# Netflix - Making A Murderer



## Michelle420

Anyone watching this series? What do you think about it?

Netflix documentary on Steven Avery case generating buzz, but some say it doesn't tell the whole story


----------



## koshergrl

Is it a documentary? I might give it a whirl.


----------



## Michelle420

koshergrl said:


> Is it a documentary? I might give it a whirl.



It is but has ten episodes to it. It's controversial if you do watch it give me your opinion, I always think of you as insightful smart.


----------



## Michelle420

Here's the trailer


----------



## Gracie

Guilty. Keep the asshole in prison.


----------



## Michelle420

Gracie said:


> Guilty. Keep the asshole in prison.



But he was released not guilty after being held 18 yrs the DNA was not his. Then after he's out they turn around and pin another one on him, coincidentally he's about to file a lawsuit for 36 million dollars against them for that 18 yrs he spent in prison.


----------



## Gracie

Fry his sorry cat burning ass.


----------



## koshergrl

Hm. I dunno, I tend to be of the opinion that people who commit burglaries should rot in jail for the majority of their lives anyway...if they did, a lot of murders would never happen.


----------



## koshergrl

I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.


----------



## Gracie

koshergrl said:


> I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.


Anyone that can soak his pet cat in lighter fluid or gasoline, then light it on fire and listen to it scream...even 40 years ago....is a serial killer who will not flinch at doing the same thing to a human being. No soul. Keep his sorry ass in prison, then fry him. No loss.


----------



## Michelle420

Gracie said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that can soak his pet cat in lighter fluid or gasoline, then light it on fire and listen to it scream...even 40 years ago....is a serial killer who will not flinch at doing the same thing to a human being. No soul. Keep his sorry ass in prison, then fry him. No loss.
Click to expand...


I haven't watched the whole thing and know nothing about this that you are speaking of. I read the article that he was put away for sexual assault for 18 yrs and then they found it was not his dna and he was innocent. Then as he was going to file a lawsuit for being imprisoned he was charged with murder of a missing girl.

So have you watched this Gracie, which episode did he do that in, I will skip that one.


----------



## Dhara

I watched this in it's entirety. Shows how corrupt our system of "justice" is.  Massive amount of police misconduct.


----------



## Michelle420

Gracie said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that can soak his pet cat in lighter fluid or gasoline, then light it on fire and listen to it scream...even 40 years ago....is a serial killer who will not flinch at doing the same thing to a human being. No soul. Keep his sorry ass in prison, then fry him. No loss.
Click to expand...


He may be a serial killer, I have not watched all of it. I just read the article and wondered peoples opinions who have watched it.


----------



## Michelle420

Anyone who tortures animals has something wrong with them.


----------



## koshergrl

Gracie said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that can soak his pet cat in lighter fluid or gasoline, then light it on fire and listen to it scream...even 40 years ago....is a serial killer who will not flinch at doing the same thing to a human being. No soul. Keep his sorry ass in prison, then fry him. No loss.
Click to expand...

 That's crazy. Torturing an animal is bad, but it isn't proof that someone's a serial killer, lol.

But he was a loser, he should have stayed in prison from the time he was convicted of burglary.


----------



## Dhara

drifter said:


> Anyone who tortures animals has something wrong with them.


That doesn't mean he killed Halbach.  Dassey's illegally obtained testimony should have been thrown out.

IMO, Avery and Dassey were framed and the real killer walked free.


----------



## Michelle420

Dhara said:


> I watched this in it's entirety. Shows how corrupt our system of "justice" is.  Massive amount of police misconduct.



So do you think they framed him the 2nd time to avoid the 36 million dollar lawsuit for false imprisonment? Typically people who torture animals can have a proclivity to be violent offenders, even some become serial killers. 

Thanks for sharing your opinion especially since you have watched the whole thing.


----------



## Michelle420

koshergrl said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that can soak his pet cat in lighter fluid or gasoline, then light it on fire and listen to it scream...even 40 years ago....is a serial killer who will not flinch at doing the same thing to a human being. No soul. Keep his sorry ass in prison, then fry him. No loss.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's crazy. Torturing an animal is bad, but it isn't proof that someone's a serial killer, lol.
> 
> But he was a loser, he should have stayed in prison from the time he was convicted of burglary.
Click to expand...


The prison sentence for sexual assault was false so should he get any compensation for that? 

I had a friend who got arrested as a teen for shoplifting, and today she's an upstanding citizen. I mean I think age of crime matters too, do you think so ? People can change over time.


----------



## Michelle420

Dhara said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who tortures animals has something wrong with them.
> 
> 
> 
> That doesn't mean he killed Halbach.  Dassey's illegally obtained testimony should have been thrown out.
> 
> IMO, Avery and Dassey were framed and the real killer walked free.
Click to expand...


Thanks I'm going to watch it.


----------



## Dhara

drifter said:


> Dhara said:
> 
> 
> 
> I watched this in it's entirety. Shows how corrupt our system of "justice" is.  Massive amount of police misconduct.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So do you think they framed him the 2nd time to avoid the 36 million dollar lawsuit for false imprisonment? Typically people who torture animals can have a proclivity to be violent offenders, even some become serial killers.
> 
> Thanks for sharing your opinion especially since you have watched the whole thing.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think he was framed in order to avoid a broke county having to pay out millions of dollars they didn't have in a law suit.

I think the animal cruelty experience is horrible but that is not enough to presume he kidnapped, raped and murdered Halback.  There is no forensic evidence Halback was raped.

Animal cruelty is associated with serial killers.  Stephen Avery isn't a serial murderer.


----------



## koshergrl

drifter said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that can soak his pet cat in lighter fluid or gasoline, then light it on fire and listen to it scream...even 40 years ago....is a serial killer who will not flinch at doing the same thing to a human being. No soul. Keep his sorry ass in prison, then fry him. No loss.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's crazy. Torturing an animal is bad, but it isn't proof that someone's a serial killer, lol.
> 
> But he was a loser, he should have stayed in prison from the time he was convicted of burglary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The prison sentence for sexual assault was false so should he get any compensation for that?
> 
> I had a friend who got arrested as a teen for shoplifting, and today she's an upstanding citizen. I mean I think age of crime matters too, do you think so ? People can change over time.
Click to expand...

 Shoplifting is a far cry from burglary. People who are willing to commit burglaries are willing to risk face to face confrontation with people in their own homes...it puts them in a totally different classification.


----------



## Michelle420

Dhara said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dhara said:
> 
> 
> 
> I watched this in it's entirety. Shows how corrupt our system of "justice" is.  Massive amount of police misconduct.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So do you think they framed him the 2nd time to avoid the 36 million dollar lawsuit for false imprisonment? Typically people who torture animals can have a proclivity to be violent offenders, even some become serial killers.
> 
> Thanks for sharing your opinion especially since you have watched the whole thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yes, I think he was framed in order to avoid a broke county having to pay out millions of dollars they didn't have in a law suit.
> 
> I think the animal cruelty experience is horrible but that is not enough to presume he kidnapped, raped and murdered Halback.  There is no forensic evidence Halback was raped.
> 
> Animal cruelty is associated with serial killers.  Stephen Avery isn't a serial murderer.
Click to expand...


You have watched the whole thing so I am sure there are things I am missing. Still I already despise him for torturing animals. YIKES! 

Anyway great feedback thanks!


----------



## Dhara

Two hundred thousand citizens have petitioned the WH for his pardon.  One juror already recanted his vote and other jurors said they feared for their lives.  The jury behaved badly, trading votes and so on.


----------



## Michelle420

koshergrl said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that can soak his pet cat in lighter fluid or gasoline, then light it on fire and listen to it scream...even 40 years ago....is a serial killer who will not flinch at doing the same thing to a human being. No soul. Keep his sorry ass in prison, then fry him. No loss.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's crazy. Torturing an animal is bad, but it isn't proof that someone's a serial killer, lol.
> 
> But he was a loser, he should have stayed in prison from the time he was convicted of burglary.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The prison sentence for sexual assault was false so should he get any compensation for that?
> 
> I had a friend who got arrested as a teen for shoplifting, and today she's an upstanding citizen. I mean I think age of crime matters too, do you think so ? People can change over time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Shoplifting is a far cry from burglary. People who are willing to commit burglaries are willing to risk face to face confrontation with people in their own homes...it puts them in a totally different classification.
Click to expand...


That makes sense. Yeah Burglary you risk getting yourself killed too, shoplifting is still bad in that it is stealing from someone's business but it is a different level.


----------



## ClosedCaption

I watched and they need to lock up Lenk and the other guy for starters.

Then Ken Kratz stupid voice ass


----------



## strollingbones

watched it......lot of questions about it....if avery didnt kill her who did?
for a man with an iq of  70....how complex would you expect the murder to be...his torture of animals is an indicator...plus according to his bunk mate in jail...he has fantasies of torturing and raping women....he gave  his sisters name and phone number to get the young lady back out to his place...seems she went one time and he answered the door with just a towel on....sadly lots of questions


----------



## ClosedCaption

strollingbones said:


> watched it......lot of questions about it....if avery didnt kill her who did?
> for a man with an iq of  70....how complex would you expect the murder to be...his torture of animals is an indicator...plus according to his bunk mate in jail...he has fantasies of torturing and raping women....he gave  his sisters name and phone number to get the young lady back out to his place...seems she went one time and he answered the door with just a towel on....sadly lots of questions



Everything there is rumor except maybe the burning of the cat.


----------



## strollingbones

Here are some basic things we know right now:


Parts of Halbach’s body were found burned in Avery’s fire pit.
Evidence of Avery’s involvement was found inside his home.
There is DNA evidence tying the bullet found in the Avery garage to Halbach.
Avery was the last known person to see Halbach alive.
Police found her car, with blood on it and in it, left on the Avery family’s lot.
Avery’s high-school age cousin, Brendan Dassey, confessed that he had assisted his uncle in murder of Halbach.*
Steven Avery Is Guilty As Hell


----------



## ClosedCaption

strollingbones said:


> Here are some basic things we know right now:
> 
> 
> Parts of Halbach’s body were found burned in Avery’s fire pit.





True




> Evidence of Avery’s involvement was found inside his home.



What evidence?




> There is DNA evidence tying the bullet found in the Avery garage to Halbach.



