This is Janine Arvizu, a hero analytical chemist and a laboratory data quality auditor whose testimony appeared in Netflix's true-crime documentary Making a Murderer.
She reviewed the argument that Steven Avery, the documentary's protagonist, couldn't have had his blood planted on a crime scene because a new test said so.
The science presented by the FBI's expert could reasonably be described as not fit for peer review. Here's Avery's lawyer and the expert in question:
This is a patently absurd statement and Arizu, all around science badass that she is, isn't afraid to call it out in her capacity as a defense witness:
Shining beacon of logic and reason that she is, she also pointed out that not detecting EDTA does not mean it's not there, especially with no documentation about the test's sensitivity.
If only we could all live the #ScienceLife as hard as her!
Science Writer, Fossil Beastmaster
Contact Alex Kasprak at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Got a confidential tip? Submit it here.