Mr. Stevens Wasn T Foolproof

Mr. Stevens isn’t guilty. The evidence against Stevens wasn’t foolproof. The Prosecutor didn’t have enough compelling evidence against him that couldn’t be contradicted. The officers, and everyone on the case, tried too hard to find the culprit, and with that overlooked facts. Didn’t look at all possible evidence, and dismissed the idea of another suspect altogether. The state's most compelling evidence is that of the coat, they found evidence of Mr. Rodgers DNA on the bottom of the coat. The problem with this is that the defense proved the point that if he had murdered Mr. Rodgers, then blood would have been all over the jacket, which there wasn’t. Equally important to point out is that they should have searched for shoes, and pants when they scoured his house. Considering they both should have had blood residue or particulates on them. They stated that he could have taken the jacket off, but it’s a suspicion. If a man brutally murders another man and took the time to dispose of all of his clothes that he wore the night of the murder, and did it intentionally to cover his tracks then why didn’t he also just dispose of the jacket too. I also believe in what the defense said when it came to the transfer

It was very evident that the man in the first picture had better posture, and a clean shave, plus the distinct white beanie. In the second one, the man was more hunched over. He appeared to have a dark beard, and mustache. The man in the first picture is definitely Mr. Stevens, the second man however is not stevens, and it is extremely obvious. What gets me the most is that the hat is missing. A white hat. If he had left it behind or tossed it out on his escape from the crime scene, then why didn’t police find it? If he had gotten blood on the hat it would have been very distinct, and noticeable, yet no one looked or thought to wonder where the hat