Found by the detective being sued for 36 million also, no blood anywhere.




> Avery was the last known person to see Halbach alive.



According to the police who didnt check anyone else




> Police found her car, with blood on it and in it, left on the Avery family’s lot.



Yep, which looks even more like a set up since he gets rid of cars for a living.




> Avery’s high-school age cousin, Brendan Dassey, confessed that he had assisted his uncle in murder of Halbach.*






> Steven Avery Is Guilty As Hell



Coerced confession they threw out in Avery's case.  If Dassey is to be believed then they killed her in the bedroom...and didnt leave any blood.  Then took her to the Garage, still no blood.  And shot her which also resulted in no blood at the scene.


----------



## strollingbones

believe what you will...the show left a lot of evidence out...and again...if avery did not kill her...who did?  who had access to the yard..they are now saying averys dna was found in sweat under the car hood....now one would have to believe that they had a tube of sweat to plant? 

i am very skeptical of the juror who came forward...he has managed to live with himself and voting on whatever....do i believe him...not so much....you always have those wanting to ride the wave of publicity


----------



## ClosedCaption

strollingbones said:


> believe what you will...the show left a lot of evidence out



None of what I posted deals with belief.




> ...and again...if avery did not kill her...who did?



Dont know...but thats not a defense or proof that Avery did it, not knowing.




> who had access to the yard..they are now saying averys dna was found in sweat under the car hood




Ken Kratz the prosecutor is the one saying that.  Its been shown that he says anything like the Press Conferences he held BEFORE conviction



> ....now one would have to believe that they had a tube of sweat to plant?




IF it was indeed sweat.  But what you're doing is repeating unfounded information and wondering how that unfounded information could happen instead of asking for proof of the allegation as a starting point.



> i am very skeptical of the juror who came forward...he has managed to live with himself and voting on whatever....do i believe him...not so much....you always have those wanting to ride the wave of publicity



You can be skeptical but again, this is about facts and not feelings.  Fortunately the juror also has nothing to do with whether or not Avery killed anyone


----------



## strollingbones

so tell me your story of what happened


----------



## strollingbones

aren't your reactions based in emotions?


----------



## ClosedCaption

strollingbones said:


> so tell me your story of what happened



There is enough doubt that Avery shouldnt be in prison.  Thats the story.

You dont justify locking someone up just because SOMEONE has to go to jail for it


----------



## ClosedCaption

strollingbones said:


> aren't your reactions based in emotions?



Maybe, but I'm talking about the case and not my reactions to the case.  The Juror has absolutely zero to do with the murder.


----------



## CowboyTed

Looked at it all...

Where was this woman killed and where is the evidence... 

If Avery knew how to supress all DNA evidence but still know how to crush a car....

Stinks to high heven


----------



## james bond

Innocent until pro... guilty.  What the heck, I'll start watching.


----------



## james bond

I just finished episode 1 and think the show is biased for Mr. Avery, but anyway it provides a compelling case.  I though Judy Dvorak was hard to believe and some strange things happened such as Penny Beerntsen unable to read the statement, but ended up signing it.  There is Chief Deputy Kusche drawing Avery from an older photo and creating a large framed composite drawing and putting it up in his office.  There is no doubt both Kusche and Sheriff Tom Locourek talked to each other.  However, the case that they conspired against Avery is harder to prove.  There isn't a smoking gun, so can see why Avery lost.  The most troubling part is how law enforcement and the prosecutor acts in the case.  I'm not sure if the show accurately depicts this, but it seems something is wrong with the system that is in place in small town Manitowic County.


----------



## james bond

drifter said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Guilty. Keep the asshole in prison.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But he was released not guilty after being held 18 yrs the DNA was not his. Then after he's out they turn around and pin another one on him, coincidentally he's about to file a lawsuit for 36 million dollars against them for that 18 yrs he spent in prison.
Click to expand...

I only saw episode 1 and will probably continue.  He did file a law suit against the county, so his arrest for murder came after the lawsuit trial started.  What do you mean they "pin" the murder on him?


----------



## usmbtech

I just finished this show over the weekend.  Here's an interesting theory.

This Is The Most Credible 'Making A Murderer' Theory I've Seen So Far


----------



## elchorizo

DanK said:


> I just finished this show over the weekend.  Here's an interesting theory.
> 
> This Is The Most Credible 'Making A Murderer' Theory I've Seen So Far



Good read and great theory.


----------



## cereal_killer

DanK said:


> I just finished this show over the weekend.  Here's an interesting theory.
> 
> This Is The Most Credible 'Making A Murderer' Theory I've Seen So Far


Dude this makes 100% total sense and like the title says its definitely the most credible to date. This story/doc just keeps on giving. I believe sooner or later the truth will come out. There's too many people out there asking questions, something is going to happen.


----------



## strollingbones

i think when or if the truth comes out it will be steve avery found guilty of murder....the evidence is not all given in the documentary....it will be interesting to see season 2....i understand netflix is going for it


----------



## 4Nines

DanK said:


> I just finished this show over the weekend.  Here's an interesting theory.
> 
> This Is The Most Credible 'Making A Murderer' Theory I've Seen So Far



From what we know, this sounds like the most logical possibility if Avery didn't do it.


----------



## strollingbones

one must take into account the intelligence levels one is dealing with.....you are giving more credit to these people than is due


----------



## Sarah G

The footage we did see of them interviewing the slow kid showed the police unabashedly leading this kid and putting words into his mouth.  That case was so dirty.  I hope he gets a new and fair trial because that last one wasn't.  They visited the site where she was supposedly killed several times and suddenly certain pieces of evidence are showing up?


----------



## Coloradomtnman

drifter said:


> Anyone watching this series? What do you think about it?
> 
> Netflix documentary on Steven Avery case generating buzz, but some say it doesn't tell the whole story



It was so entertaining the Coloradomtnwoman and I watched it in three nights, back to back.

Steven Avery may be guilty - I read that some physical evidence wasn't covered in the documentary that supports the prosecution.

Dassey is probably innocent.

They both should be allowed a retrial.


----------



## strollingbones

american justice is dirty...white man has coke.....black man has crack......you go to prison for crack but not coke


----------



## james bond

DanK said:


> I just finished this show over the weekend.  Here's an interesting theory.
> 
> This Is The Most Credible 'Making A Murderer' Theory I've Seen So Far



Good stuff for a re-trial.  Just to show reasonable doubt.


----------



## james bond

Is this the OJ trial for milennials?  It's got blood evidence in the car and garage.  It's got police planting evidence and a coverup.  It's got a county's prejudice towards a poor person.  So where is the glove that doesn't fit?  In this case, it's the defense that Steven Avery's attorneys were not able to put on, i.e. there could have been someone else.


----------



## rightwinger

Coloradomtnman said:


> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone watching this series? What do you think about it?
> 
> Netflix documentary on Steven Avery case generating buzz, but some say it doesn't tell the whole story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was so entertaining the Coloradomtnwoman and I watched it in three nights, back to back.
> 
> Steven Avery may be guilty - I read that some physical evidence wasn't covered in the documentary that supports the prosecution.
> 
> Dassey is probably innocent.
> 
> They both should be allowed a retrial.
Click to expand...


Steve Avery was portrayed as a quiet, polite young man with limited intelligence. He is too sweet to have done something like this

Neighbors and his ex girlfriend paint a different picture. They were afraid of him and considered him to be creepy

Theresa Halbach came to the property because Avery specifically requested Auto Shopper send the woman who took pictures before. It seems Avery had been fantasizing about this woman. She had said that when she visited the property before, Avery answered the door wearing a towel


----------



## Coloradomtnman

rightwinger said:


> Coloradomtnman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone watching this series? What do you think about it?
> 
> Netflix documentary on Steven Avery case generating buzz, but some say it doesn't tell the whole story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was so entertaining the Coloradomtnwoman and I watched it in three nights, back to back.
> 
> Steven Avery may be guilty - I read that some physical evidence wasn't covered in the documentary that supports the prosecution.
> 
> Dassey is probably innocent.
> 
> They both should be allowed a retrial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Theresa Halbach came to the property because Avery specifically requested Auto Shopper send the woman who took pictures before. It seems Avery had been fantasizing about this woman. She had said that when she visited the property before, Avery answered the door wearing a towel
Click to expand...


Wearing only a towel?  Was that part of the prosecution?  If so, why was that left out of the documentary?  That's pretty damning.


----------



## rightwinger

Coloradomtnman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coloradomtnman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone watching this series? What do you think about it?
> 
> Netflix documentary on Steven Avery case generating buzz, but some say it doesn't tell the whole story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was so entertaining the Coloradomtnwoman and I watched it in three nights, back to back.
> 
> Steven Avery may be guilty - I read that some physical evidence wasn't covered in the documentary that supports the prosecution.
> 
> Dassey is probably innocent.
> 
> They both should be allowed a retrial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Theresa Halbach came to the property because Avery specifically requested Auto Shopper send the woman who took pictures before. It seems Avery had been fantasizing about this woman. She had said that when she visited the property before, Avery answered the door wearing a towel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wearing only a towel?  Was that part of the prosecution?  If so, why was that left out of the documentary?  That's pretty damning.
Click to expand...


The documentary was decidedly one sided presenting only Averys defense and omitted many pieces of the prosecution

Even at that, while watching the documentary, I thought I would have found Avery guilty and Dassey maybe guilty of helping to dispose of the body

I was willing to buy in to the idea of maybe the police dropped a key and maybe they smeared some of Averys blood in the car....but the idea that they would find the victims car and the victims charred remains at another location and ignore an actual crime scene in order to frame Avery seemed too far fetched


----------



## rightwinger

Evidence that's missing from ‘Making a Murderer'


----------



## Coloradomtnman

rightwinger said:


> Coloradomtnman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coloradomtnman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone watching this series? What do you think about it?
> 
> Netflix documentary on Steven Avery case generating buzz, but some say it doesn't tell the whole story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was so entertaining the Coloradomtnwoman and I watched it in three nights, back to back.
> 
> Steven Avery may be guilty - I read that some physical evidence wasn't covered in the documentary that supports the prosecution.
> 
> Dassey is probably innocent.
> 
> They both should be allowed a retrial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Theresa Halbach came to the property because Avery specifically requested Auto Shopper send the woman who took pictures before. It seems Avery had been fantasizing about this woman. She had said that when she visited the property before, Avery answered the door wearing a towel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wearing only a towel?  Was that part of the prosecution?  If so, why was that left out of the documentary?  That's pretty damning.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The documentary was decidedly one sided presenting only Averys defense and omitted many pieces of the prosecution
> 
> Even at that, while watching the documentary, I thought I would have found Avery guilty and Dassey maybe guilty of helping to dispose of the body
> 
> I was willing to buy in to the idea of maybe the police dropped a key and maybe they smeared some of Averys blood in the car....but the idea that they would find the victims car and the victims charred remains at another location and ignore an actual crime scene in order to frame Avery seemed too far fetched
Click to expand...


