who on june 15th, 1974, was in cheryl miller s bedroom with his hands around her neck squeezing the last breaths from her dying body? see if we can replicate roughly the position of the body in relation to the dresser. the prosecution next used a dummy to demonstrate for the jury evidence that it said would conclusively link ferris to the murder. what do those circles represent? it represents the area with the latent fingerprints identified on mr. ferris were located. remember, two of ferris fingerprints were found on a dresser in the victim s room, but the state argued that it was the position of those prints, just inches from the victim s head, that was key. the prosecutor used a police officer to show the jury that the prints could only have been
if you want to conclude it is speculation, sobeit. who are you going to believe? some guy 30 years later saying the clown must have been mistaken or a guy doing thousands of autopsies who saw it? the man who took it out of the woman s body. he knew what he had. he knew it was semen. what does it say to you that this theory has changed? that they don t know. they don t know what it is but want to avoid the conclusion the most obvious conclusion the guy that looked at it june 15th, 1974, was right and that it was semen without sperm. because if that s right, then gabe ferris is almost certainly innocent. and they know that. and so they want to avoid that theory. i don t think that they re knowingly prosecuting the wrong guy. i think what they re doing is they believe it. they got locked on to a theory, they believe it, and they tend to discount all the evidence that contradicts that theory. finally, the defense closed its case by asking jurors this question if there was such a
ferris confessed to him. the snitch, like some other trial witnesses, did not wish to be photographed. he said he killed a woman, he said he strangled her. prosecutors called an ex-girlfriend who said ferris made strange statements while riding in a car in 1976, two years after cheryl miller was killed. he just kept saying, i didn t mean to do it. i didn t mean to do it. was gabe ferris his own worst enemy? well, i think there s no question about that. gabe ferris told enough people, enough things, to allow us to present evidence that would be corroborated in his own words. he was, in fact, the best evidence against him. but what physical evidence was there to back up those claims? how could prosecutors prove to the jury that ferris was the man who on june 15th, 1974, was in cheryl miller s bedroom with his hands around her neck squeezing the last breaths from her dying body? see if we can replicate
if you want to conclude it is speculation, so be it. who are you going to believe? some guy 30 years later saying the clown must have been mistaken or a guy doing thousands of autopsies who saw it? the man who took it out of the woman s body. he knew what he had. he knew it was semen. what does it say to you that this theory has changed? that they don t know. they don t know what it is but want to avoid the conclusion the most obvious conclusion the guy that looked at it june 15th, 1974, was right and that it was semen without sperm. because if that s right, then gabe ferris is almost certainly innocent. and they know that. and so they want to avoid that theory. i don t think that they re knowingly prosecuting the wrong guy. i think what they re doing is they believe it. they got locked on to a theory, they believe it, and they tend to discount all the evidence that contradicts that theory. finally, the defense closed its case by asking jurors this question if there was such
original pathologist, now dead, that the killer was sterile. it s 100% pure speculation. no, it is not. that is my opinion. if you want to conclude it is speculation, sobeit. who are you going to believe? some guy 30 years later saying the clown must have been mistaken or a guy doing thousands of autopsies who saw it? the man who took it out of the woman s body. he knew what he had. he knew it was semen. what does it say to you that this theory has changed? that they don t know. they don t know what it is but want to avoid the conclusion the most obvious conclusion the guy that looked at it june 15th, 1974, was right and that it was semen without sperm. because if that s right, then gabe ferris is almost certainly innocent. and they know that. and so they want to avoid that theory. i don t think that they re knowingly prosecuting the wrong guy. i think what they re doing is they believe it. they got locked on to a theory, they believe it, and they tend to discount all the evi