.”
In response, Strang told Kelly: “Steven Avery can be accused of a lot of things, but a really good housekeeper doesn’t make the list … I have no idea when the bleach got on the jeans. I can’t imagine, especially where as I recall there was deer blood left in the garage, that all traces of human blood would have been removed from that garage by anybody, let alone Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey.”
The second central question the attorneys addressed is related to evidence Kratz has asserted didn’t make it into the show. He’s that Avery’s DNA was found under the hood of Halbach’s car — not blood DNA but sweat.
Kratz said that Dassey told police about the sweat for “the first time,” which led the lab to swab under Halbach’s car hood.
“It came out to be Steven Avery’s DNA, but importantly non-blood DNA,” Kratz said, referring to the defence’s theory that blood from Avery’s previous arrest was planted at the crime scene as part of the police’s framing of Avery.
Strang refuted, “There was no evidence of stress. There was evidence of DNA transferred, Steven Avery’s DNA. But the sweat idea is just Mr. Kratz’s theory and has never been any more than that. The DNA from Steven Avery under that hood could’ve been transferred any number of ways.”
Watch the interviews below:
NOW WATCH: ‘House of Cards’ ran a realistic-looking political ad during the Republican presidential debate
NOW WATCH: Briefing videos
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.