I came to the same conclusion except that I still think Dassey may have had nothing to do with the murder or disposal of Halbach's body.  The way the investigators led him in his statements, his demeanor (autism or asburgers), and his developmental and mental disabilities and no direct or even circumstantial evidence linking him to the crime provide enough reasonable doubt for a retrial.


----------



## rightwinger

Coloradomtnman said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coloradomtnman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Coloradomtnman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drifter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone watching this series? What do you think about it?
> 
> Netflix documentary on Steven Avery case generating buzz, but some say it doesn't tell the whole story
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It was so entertaining the Coloradomtnwoman and I watched it in three nights, back to back.
> 
> Steven Avery may be guilty - I read that some physical evidence wasn't covered in the documentary that supports the prosecution.
> 
> Dassey is probably innocent.
> 
> They both should be allowed a retrial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Theresa Halbach came to the property because Avery specifically requested Auto Shopper send the woman who took pictures before. It seems Avery had been fantasizing about this woman. She had said that when she visited the property before, Avery answered the door wearing a towel
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wearing only a towel?  Was that part of the prosecution?  If so, why was that left out of the documentary?  That's pretty damning.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The documentary was decidedly one sided presenting only Averys defense and omitted many pieces of the prosecution
> 
> Even at that, while watching the documentary, I thought I would have found Avery guilty and Dassey maybe guilty of helping to dispose of the body
> 
> I was willing to buy in to the idea of maybe the police dropped a key and maybe they smeared some of Averys blood in the car....but the idea that they would find the victims car and the victims charred remains at another location and ignore an actual crime scene in order to frame Avery seemed too far fetched
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I came to the same conclusion except that I still think Dassey may have had nothing to do with the murder or disposal of Halbach's body.  The way the investigators led him in his statements, his demeanor (autism or asburgers), and his developmental and mental disabilities and no direct or even circumstantial evidence linking him to the crime provide enough reasonable doubt for a retrial.
Click to expand...


I agree Dassey got railroaded

They kept pushing him to make up a story and he did. None of his story made sense. If the woman was tied up in that bedroom and Dassey had sex with her in that bedroom, there would be hair, pubic hair, sweat, saliva, semen all over the place. They didn't find anything

I doubt Dassey was smart enough to remove any but the most obvious evidence

I had questions about the fire pit. It was pretty small and I am not sure Dassey could have been there and not realized there was a body in that fire


----------



## iamwhatiseem

Gracie said:


> koshergrl said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know if I could handle ten episodes of that.
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone that can soak his pet cat in lighter fluid or gasoline, then light it on fire and listen to it scream...even 40 years ago....is a serial killer who will not flinch at doing the same thing to a human being. No soul. Keep his sorry ass in prison, then fry him. No loss.
Click to expand...


Soooo....convict him of something he didn't do to pay for a crime you think he would do...got it.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

What those like rightwinger keep forgetting...jurors can only convict someone based exclusively and entirely *on only what the prosecution shows. *
Jurors cannot base their decision on anything else but what the prosecution states, and how the defense answers those charges. 
 In saying that, there is no way - no how - not on this planet or any other planet did Steven Avery, or anyone else for that matter, murder Theresa Halbach in the way the prosecution said it happen. However and whoever murdered this woman, did not murder her anywhere on Steven Avery's property, PERIOD. Didn't happen. 
 I do not know if Avery killed this woman, but what I do know is that there were other suspects who had motive and access to Theresa...and they were all not even questioned. I do know that the evidence on the scene was almost beyond a doubt -  at the very least altered if not planted.
  Steven Avery and Dassey were convicted of the same crime, where the SAME PROSECUTOR PRESENTED TOTALLY DIFFERENT EVIDENCE AND TOTALLY DIFFERENT METHOD OF DEATH...how the f*ck is that possible??


----------



## Carla_Danger

drifter said:


> Anyone watching this series? What do you think about it?
> 
> Netflix documentary on Steven Avery case generating buzz, but some say it doesn't tell the whole story





My mom recommended this series, but I haven't watched it yet. I think I'll check out the real story, then watch it.


----------



## rightwinger

iamwhatiseem said:


> What those like rightwinger keep forgetting...jurors can only convict someone based exclusively and entirely *on only what the prosecution shows. *
> Jurors cannot base their decision on anything else but what the prosecution states, and how the defense answers those charges.
> In saying that, there is no way - no how - not on this planet or any other planet did Steven Avery, or anyone else for that matter, murder Theresa Halbach in the way the prosecution said it happen. However and whoever murdered this woman, did not murder her anywhere on Steven Avery's property, PERIOD. Didn't happen.
> I do not know if Avery killed this woman, but what I do know is that there were other suspects who had motive and access to Theresa...and they were all not even questioned. I do know that the evidence on the scene was almost beyond a doubt -  at the very least altered if not planted.
> Steven Avery and Dassey were convicted of the same crime, where the SAME PROSECUTOR PRESENTED TOTALLY DIFFERENT EVIDENCE AND TOTALLY DIFFERENT METHOD OF DEATH...how the f*ck is that possible??



I could not see how Dassey could be convicted of worse crimes than Avery was charged with

They did not even bring up Dassey's wild, ever changing stories during Avery's trial

But what evidence was there to convict Avery?

Last known person to see her alive
He specifically requested she come to take pictures (lured her to the property)
Her car was found on his property
No evidence of her ever being off the property. No witnesses, no phone calls after seeing Avery.
Avery's blood and sweat were found in the car
The keys to the car were in his room
The charred remains were found 30 feet from his trailer

If I was on the jury, I would have convicted


----------



## iamwhatiseem

rightwinger said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those like rightwinger keep forgetting...jurors can only convict someone based exclusively and entirely *on only what the prosecution shows. *
> Jurors cannot base their decision on anything else but what the prosecution states, and how the defense answers those charges.
> In saying that, there is no way - no how - not on this planet or any other planet did Steven Avery, or anyone else for that matter, murder Theresa Halbach in the way the prosecution said it happen. However and whoever murdered this woman, did not murder her anywhere on Steven Avery's property, PERIOD. Didn't happen.
> I do not know if Avery killed this woman, but what I do know is that there were other suspects who had motive and access to Theresa...and they were all not even questioned. I do know that the evidence on the scene was almost beyond a doubt -  at the very least altered if not planted.
> Steven Avery and Dassey were convicted of the same crime, where the SAME PROSECUTOR PRESENTED TOTALLY DIFFERENT EVIDENCE AND TOTALLY DIFFERENT METHOD OF DEATH...how the f*ck is that possible??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could not see how Dassey could be convicted of worse crimes than Avery was charged with
> 
> They did not even bring up Dassey's wild, ever changing stories during Avery's trial
> 
> But what evidence was there to convict Avery?
> 
> Last known person to see her alive
> He specifically requested she come to take pictures (lured her to the property)
> Her car was found on his property
> No evidence of her ever being off the property. No witnesses, no phone calls after seeing Avery.
> Avery's blood and sweat were found in the car
> The keys to the car were in his room
> The charred remains were found 30 feet from his trailer
> 
> If I was on the jury, I would have convicted
Click to expand...


The keys were not found by the outside investigators after FOUR DAYS OF SEARCHING the trailer and garage.
But lo and behold, the very man that was being sued just happen to find it - right in plain site!! AMAZING!!!...
 The blood and sweat - again, not allowed in testimony for God only knows why - a vial of his blood was found in Police custody and had been tampered with. Getting Steven's sweat would have been easy.
 But no one drop, or even a forensic droplet of Theresa's blood found in the garage. You tell me how you can shoot someone in the head and hack their body into pieces and not get any blood anywhere??
Impossible. 
 The prosecution and judge in both cases did such an unbelievably unethical and to the point of bizarre activity in both cases that it boggles the mind how there was no re-trial.


----------



## rightwinger

iamwhatiseem said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those like rightwinger keep forgetting...jurors can only convict someone based exclusively and entirely *on only what the prosecution shows. *
> Jurors cannot base their decision on anything else but what the prosecution states, and how the defense answers those charges.
> In saying that, there is no way - no how - not on this planet or any other planet did Steven Avery, or anyone else for that matter, murder Theresa Halbach in the way the prosecution said it happen. However and whoever murdered this woman, did not murder her anywhere on Steven Avery's property, PERIOD. Didn't happen.
> I do not know if Avery killed this woman, but what I do know is that there were other suspects who had motive and access to Theresa...and they were all not even questioned. I do know that the evidence on the scene was almost beyond a doubt -  at the very least altered if not planted.
> Steven Avery and Dassey were convicted of the same crime, where the SAME PROSECUTOR PRESENTED TOTALLY DIFFERENT EVIDENCE AND TOTALLY DIFFERENT METHOD OF DEATH...how the f*ck is that possible??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could not see how Dassey could be convicted of worse crimes than Avery was charged with
> 
> They did not even bring up Dassey's wild, ever changing stories during Avery's trial
> 
> But what evidence was there to convict Avery?
> 
> Last known person to see her alive
> He specifically requested she come to take pictures (lured her to the property)
> Her car was found on his property
> No evidence of her ever being off the property. No witnesses, no phone calls after seeing Avery.
> Avery's blood and sweat were found in the car
> The keys to the car were in his room
> The charred remains were found 30 feet from his trailer
> 
> If I was on the jury, I would have convicted
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The keys were not found by the outside investigators after FOUR DAYS OF SEARCHING the trailer and garage.
> But lo and behold, the very man that was being sued just happen to find it - right in plain site!! AMAZING!!!...
> The blood and sweat - again, not allowed in testimony for God only knows why - a vial of his blood was found in Police custody and had been tampered with. Getting Steven's sweat would have been easy.
> But no one drop, or even a forensic droplet of Theresa's blood found in the garage. You tell me how you can shoot someone in the head and hack their body into pieces and not get any blood anywhere??
> Impossible.
> The prosecution and judge in both cases did such an unbelievably unethical and to the point of bizarre activity in both cases that it boggles the mind how there was no re-trial.
Click to expand...


