details? it just didn t roll off like that. and what about all that blood igaz says ferris was covered in? the big problem with that, there was no blood at the crime scene. just a little bit in her nose. otherwise, there s no blood. even if you believed her, that he had blood on him, you would say so what? because there s no blood at the crime scene? absolutely. terri s story has evolved over the years, the time switch, different details come in and out. it s never been consistent. the truth is the truth. the truth does not change over time. and her story has new details and every time it just expands. i thought of some other things, but i m not sure if they really happened or not. do you recall saying that? yes. and the defense was particularly interested in how igaz qualified the events when she gave her statement. it seems every time you give a statement, there s something new in there. is that not correct? that s what i remembered.
that same night in their honeymoon cottage ferris turned on the 11:00 news. he got up real close to the television and when it was talking about cheryl miller, he was touching the television and he was making noises like he was crying but he wasn t crying. pretend crying. he told me that that was the last girlfriend he had before me. did he tell you that he was still dating her? no. did he tell you that he had a date with her the night before your wedding? no. and that, prosecutors would claim, was the motive behind the murder. because it turns out that gabriel ferris had set up a date with cheryl miller the night before his wedding, his so-called stag night apparently to have sex with her once more before becoming a married man. but ferris later told police that his wife-to-be had kept such a close eye on him that night, that he couldn t get away to see his girlfriend. so prosecutors theorized ferris decided to see cheryl miller at his very next opportunity, which turned o
bedroom, cheryl miller s former boyfriend, gabriel ferris, was on trial, now for the third time for the murder. he was facing a life sentence and his attorneys were on the attack. after pointing to other viable suspects, the defense was about to drop a bombshell. because it turns out that when the physical evidence was gathered from the crime scene 30 years ago and detectives began following leads, those dark hairs on the victim s body weren t the only crucial pieces of evidence that pointed away from gabriel ferris. the medical examiner also found something highly unusual, left behind, he believed, by the man who raped and murdered cheryl miller. he told the two detectives that he found a large quantity of semen, and what was remarkable was not finding sperm. indicating whoever raped cheryl miller was sterile. right. it was true. police and medical reports said
so even of the pool of suspects that the defense argued could have committed this crime, none of them were sterile. maybe none of them committed the crime. well, there s always, i suppose, that possibility. and again, if you take just that single piece of evidence you can create whatever doubt you wish to create. the defense was focused on presenting hard, physical evidence to show the jury that gabriel ferris could not be the killer. what it said were hairs and semen that didn t come from ferris, and the defense argued that the state had a shaky case based on two old fingerprints, circumstantial evidence, and witnesses whose stories had changed over three decades. all right. you may proceed. the defense argued the case never would have gone to trial if it had not been for one man. that s what you say he told you. that s what he told me. roy walton, the retired saginaw police detective that
ferris. the rest of the case was similar smoke and mirrors. not pretty but the point i want to make. now ferris had another chance to convince a jury of his innocence, and they believed that the jury could only concluded that ferris was not guilty. why? a lack of physical evidence. was there any of gabe ferris hair found at the crime scene? none. semen? none. blood, skin tissue? nothing. what does that say about this case? i think it s a very weak case. a weak case, the defense argued, even though ferris fingerprint was found on a dresser a few inches from the victim s head. ferris said they had sex all over the bedroom and fingerprint analysts forced to admit they couldn t prove the prints were left the night of the murder. you said you could not place a time on it, correct? that s true. so you don t know when it was made?