Number 1 and 4) are debatable
It is not even remotely debatable. Police thought they might have seen some movement but later recognized it was just them moving their heads that gave the impression of such. Sheila was dead before they got there, there was no one inside to move.
and 4) are debatable. According to Julie Mugford. Jeremy told her that Mathew Mcdonald made a phone call from WHF to Jeremy's cottage via his answer machine. So a record of such call would be made. Since you believe what this woman says there you go. I on the hand don't. But since her testimony can only have come from either the police or the relatives. I postulate that they must have had evidence of such a call and thus got her to parrot an alternative explanation for it.
1) Believing that Jeremy fed her such lie doesn't in any way make Jeremy's lie true. MM had nothing to do with the murders.
2) Even if someone had called from WHF to Goldhanger there still would not have been any phone record proving it.
3) If someone had called Jeremy's answering machine pretending to be Nevill and the tape were turned over to police it would not prove the time of the call, could be used to prove the call wasn't Nevill's voice and worst of all would demolish Jeremy's claim he actually spoke to Nevill as opposed to his answering machine picking up. .
Number 6) Proven: muzzle-imprint abrasion and zone of searing and soot deposition around the contact wound's to Sheila's chin are all consistent with being made by the threaded end of the barrel absent of any silencer. This is supported by four ballistic experts. The typical kneejerk guilter rebuttal is that the CCRC reject this evidence. Indeed they did. In absence of a counter-expert.
Complete nonsense. There is no muzzle imprint except in the minds of fools. The argument that there is a muzzle imprint is pathetic it consists of saying that Vanezis description sounds like a muzzle imprint not a bullet abrasion like he assessed.
Furthermore, Nicholas Caffell having suffered two contact wounds. They failed to discover any blood or tissue evidence of this within the silencer. Another incongruity that supports the evidence I mentioned above.
1) He suffered contact or near contact shots
2) You are making up that blood would have to get inside the moderator from any and all contact wounds no matter where located which is patently untrue. 22 shots to the head rarely result in backspatter. The reason why Sheila's wound was sure to create drawback was because of its location. She suffered a previous wound that caused her neck to fill with blood thus shooting her in the neck was sure to result in backspatter if a non-contact wound or drawback if a contact wound.
3) if your babble were true then instead of just Sheila's blood having to be in the rifle barrel then their blood would have to have been in it but no blood was inside it.
Evidence that was not discovered by the police but in a rather suspiciously convenient manner, does not cohere with big picture.
It coheres perfectly except in the mind of biased people bent on hiding from reality who would like to pretend the family knew 3 things they didn't have any clue about:
1) the family would have to know that her fatal wound was a contact wound
2) the family would have to know all about drawback and how to mimic it
3) the family would have to have a source of her blood to plant or would have to somehow know that Boutflour's blood had the same attributes.
Naturally here is no evidence of any of these let alone all of them. In addition to planting such evidence the family would have to arrange for someone to remove Sheila's blood from the rifle barrel because it would have been present had the moderator not been used. It would be useless to plant such evidence unless removing it from the barrel because that would prove that either the blood in the barrel or moderator was planted.
7) police used the moderator to scratch the mantle to frame Steven Avery??? Fascinating. please tell me more!
There is nothing to tell. There is just a barebones allegation that police used it to scratch the mantle and get paint on it. This doesn't come from the basis of evidence it is made up out of necessity to try to explain away the evidence.