Again you are trying to make a case for reasonable doubt. The defenses case is that every piece of evidence against Avery was planted....I just can't buy it

There can be a lot of what ifs and unknowns related to the case. The blood found in Halbachs car did not come from that vial. Police had no access to Avery's sweat that was found in the car, he had not been arrested yet

To believe Avery is innocent, you have to believe in some alternate reality. The alternate reality presented by the defense is just too extreme. Police could drop a key or spread some blood and expect to get away with it.
Transporting a car and charred bones from another location to Avery's property is just too big a reach. Too many things could go wrong to expose the police's actions. Plus they would have to be willing to  ignore the real murder scene and murderer



.


----------



## iamwhatiseem

rightwinger said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those like rightwinger keep forgetting...jurors can only convict someone based exclusively and entirely *on only what the prosecution shows. *
> Jurors cannot base their decision on anything else but what the prosecution states, and how the defense answers those charges.
> In saying that, there is no way - no how - not on this planet or any other planet did Steven Avery, or anyone else for that matter, murder Theresa Halbach in the way the prosecution said it happen. However and whoever murdered this woman, did not murder her anywhere on Steven Avery's property, PERIOD. Didn't happen.
> I do not know if Avery killed this woman, but what I do know is that there were other suspects who had motive and access to Theresa...and they were all not even questioned. I do know that the evidence on the scene was almost beyond a doubt -  at the very least altered if not planted.
> Steven Avery and Dassey were convicted of the same crime, where the SAME PROSECUTOR PRESENTED TOTALLY DIFFERENT EVIDENCE AND TOTALLY DIFFERENT METHOD OF DEATH...how the f*ck is that possible??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could not see how Dassey could be convicted of worse crimes than Avery was charged with
> 
> They did not even bring up Dassey's wild, ever changing stories during Avery's trial
> 
> But what evidence was there to convict Avery?
> 
> Last known person to see her alive
> He specifically requested she come to take pictures (lured her to the property)
> Her car was found on his property
> No evidence of her ever being off the property. No witnesses, no phone calls after seeing Avery.
> Avery's blood and sweat were found in the car
> The keys to the car were in his room
> The charred remains were found 30 feet from his trailer
> 
> If I was on the jury, I would have convicted
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The keys were not found by the outside investigators after FOUR DAYS OF SEARCHING the trailer and garage.
> But lo and behold, the very man that was being sued just happen to find it - right in plain site!! AMAZING!!!...
> The blood and sweat - again, not allowed in testimony for God only knows why - a vial of his blood was found in Police custody and had been tampered with. Getting Steven's sweat would have been easy.
> But no one drop, or even a forensic droplet of Theresa's blood found in the garage. You tell me how you can shoot someone in the head and hack their body into pieces and not get any blood anywhere??
> Impossible.
> The prosecution and judge in both cases did such an unbelievably unethical and to the point of bizarre activity in both cases that it boggles the mind how there was no re-trial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Again you are trying to make a case for reasonable doubt. The defenses case is that every piece of evidence against Avery was planted....I just can't buy it
> 
> There can be a lot of what ifs and unknowns related to the case. The blood found in Halbachs car did not come from that vial. Police had no access to Avery's sweat that was found in the car, he had not been arrested yet
> 
> To believe Avery is innocent, you have to believe in some alternate reality. The alternate reality presented by the defense is just too extreme. Police could drop a key or spread some blood and expect to get away with it.
> Transporting a car and charred bones from another location to Avery's property is just too big a reach. Too many things could go wrong to expose the police's actions. Plus they would have to be willing to  ignore the real murder scene and murderer
> 
> 
> 
> .
Click to expand...



Your leaving things out guy....or forgetting them.
Charred bones...did you forget there was a 2nd burn site? Also there were bone fragments in a barrel? Lot's of questions about that.
Blood in car...did you forget it was a couple drops in a strange spot? But none in all the places you would expect it?
The bones were transported, this is not arguable. There was a 2nd burn location, with bone fragments, and bone fragments in the barrel. She was not burned in one location. Again, highly questionable.
 Every single piece of evidence there are very reasonable suspicions and oddities...every one of them. And where is the murder site??? Avery was convicted of killing her in his garage, yet there was not even a forensic-trace amount of blood anywhere within...and no signs of clean up or traces of cleaning chemicals....so...how is that possible? He would have literally had to completely cover the floors/ceilings and walls with plastic. Obviously that is silly.


----------



## rightwinger

To believe Steve Avery, you have to believe in an alternate reality
Avery waved goodbye to Theresa Halbach that afternoon as she drove off the property....never to be seen alive again

The defense believes that someone else killed her shortly after and  drove her to some remote location where the car, with the keys in it, was abandoned. He then took her body and burned it beyond recognition

The local police, finding both the car and charred bones said....This is a good chance to pin it on Avery

So they got some of Avery's blood and sweat and planted it in the Rav4. Two of them then drove to the Avery property and hid the car without being seen. They then returned to the crime scene and dug up a barrel full of bones and then dumped them on Avery's property unseen

Perfect crime?

Hardly. Too many unknowns for police to risk not only their jobs but time in prison.
How did they know that Halbach had not phoned someone as soon as she left the Avery property and told someone where she was headed?
How did they know that nobody had seen or talked to Halbach after she left the property?
How did they know that the car was not full of someone elses DNA?
How did they know that the real killer would not show up somewhere else covered in blood?
How did they know that an Avery would not video this strange activity on their property?
How did they know that Avery would not have an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the killing?

Not a good option for the police


----------



## rightwinger

Want to know what really convinced me?

The Avery blood smear under the car ignition

My car has the same ignition as that Rav 4 with the ignition inside an indentation on the dashboard. When I turn the key, I hold the key between my thumb and forefinger and as I turn, my middle finger rubs against that indentation.

That spot on my middle finger is the exact spot Avery was found to have a one inch cut. The police hadn't arrested him, how would they know he was cut right there?


----------



## iamwhatiseem

rightwinger said:


> To believe Steve Avery, you have to believe in an alternate reality
> Avery waved goodbye to Theresa Halbach that afternoon as she drove off the property....never to be seen alive again
> 
> The defense believes that someone else killed her shortly after and  drove her to some remote location where the car, with the keys in it, was abandoned. He then took her body and burned it beyond recognition
> 
> The local police, finding both the car and charred bones said....This is a good chance to pin it on Avery
> 
> So they got some of Avery's blood and sweat and planted it in the Rav4. Two of them then drove to the Avery property and hid the car without being seen. They then returned to the crime scene and dug up a barrel full of bones and then dumped them on Avery's property unseen
> 
> Perfect crime?
> 
> Hardly. Too many unknowns for police to risk not only their jobs but time in prison.
> How did they know that Halbach had not phoned someone as soon as she left the Avery property and told someone where she was headed?
> How did they know that nobody had seen or talked to Halbach after she left the property?
> How did they know that the car was not full of someone elses DNA?
> How did they know that the real killer would not show up somewhere else covered in blood?
> How did they know that an Avery would not video this strange activity on their property?
> How did they know that Avery would not have an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the killing?
> 
> Not a good option for the police


That is hardly the only scenario.
Look, do I think Avery did it? I don't know...probably so. I would say a good 70% chance he did. But what about the X boyfriend? Why would he access Theresa's voice messages and delete multiple entries within days of her murder??? Do you not find that really strange? As a police detective would you not at least ask him about that?? 
This same man is the guy who talked to the women who found the car within 10 minutes after talking to him. Coincidence? I suppose you saw the aerial video of the property and just how massive it was and how many cars there were? - and the women just happen to find it 10 minutes after entering the property - which as the defense stated - is just about the time it would take to walk from the entrance directly to the car? Coincidence? 

 Like others - you gloss over the obvious, in fact you won't even address them.
The keys...the keys....DAMNING evidence. Yet the manner in which they were found were equally DAMNINGLY worrisome. In Four days, dozens of detectives...not one of them sees the keys right there in the open - in fact they have a photo showing that spot where they were found...and they are not there. And the shoes were moved also. How in the world could you not be suspect of that - especially after knowing the only two officers in the room were unlawfully there - and were deposed by Steven Avery. No one but a completel moron would not at the very least doubt that evidence.


----------



## rightwinger

iamwhatiseem said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> To believe Steve Avery, you have to believe in an alternate reality
> Avery waved goodbye to Theresa Halbach that afternoon as she drove off the property....never to be seen alive again
> 
> The defense believes that someone else killed her shortly after and  drove her to some remote location where the car, with the keys in it, was abandoned. He then took her body and burned it beyond recognition
> 
> The local police, finding both the car and charred bones said....This is a good chance to pin it on Avery
> 
> So they got some of Avery's blood and sweat and planted it in the Rav4. Two of them then drove to the Avery property and hid the car without being seen. They then returned to the crime scene and dug up a barrel full of bones and then dumped them on Avery's property unseen
> 
> Perfect crime?
> 
> Hardly. Too many unknowns for police to risk not only their jobs but time in prison.
> How did they know that Halbach had not phoned someone as soon as she left the Avery property and told someone where she was headed?
> How did they know that nobody had seen or talked to Halbach after she left the property?
> How did they know that the car was not full of someone elses DNA?
> How did they know that the real killer would not show up somewhere else covered in blood?
> How did they know that an Avery would not video this strange activity on their property?
> How did they know that Avery would not have an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the killing?
> 
> Not a good option for the police
> 
> 
> 
> That is hardly the only scenario.
> Look, do I think Avery did it? I don't know...probably so. I would say a good 70% chance he did. But what about the X boyfriend? Why would he access Theresa's voice messages and delete multiple entries within days of her murder??? Do you not find that really strange? As a police detective would you not at least ask him about that??
> This same man is the guy who talked to the women who found the car within 10 minutes after talking to him. Coincidence? I suppose you saw the aerial video of the property and just how massive it was and how many cars there were? - and the women just happen to find it 10 minutes after entering the property - which as the defense stated - is just about the time it would take to walk from the entrance directly to the car? Coincidence?
> 
> Like others - you gloss over the obvious, in fact you won't even address them.
> The keys...the keys....DAMNING evidence. Yet the manner in which they were found were equally DAMNINGLY worrisome. In Four days, dozens of detectives...not one of them sees the keys right there in the open - in fact they have a photo showing that spot where they were found...and they are not there. And the shoes were moved also. How in the world could you not be suspect of that - especially after knowing the only two officers in the room were unlawfully there - and were deposed by Steven Avery. No one but a completel moron would not at the very least doubt that evidence.
Click to expand...


