Smudged fingerprints and the unreliability of this evidence

Just wanted to share these screenshots of tweets I’ve come across that are noting the unreliability of the fingerprints taken near the crime scene. But despite the prints being smudged, just a few days after LM’s arrest, several news sources claimed that LM’s fingerprints matched the ones found at the crime scene, convicting him of the crime alleged against him w/o a fair and proper trial. I think articles such as these are part of the reason so many have already convicted him in their heads. Additionally, almost everyone who mentions the fingerprints, water bottle, and wrapper say “at the crime scene” instead of NEAR the crime scene. It may not seem like a large distance but from a criminal standpoint it’s a world of a difference. These items were found close to the scene of the crime, not AT the crime scene itself.

Also, fingerprint science is flimsy itself, but many aren’t aware of this. Fingerprints aren’t the best and most reliable form of evidence, yet the majority of the public isn’t aware of this. LM’s prosecutor mentions this in his book, and how prosecutors often take advantage of the jury’s lack of knowledge in this matter to get a conviction. This + the prints being smudged just makes them all the more unreliable.

In saying all this, I want to stress how important it is not to take the things mainstream media says to us at face-value. In fact, so much has and will be misconstrued to fit a specific narrative. I hope whoever is elected for his jury is educated on this and can see right through the prosecutions mind games.