I have no admiration of the police work ( they showed how inept they were in the previous case). They knew they were under scrutiny because of Avery and still they allowed themselves to be involved in the investigation.

In closing arguments, the defense talked about how the police might not plant evidence to make an innocent man appear guilty but they might do it to make a weak case appear stronger.

In that regard, I could see police subtly drop a key or smear blood when nobody is looking.

But to risk transporting a murder vehicle or a bunch of charred bones is just too far out there to be credible


----------



## iamwhatiseem

rightwinger said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> To believe Steve Avery, you have to believe in an alternate reality
> Avery waved goodbye to Theresa Halbach that afternoon as she drove off the property....never to be seen alive again
> 
> The defense believes that someone else killed her shortly after and  drove her to some remote location where the car, with the keys in it, was abandoned. He then took her body and burned it beyond recognition
> 
> The local police, finding both the car and charred bones said....This is a good chance to pin it on Avery
> 
> So they got some of Avery's blood and sweat and planted it in the Rav4. Two of them then drove to the Avery property and hid the car without being seen. They then returned to the crime scene and dug up a barrel full of bones and then dumped them on Avery's property unseen
> 
> Perfect crime?
> 
> Hardly. Too many unknowns for police to risk not only their jobs but time in prison.
> How did they know that Halbach had not phoned someone as soon as she left the Avery property and told someone where she was headed?
> How did they know that nobody had seen or talked to Halbach after she left the property?
> How did they know that the car was not full of someone elses DNA?
> How did they know that the real killer would not show up somewhere else covered in blood?
> How did they know that an Avery would not video this strange activity on their property?
> How did they know that Avery would not have an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the killing?
> 
> Not a good option for the police
> 
> 
> 
> That is hardly the only scenario.
> Look, do I think Avery did it? I don't know...probably so. I would say a good 70% chance he did. But what about the X boyfriend? Why would he access Theresa's voice messages and delete multiple entries within days of her murder??? Do you not find that really strange? As a police detective would you not at least ask him about that??
> This same man is the guy who talked to the women who found the car within 10 minutes after talking to him. Coincidence? I suppose you saw the aerial video of the property and just how massive it was and how many cars there were? - and the women just happen to find it 10 minutes after entering the property - which as the defense stated - is just about the time it would take to walk from the entrance directly to the car? Coincidence?
> 
> Like others - you gloss over the obvious, in fact you won't even address them.
> The keys...the keys....DAMNING evidence. Yet the manner in which they were found were equally DAMNINGLY worrisome. In Four days, dozens of detectives...not one of them sees the keys right there in the open - in fact they have a photo showing that spot where they were found...and they are not there. And the shoes were moved also. How in the world could you not be suspect of that - especially after knowing the only two officers in the room were unlawfully there - and were deposed by Steven Avery. No one but a completel moron would not at the very least doubt that evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have no admiration of the police work ( they showed how inept they were in the previous case). They knew they were under scrutiny because of Avery and still they allowed themselves to be involved in the investigation.
> 
> In closing arguments, the defense talked about how the police might not plant evidence to make an innocent man appear guilty but they might do it to make a weak case appear stronger.
> 
> In that regard, I could see police subtly drop a key or smear blood when nobody is looking.
> 
> But to risk transporting a murder vehicle or a bunch of charred bones is just too far out there to be credible
Click to expand...


I can agree with that.
But, it may not have been the police that transported the vehicle. Again, the X boyfriend...and the HUGE coincidence of finding that car so quickly...also remember that Avery had a car crusher on his property. In* less* time it took to drive the vehicle to it's location, carry branches, car parts etc. and poorly, almost comically inept attempt that it took to hide the vehicle - Steven could have forever destroyed any hope of finding the car by simply crushing it. Now why the hell would he put it within minutes of the entrance barely covered instead? Makes no sense.
The two burn sites and bones in the barrel are really odd...and again, again this contradicts the prosecution.

  Look, the most upsetting thing about this trial is not the guilt/innocence of Avery. Not even close. It is how he was convicted! From beginning to end. From every single officer involved to the judge himself! It is truly unbelievable that this took place.
And leaves anyone to wonder just how many times does this occur.


----------



## rightwinger

iamwhatiseem said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> To believe Steve Avery, you have to believe in an alternate reality
> Avery waved goodbye to Theresa Halbach that afternoon as she drove off the property....never to be seen alive again
> 
> The defense believes that someone else killed her shortly after and  drove her to some remote location where the car, with the keys in it, was abandoned. He then took her body and burned it beyond recognition
> 
> The local police, finding both the car and charred bones said....This is a good chance to pin it on Avery
> 
> So they got some of Avery's blood and sweat and planted it in the Rav4. Two of them then drove to the Avery property and hid the car without being seen. They then returned to the crime scene and dug up a barrel full of bones and then dumped them on Avery's property unseen
> 
> Perfect crime?
> 
> Hardly. Too many unknowns for police to risk not only their jobs but time in prison.
> How did they know that Halbach had not phoned someone as soon as she left the Avery property and told someone where she was headed?
> How did they know that nobody had seen or talked to Halbach after she left the property?
> How did they know that the car was not full of someone elses DNA?
> How did they know that the real killer would not show up somewhere else covered in blood?
> How did they know that an Avery would not video this strange activity on their property?
> How did they know that Avery would not have an alibi for his whereabouts at the time of the killing?
> 
> Not a good option for the police
> 
> 
> 
> That is hardly the only scenario.
> Look, do I think Avery did it? I don't know...probably so. I would say a good 70% chance he did. But what about the X boyfriend? Why would he access Theresa's voice messages and delete multiple entries within days of her murder??? Do you not find that really strange? As a police detective would you not at least ask him about that??
> This same man is the guy who talked to the women who found the car within 10 minutes after talking to him. Coincidence? I suppose you saw the aerial video of the property and just how massive it was and how many cars there were? - and the women just happen to find it 10 minutes after entering the property - which as the defense stated - is just about the time it would take to walk from the entrance directly to the car? Coincidence?
> 
> Like others - you gloss over the obvious, in fact you won't even address them.
> The keys...the keys....DAMNING evidence. Yet the manner in which they were found were equally DAMNINGLY worrisome. In Four days, dozens of detectives...not one of them sees the keys right there in the open - in fact they have a photo showing that spot where they were found...and they are not there. And the shoes were moved also. How in the world could you not be suspect of that - especially after knowing the only two officers in the room were unlawfully there - and were deposed by Steven Avery. No one but a completel moron would not at the very least doubt that evidence.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have no admiration of the police work ( they showed how inept they were in the previous case). They knew they were under scrutiny because of Avery and still they allowed themselves to be involved in the investigation.
> 
> In closing arguments, the defense talked about how the police might not plant evidence to make an innocent man appear guilty but they might do it to make a weak case appear stronger.
> 
> In that regard, I could see police subtly drop a key or smear blood when nobody is looking.
> 
> But to risk transporting a murder vehicle or a bunch of charred bones is just too far out there to be credible
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I can agree with that.
> But, it may not have been the police that transported the vehicle. Again, the X boyfriend...and the HUGE coincidence of finding that car so quickly...also remember that Avery had a car crusher on his property. In* less* time it took to drive the vehicle to it's location, carry branches, car parts etc. and poorly, almost comically inept attempt that it took to hide the vehicle - Steven could have forever destroyed any hope of finding the car by simply crushing it. Now why the hell would he put it within minutes of the entrance barely covered instead? Makes no sense.
> The two burn sites and bones in the barrel are really odd...and again, again this contradicts the prosecution.
> 
> Look, the most upsetting thing about this trial is not the guilt/innocence of Avery. Not even close. It is how he was convicted!!! From beginning to end. From every single officer involved to the judge himself! It is truly unbelievable that this took place.
> And leaves anyone to wonder just how many times does this occur.
Click to expand...


I think Avery was obsessed with Halbach, lured her to the compound, assaulted and killed her when she came to take pictures. I am not sure it happened in the garage. I don't think she was tied up in the bed.

After killing her, I think Avery put her body in the back of the Rav4, leaving both his and her bloodstains and parked it somewhere  until dark. He then drove the car back for his big bonfire and threw in the body

Because it was dark, he drove the Rav4 to an obscure part of the lot and covered it up planning to come back later and dispose of the car. That is why he would have kept the key in his bedroom. He thought he would have more time

The same with the barrel and the ashes. Instead of the police using the barrel, it could have been Avery using it to move the evidence. One thing not covered in the Netflix series was that they found her burnt phone and contents of her purse in the barrel.

I doubt if Dassey was involved in the murder, but may  have been involved in disposing the body.  I don't think you could sit next to a bonfire and not see and smell a body burning


----------



## iamwhatiseem

rightwinger said:


> I think Avery was obsessed with Halbach, lured her to the compound, assaulted and killed her when she came to take pictures. I am not sure it happened in the garage. I don't think she was tied up in the bed.



Answer: I think Avery was an obvious pervert for plenty of reasons outside of this case.
But what about what the School bus driver saw? Which contrasted the prosecutions timeline and what their witnesses said they saw, witnesses who hated Avery.



rightwinger said:


> After killing her, I think Avery put her body in the back of the Rav4, leaving both his and her bloodstains and parked it somewhere  until dark. He then drove the car back for his big bonfire and threw in the body


What about the 2nd burn site that had bone fragments, showing without question she was at the very least dismembered and burned way back on the property...but no...he for some reason put that fire out...pulled her burning parts out...and took then to his backyard and burned them??? Really?


rightwinger said:


> Because it was dark, he drove the Rav4 to an obscure part of the lot and covered it up planning to come back later and dispose of the car. That is why he would have kept the key in his bedroom. He thought he would have more time
> 
> The same with the barrel and the ashes. Instead of the police using the barrel, it could have been Avery using it to move the evidence. One thing not covered in the Netflix series was that they found her burnt phone and contents of her purse in the barrel.



Yes. And that supports the theory that the bones were planted and again points to the 2nd burn site that you won't talk about.


rightwinger said:


> I doubt if Dassey was involved in the murder, but may  have been involved in disposing the body.  I don't think you could sit next to a bonfire and not see and smell a body burning



Dassey was completely framed by the police and prosecution with help from the judge.
It is unconscionable that the judge did not declare a new trial when he learned that the defense lawyer directly and illegally aided the prosecution when they thought they were going to use Dassey in Avery's case. Again...you have to wonder how much of this kind of stuff happens everyday.


----------



## rightwinger

iamwhatiseem said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think Avery was obsessed with Halbach, lured her to the compound, assaulted and killed her when she came to take pictures. I am not sure it happened in the garage. I don't think she was tied up in the bed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Answer: I think Avery was an obvious pervert for plenty of reasons outside of this case.
> But what about what the School bus driver saw? Which contrasted the prosecutions timeline and what their witnesses said they saw, witnesses who hated Avery.
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> After killing her, I think Avery put her body in the back of the Rav4, leaving both his and her bloodstains and parked it somewhere  until dark. He then drove the car back for his big bonfire and threw in the body
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What about the 2nd burn site that had bone fragments, showing without question she was at the very least dismembered and burned way back on the property...but no...he for some reason put that fire out...pulled her burning parts out...and took then to his backyard and burned them??? Really?
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because it was dark, he drove the Rav4 to an obscure part of the lot and covered it up planning to come back later and dispose of the car. That is why he would have kept the key in his bedroom. He thought he would have more time
> 
> The same with the barrel and the ashes. Instead of the police using the barrel, it could have been Avery using it to move the evidence. One thing not covered in the Netflix series was that they found her burnt phone and contents of her purse in the barrel.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes. And that supports the theory that the bones were planted and again points to the 2nd burn site that you won't talk about.
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt if Dassey was involved in the murder, but may  have been involved in disposing the body.  I don't think you could sit next to a bonfire and not see and smell a body burning
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dassey was completely framed by the police and prosecution with help from the judge.
> It is unconscionable that the judge did not declare a new trial when he learned that the defense lawyer directly and illegally aided the prosecution when they thought they were going to use Dassey in Avery's case. Again...you have to wonder how much of this kind of stuff happens everyday.
Click to expand...

I am not obsessed with the second burn site. Avery could have been dissatisfied with his first attempt to destroy the body and moved to a second site to do a better job

Another thing not covered in the Netflix documentary was that bone fragments were encased in steel belts and rubber from burning rubber. Just like the tires in Averys bonfire


----------



## Carla_Danger

Gracie said:


> Fry his sorry cat burning ass.





I'm only on episode one, and already I'm not feeling any sympathy for this man, just knowing about him burning that cat alive.


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> Want to know what really convinced me?
> 
> The Avery blood smear under the car ignition
> 
> My car has the same ignition as that Rav 4 with the ignition inside an indentation on the dashboard. When I turn the key, I hold the key between my thumb and forefinger and as I turn, my middle finger rubs against that indentation.
> 
> That spot on my middle finger is the exact spot Avery was found to have a one inch cut. The police hadn't arrested him, how would they know he was cut right there?




The pin hole in Avery evidence blood capsule doesnt sway you?

I mean, he gets rid of cars for a living....but not this one.  He decides what, to put the dead girl in the back for fun...just to take her right back out to be burned and instead of crushing the car he has the brilliant idea to park it on his land and cover it with sticks?


----------



## rightwinger

ClosedCaption said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Want to know what really convinced me?
> 
> The Avery blood smear under the car ignition
> 
> My car has the same ignition as that Rav 4 with the ignition inside an indentation on the dashboard. When I turn the key, I hold the key between my thumb and forefinger and as I turn, my middle finger rubs against that indentation.
> 
> That spot on my middle finger is the exact spot Avery was found to have a one inch cut. The police hadn't arrested him, how would they know he was cut right there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The pin hole in Avery evidence blood capsule doesnt sway you?
> 
> I mean, he gets rid of cars for a living....but not this one.  He decides what, to put the dead girl in the back for fun...just to take her right back out to be burned and instead of crushing the car he has the brilliant idea to park it on his land and cover it with sticks?
Click to expand...


It would have if testing had shown the blood in the car had the same preservative as that blood sample. Avery also had a one inch fresh cut on his middle finger. It would have been better for the defense if he didn't have a scratch on his body

I think he killed the girl while it was still light out. Put her in the back of the Rav4, drove it to a remote spot and then came back with the car after it was dark for the burning.
He covered it with sticks because he hadn't had the opportunity to crush it yet. Probably waiting till there were no other family members on the lot


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Want to know what really convinced me?
> 
> The Avery blood smear under the car ignition
> 
> My car has the same ignition as that Rav 4 with the ignition inside an indentation on the dashboard. When I turn the key, I hold the key between my thumb and forefinger and as I turn, my middle finger rubs against that indentation.
> 
> That spot on my middle finger is the exact spot Avery was found to have a one inch cut. The police hadn't arrested him, how would they know he was cut right there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The pin hole in Avery evidence blood capsule doesnt sway you?
> 
> I mean, he gets rid of cars for a living....but not this one.  He decides what, to put the dead girl in the back for fun...just to take her right back out to be burned and instead of crushing the car he has the brilliant idea to park it on his land and cover it with sticks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It would have if testing had shown the blood in the car had the same preservative as that blood sample. Avery also had a one inch fresh cut on his middle finger. It would have been better for the defense if he didn't have a scratch on his body
Click to expand...


True except remember that the FBI didnt have any such test until the police were accused of a set up.  Then magically they not only have the test but the results as well using a secret formula another forensic specialist couldnt decipher.  




> I think he killed the girl while it was still light out. Put her in the back of the Rav4, drove it to a remote spot and then came back with the car after it was dark for the burning.
> He covered it with sticks because he hadn't had the opportunity to crush it yet. Probably waiting till there were no other family members on the lot



Probably a lot of stuff.  But he didnt use the car crusher or the incinerator and instead choose to build a big ass fire to avoid being noticed?


----------



## ClosedCaption

And still, why was there a pin hole in the evidence blood tube?


----------



## rightwinger

ClosedCaption said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> Want to know what really convinced me?
> 
> The Avery blood smear under the car ignition
> 
> My car has the same ignition as that Rav 4 with the ignition inside an indentation on the dashboard. When I turn the key, I hold the key between my thumb and forefinger and as I turn, my middle finger rubs against that indentation.
> 
> That spot on my middle finger is the exact spot Avery was found to have a one inch cut. The police hadn't arrested him, how would they know he was cut right there?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The pin hole in Avery evidence blood capsule doesnt sway you?
> 
> I mean, he gets rid of cars for a living....but not this one.  He decides what, to put the dead girl in the back for fun...just to take her right back out to be burned and instead of crushing the car he has the brilliant idea to park it on his land and cover it with sticks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It would have if testing had shown the blood in the car had the same preservative as that blood sample. Avery also had a one inch fresh cut on his middle finger. It would have been better for the defense if he didn't have a scratch on his body
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> True except remember that the FBI didnt have any such test until the police were accused of a set up.  Then magically they not only have the test but the results as well using a secret formula another forensic specialist couldnt decipher.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think he killed the girl while it was still light out. Put her in the back of the Rav4, drove it to a remote spot and then came back with the car after it was dark for the burning.
> He covered it with sticks because he hadn't had the opportunity to crush it yet. Probably waiting till there were no other family members on the lot
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Probably a lot of stuff.  But he didnt use the car crusher or the incinerator and instead choose to build a big ass fire to avoid being noticed?
Click to expand...

The FBI test would show if it was pure blood or blood with "stuff" in it. While the exact formula of the preservative could have been challenged by the defense, there was no additional "stuff" in the sample
It was just blood.....Averys blood


----------



## Sarah G

Is he getting a new trial?  That man is so not guilty, the kid isn't either.


----------



## Sarah G

ClosedCaption said:


> And still, why was there a pin hole in the evidence blood tube?


And there was just a little bit of that blood in the car, where you put the keys in.  There is no way they shot her in that messy garage.  No blood!  Not even a drop hidden in that mess.


----------



## james bond

DanK said:


> I just finished this show over the weekend.  Here's an interesting theory.
> 
> This Is The Most Credible 'Making A Murderer' Theory I've Seen So Far



Wait.  There's more than Bobby Dassay and Scott Tadych.

'Making A Murderer': 5 fascinating theories about what REALLY happened

And this one wraps up "the biggest unsolved murder cases in American history, including the Zodiac killings, the West Memphis Three, Chandra Levy, and Jon Benet Ramsey."

C'mon, was this guy REALLY in the Netflix documentary ?

This Former Cop Claims To Know Who Really Killed Teresa Halbach


----------



## rightwinger

Sarah G said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> And still, why was there a pin hole in the evidence blood tube?
> 
> 
> 
> And there was just a little bit of that blood in the car, where you put the keys in.  There is no way they shot her in that messy garage.  No blood!  Not even a drop hidden in that mess.
Click to expand...


A bullet fired from Averys gun with Halbachs blood DNA was found in the garage. How were police supposed to get a sample of Halbachs blood after she had been cremated?

Brendan Dassey said he helped clean up blood in the garage. His jeans were found with bleach on them


----------



## rightwinger

Sarah G said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> And still, why was there a pin hole in the evidence blood tube?
> 
> 
> 
> And there was just a little bit of that blood in the car, where you put the keys in.  There is no way they shot her in that messy garage.  No blood!  Not even a drop hidden in that mess.
Click to expand...


Want to know what really convinced me?

The Avery blood smear under the car ignition

My car has the same ignition as that Rav 4 with the ignition inside an indentation on the dashboard. When I turn the key, I hold the key between my thumb and forefinger and as I turn, my middle finger rubs against that indentation.

That spot on my middle finger is the exact spot Avery was found to have a one inch cut. The police hadn't arrested him, how would they know he was cut right there?


----------



## Sarah G

rightwinger said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> And still, why was there a pin hole in the evidence blood tube?
> 
> 
> 
> And there was just a little bit of that blood in the car, where you put the keys in.  There is no way they shot her in that messy garage.  No blood!  Not even a drop hidden in that mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A bullet fired from Averys gun with Halbachs blood DNA was found in the garage. How were police supposed to get a sample of Halbachs blood after she had been cremated?
> 
> Brendan Dassey said he helped clean up blood in the garage. His jeans were found with bleach on them
Click to expand...

I'm talking about how blood splatters, especially a head wound would have been all over everything and that place was chock full of little items on the workbenches, floor, all up the walls, they would not have been able to address all of the blood.  I think she was killed somewhere else, her ashes spread on the fire pit, that blood in the car, the bullet, the key on the floor found later all placed there by police.


----------



## Sarah G

The kid didn't have anything to do with it.  They coerced him into telling the story he told.


----------



## rightwinger

Sarah G said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> And still, why was there a pin hole in the evidence blood tube?
> 
> 
> 
> And there was just a little bit of that blood in the car, where you put the keys in.  There is no way they shot her in that messy garage.  No blood!  Not even a drop hidden in that mess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A bullet fired from Averys gun with Halbachs blood DNA was found in the garage. How were police supposed to get a sample of Halbachs blood after she had been cremated?
> 
> Brendan Dassey said he helped clean up blood in the garage. His jeans were found with bleach on them
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm talking about how blood splatters, especially a head wound would have been all over everything and that place was chock full of little items on the workbenches, floor, all up the walls, they would not have been able to address all of the blood.  I think she was killed somewhere else, her ashes spread on the fire pit, that blood in the car, the bullet, the key on the floor found later all placed there by police.
Click to expand...


She could have been shot in the garage and fallen to the floor. A headshot while she was lying on the floor would have spattered in an area right around her head. Dassey said he helped clean up in the garage and was found with bleach on his pants

How could police have planted a bullet with Halbachs blood on it?  Where were they supposed to get a sample of her blood?


----------



## rightwinger

Sarah G said:


> The kid didn't have anything to do with it.  They coerced him into telling the story he told.



I would not have convicted him of murder. I thought the story he told about  raping her and murdering her was silly and there was no evidence to back up his story


----------



## Sarah G

rightwinger said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> The kid didn't have anything to do with it.  They coerced him into telling the story he told.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would not have convicted him of murder. I thought the story he told about  raping her and murdering her was silly and there was no evidence to back up his story
Click to expand...

I'm watching Dateline and refreshing my memory of what happened.  The cut on his finger is curious but there are other things that create big ???.


----------



## ClosedCaption

There is no way to clean blood spatter in a messy garage thoroughly enough that forensics can't find any splatter anywhere after umpteen searches.

Remember, if if they were able to clean it so throughly as to fool forensics, there was no blood in the cracks either...the police dug up the ground and found nothing.

Pin hole in the blood evidence, a false confession, no blood, no DNA on the ladies key chain as if it wasn't hers....too much shady stuff going on


----------



## strollingbones

new defense ....edwards a serial killer who always killed on halloween ...has avery taken a simple lie detector test?  not admissible but would go a long way to clearing his name...or shutting his coffin..


----------



## strollingbones

Did An Infamous Serial Killer Murder Teresa Halbach And Frame Steven Avery? - CrimeFeed

i think this has been mentioned....i see it as a total reach


----------



## Sarah G

ClosedCaption said:


> There is no way to clean blood spatter in a messy garage thoroughly enough that forensics can't find any splatter anywhere after umpteen searches.
> 
> Remember, if if they were able to clean it so throughly as to fool forensics, there was no blood in the cracks either...the police dug up the ground and found nothing.
> 
> Pin hole in the blood evidence, a false confession, no blood, no DNA on the ladies key chain as if it wasn't hers....too much shady stuff going on


Plus the tape seal was broken on that box that the blood sample was in.  I'm going to watch it again when I get some time this week.  I was completely convinced he is innocent after watching it the first time.


----------



## rightwinger

Sarah G said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way to clean blood spatter in a messy garage thoroughly enough that forensics can't find any splatter anywhere after umpteen searches.
> 
> Remember, if if they were able to clean it so throughly as to fool forensics, there was no blood in the cracks either...the police dug up the ground and found nothing.
> 
> Pin hole in the blood evidence, a false confession, no blood, no DNA on the ladies key chain as if it wasn't hers....too much shady stuff going on
> 
> 
> 
> Plus the tape seal was broken on that box that the blood sample was in.  I'm going to watch it again when I get some time this week.  I was completely convinced he is innocent after watching it the first time.
Click to expand...


Which has what to do with Avery?

The blood in the vial was treated with a preservative. The blood in the car had no preservative in it.....just 100% Avery


----------



## Bonzi

I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...


----------



## rightwinger

Bonzi said:


> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...



The Netflix series was biased in favor of the position that Avery was railroaded. They tended to gloss over any evidence to the contrary


----------



## james bond

rightwinger said:


> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way to clean blood spatter in a messy garage thoroughly enough that forensics can't find any splatter anywhere after umpteen searches.
> 
> Remember, if if they were able to clean it so throughly as to fool forensics, there was no blood in the cracks either...the police dug up the ground and found nothing.
> 
> Pin hole in the blood evidence, a false confession, no blood, no DNA on the ladies key chain as if it wasn't hers....too much shady stuff going on
> 
> 
> 
> Plus the tape seal was broken on that box that the blood sample was in.  I'm going to watch it again when I get some time this week.  I was completely convinced he is innocent after watching it the first time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which has what to do with Avery?
> 
> The blood in the vial was treated with a preservative. The blood in the car had no preservative in it.....just 100% Avery
Click to expand...


I think the preservative goes away after 35 days.  Also, Avery said he was never in the car.


----------



## rightwinger

james bond said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way to clean blood spatter in a messy garage thoroughly enough that forensics can't find any splatter anywhere after umpteen searches.
> 
> Remember, if if they were able to clean it so throughly as to fool forensics, there was no blood in the cracks either...the police dug up the ground and found nothing.
> 
> Pin hole in the blood evidence, a false confession, no blood, no DNA on the ladies key chain as if it wasn't hers....too much shady stuff going on
> 
> 
> 
> Plus the tape seal was broken on that box that the blood sample was in.  I'm going to watch it again when I get some time this week.  I was completely convinced he is innocent after watching it the first time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which has what to do with Avery?
> 
> The blood in the vial was treated with a preservative. The blood in the car had no preservative in it.....just 100% Avery
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the preservative goes away after 35 days.  Also, Avery said he was never in the car.
Click to expand...


If it only lasts 35 days, it is not a preservative

Averys blood and sweat DNA say otherwise


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sarah G said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no way to clean blood spatter in a messy garage thoroughly enough that forensics can't find any splatter anywhere after umpteen searches.
> 
> Remember, if if they were able to clean it so throughly as to fool forensics, there was no blood in the cracks either...the police dug up the ground and found nothing.
> 
> Pin hole in the blood evidence, a false confession, no blood, no DNA on the ladies key chain as if it wasn't hers....too much shady stuff going on
> 
> 
> 
> Plus the tape seal was broken on that box that the blood sample was in.  I'm going to watch it again when I get some time this week.  I was completely convinced he is innocent after watching it the first time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Which has what to do with Avery?
> 
> The blood in the vial was treated with a preservative. The blood in the car had no preservative in it.....just 100% Avery
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I think the preservative goes away after 35 days.  Also, Avery said he was never in the car.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If it only lasts 35 days, it is not a preservative
> 
> Averys blood and sweat DNA say otherwise
Click to expand...


There isn't any sweat DNA. That entire narrative is being put forth by Ken Katz and not one other soul. But just like Katz did in the documentary he simply says things are the truth and expects everyone to go with it.


----------



## ClosedCaption

Bonzi said:


> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...



He MAY be guilty but they botched the case so bad that it's no way to know for sure.

Remember that every piece of evidence that was found that helped the case along was found by Manitowoc, who had an obvious conflict of interest being there and expressly was not supposed to be there in the first place.


----------



## rightwinger

ClosedCaption said:


> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He MAY be guilty but they botched the case so bad that it's no way to know for sure.
> 
> Remember that every piece of evidence that was found that helped the case along was found by Manitowoc, who had an obvious conflict of interest being there and expressly was not supposed to be there in the first place.
Click to expand...

The car was not found by Manitowoc
The blood evidence in the car was not
The bones in the burn pit were not


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He MAY be guilty but they botched the case so bad that it's no way to know for sure.
> 
> Remember that every piece of evidence that was found that helped the case along was found by Manitowoc, who had an obvious conflict of interest being there and expressly was not supposed to be there in the first place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The car was not found by Manitowoc
> The blood evidence in the car was not
> The bones in the burn pit were not
Click to expand...


The car wasn't secure.  Remember the same Manitowoc officer who never signed into the crime scene was the same person who had access to the blood which had a pin hole in it and had been opened too.


----------



## Sarah G

ClosedCaption said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He MAY be guilty but they botched the case so bad that it's no way to know for sure.
> 
> Remember that every piece of evidence that was found that helped the case along was found by Manitowoc, who had an obvious conflict of interest being there and expressly was not supposed to be there in the first place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The car was not found by Manitowoc
> The blood evidence in the car was not
> The bones in the burn pit were not
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The car wasn't secure.  Remember the same Manitowoc officer who never signed into the crime scene was the same person who had access to the blood which had a pin hole in it and had been opened too.
Click to expand...

That's why I want to get back to the documentary, you just reminded me of the officer who didn't sign in.  Also, evidence wasn't found the first two or three times they went over there but mysteriously shows up after they looked again and again.

You don't continue to go back to collect evidence because the crime scene gets more sullied everytime you touch things.


----------



## rightwinger

ClosedCaption said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He MAY be guilty but they botched the case so bad that it's no way to know for sure.
> 
> Remember that every piece of evidence that was found that helped the case along was found by Manitowoc, who had an obvious conflict of interest being there and expressly was not supposed to be there in the first place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The car was not found by Manitowoc
> The blood evidence in the car was not
> The bones in the burn pit were not
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The car wasn't secure.  Remember the same Manitowoc officer who never signed into the crime scene was the same person who had access to the blood which had a pin hole in it and had been opened too.
Click to expand...


The blood in the car did not come from that vial....blew up in the defenses face


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He MAY be guilty but they botched the case so bad that it's no way to know for sure.
> 
> Remember that every piece of evidence that was found that helped the case along was found by Manitowoc, who had an obvious conflict of interest being there and expressly was not supposed to be there in the first place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The car was not found by Manitowoc
> The blood evidence in the car was not
> The bones in the burn pit were not
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The car wasn't secure.  Remember the same Manitowoc officer who never signed into the crime scene was the same person who had access to the blood which had a pin hole in it and had been opened too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The blood in the car did not come from that vial....blew up in the defenses face
Click to expand...


Assertions are not proof tho.  It could've since the vial had been tampered with without explanation.  You can't just SAY sweat DNA without proof. You can't just SAY it didn't come from the vial without proof and yiu can't ignore the vial was opened for what?  No reason?


----------



## Muhammed

Bonzi said:


> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...


If I was on the jury I'd say guilty.


----------



## rightwinger

ClosedCaption said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bonzi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never saw, but saw a special on it on ID - interesting.  I don't see how he's not guilty...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He MAY be guilty but they botched the case so bad that it's no way to know for sure.
> 
> Remember that every piece of evidence that was found that helped the case along was found by Manitowoc, who had an obvious conflict of interest being there and expressly was not supposed to be there in the first place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The car was not found by Manitowoc
> The blood evidence in the car was not
> The bones in the burn pit were not
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The car wasn't secure.  Remember the same Manitowoc officer who never signed into the crime scene was the same person who had access to the blood which had a pin hole in it and had been opened too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The blood in the car did not come from that vial....blew up in the defenses face
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Assertions are not proof tho.  It could've since the vial had been tampered with without explanation.  You can't just SAY sweat DNA without proof. You can't just SAY it didn't come from the vial without proof and yiu can't ignore the vial was opened for what?  No reason?
Click to expand...

The blood sample did not have EDTA, it did not have any type of preservative or alteration......it was just blood

The sheriff had no access to Averys clean blood

Avery did have a major cut on his middle finger which would have spread blood in the car. Now if the defense had shown that Avery did not have a scratch on him that would have left blood.....then they would have a case


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> The blood sample did not have EDTA, it did not have any type of preservative or alteration......it was just blood
> 
> The sheriff had no access to Averys clean blood



But remember the test wasn't if it EVER had EDTA. It showed that it didn't have EDTA at the time of testing and the FBI was unable to show anyone their method for their testing.  Even other forensic specialists couldn't make heads or tails of their testing methods.

Secret methods that can't be duplicated isn't something that should be admissible at all.  The sheriff had access to Averys blood.  What you're doing is going along with the story the police are providing as fact.  When none of it can be double checked by anyone.

It's like me saying something is a mermaid and then pointing to my own findings as proof it is. There hasn't been any independent duplication of any of their methods. Wink wink...how could that be?


----------



## strollingbones

i think avery is guilty and the series was rather one sided....but i do not see how you could not have had 'reasonable doubt'


----------



## ClosedCaption

The police have no answers for the following:

Why was Averys blood vial tampered with?

Why did the police who were at the scene never sign in? And why did he give 2 different times of arrival under oath that contridict each other?

Why can't anyone else duplicate the method for EDTA testing?


----------



## AquaAthena

iamwhatiseem said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those like rightwinger keep forgetting...jurors can only convict someone based exclusively and entirely *on only what the prosecution shows. *
> Jurors cannot base their decision on anything else but what the prosecution states, and how the defense answers those charges.
> In saying that, there is no way - no how - not on this planet or any other planet did Steven Avery, or anyone else for that matter, murder Theresa Halbach in the way the prosecution said it happen. However and whoever murdered this woman, did not murder her anywhere on Steven Avery's property, PERIOD. Didn't happen.
> I do not know if Avery killed this woman, but what I do know is that there were other suspects who had motive and access to Theresa...and they were all not even questioned. I do know that the evidence on the scene was almost beyond a doubt -  at the very least altered if not planted.
> Steven Avery and Dassey were convicted of the same crime, where the SAME PROSECUTOR PRESENTED TOTALLY DIFFERENT EVIDENCE AND TOTALLY DIFFERENT METHOD OF DEATH...how the f*ck is that possible??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could not see how Dassey could be convicted of worse crimes than Avery was charged with
> 
> They did not even bring up Dassey's wild, ever changing stories during Avery's trial
> 
> But what evidence was there to convict Avery?
> 
> Last known person to see her alive
> He specifically requested she come to take pictures (lured her to the property)
> Her car was found on his property
> No evidence of her ever being off the property. No witnesses, no phone calls after seeing Avery.
> Avery's blood and sweat were found in the car
> The keys to the car were in his room
> The charred remains were found 30 feet from his trailer
> 
> If I was on the jury, I would have convicted
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The keys were not found by the outside investigators after FOUR DAYS OF SEARCHING the trailer and garage.
> But lo and behold, the very man that was being sued just happen to find it - right in plain site!! AMAZING!!!...
> The blood and sweat - again, not allowed in testimony for God only knows why - a vial of his blood was found in Police custody and had been tampered with. Getting Steven's sweat would have been easy.
> But no one drop, or even a forensic droplet of Theresa's blood found in the garage. You tell me how you can shoot someone in the head and hack their body into pieces and not get any blood anywhere??
> Impossible.
> The prosecution and judge in both cases did such an unbelievably unethical and to the point of bizarre activity in both cases that it boggles the mind how there was no re-trial.
Click to expand...


I gave it 5 stars.


----------



## rightwinger

ClosedCaption said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> The blood sample did not have EDTA, it did not have any type of preservative or alteration......it was just blood
> 
> The sheriff had no access to Averys clean blood
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But remember the test wasn't if it EVER had EDTA. It showed that it didn't have EDTA at the time of testing and the FBI was unable to show anyone their method for their testing.  Even other forensic specialists couldn't make heads or tails of their testing methods.
> 
> Secret methods that can't be duplicated isn't something that should be admissible at all.  The sheriff had access to Averys blood.  What you're doing is going along with the story the police are providing as fact.  When none of it can be double checked by anyone.
> 
> It's like me saying something is a mermaid and then pointing to my own findings as proof it is. There hasn't been any independent duplication of any of their methods. Wink wink...how could that be?
Click to expand...



All the defense had to do is test the blood in the vial and show that it no longer had EDTA.  They couldn't
The Sheriff had no access to clean Avery blood until after he was arrested a week after the murder. Still hard to do without Avery knowing


----------



## rightwinger

ClosedCaption said:


> The police have no answers for the following:
> 
> Why was Averys blood vial tampered with?
> 
> Why did the police who were at the scene never sign in? And why did he give 2 different times of arrival under oath that contridict each other?
> 
> Why can't anyone else duplicate the method for EDTA testing?



There's one big problem with this crucial piece of evidence in favor of Steven Avery on 'Making a Murderer'

that court papers from Avery's appeal show prison nurse Marlene Kraintz was set to testify in Avery's trial for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach that she punctured a hole in the test tube of Avery's blood, and in fact such holes are commonplace, because that's often how the blood gets put in the tube in the first place.


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> All the defense had to do is test the blood in the vial and show that it no longer had EDTA. They couldn't



Of course they couldnt because as mentioned before their testing methods were secret and could not be duplicated by any other forensic specialist.

I mean it's easy to say no one could do what the FBI did when the FBI couldn't tell anyone how they did it so that it could be tested independently. I can't do a trick by Penn and Teller until they tell me how. This is how the FBI is operating in the name of Justice. "It's a secret"


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> The police have no answers for the following:
> 
> Why was Averys blood vial tampered with?
> 
> Why did the police who were at the scene never sign in? And why did he give 2 different times of arrival under oath that contridict each other?
> 
> Why can't anyone else duplicate the method for EDTA testing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's one big problem with this crucial piece of evidence in favor of Steven Avery on 'Making a Murderer'
> 
> that court papers from Avery's appeal show prison nurse Marlene Kraintz was set to testify in Avery's trial for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach that she punctured a hole in the test tube of Avery's blood, and in fact such holes are commonplace, because that's often how the blood gets put in the tube in the first place.
Click to expand...








Ok, so look at the tube.  Why is there dried blood between the cap and glass if someone only used a syringe?  It would've had to be opened for that to happen.  The nurse did that too?


----------



## james bond

Your second pic doesn't show up for me, but I have a question.  Wasn't the vial in a plastic bag?  What happened to the plastic bag?


----------



## ClosedCaption

james bond said:


> Your second pic doesn't show up for me, but I have a question.  Wasn't the vial in a plastic bag?  What happened to the plastic bag?



The second pic was the same pic but it didn't work for some reason.  No, the vial was in an evidence box that had also been opened and only found out AFTER the police claimed they didn't have access to it. The defense showed them a pic of Avery's evidence box in the office and then they came up with the excuse of basic "Yeah, but...So?"

They basically have treated every contridict in statement they've ever put out with the response "Ok, my bad...but he's guilty" and since they are the law no one but the defense has ever questioned it. Not the Judges, the appeals....none of them.


----------



## rightwinger

ClosedCaption said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> The police have no answers for the following:
> 
> Why was Averys blood vial tampered with?
> 
> Why did the police who were at the scene never sign in? And why did he give 2 different times of arrival under oath that contridict each other?
> 
> Why can't anyone else duplicate the method for EDTA testing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's one big problem with this crucial piece of evidence in favor of Steven Avery on 'Making a Murderer'
> 
> that court papers from Avery's appeal show prison nurse Marlene Kraintz was set to testify in Avery's trial for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach that she punctured a hole in the test tube of Avery's blood, and in fact such holes are commonplace, because that's often how the blood gets put in the tube in the first place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, so look at the tube.  Why is there dried blood between the cap and glass if someone only used a syringe?  It would've had to be opened for that to happen.  The nurse did that too?
Click to expand...

Moot

Because none of THAT blood was found in the car


----------



## strollingbones

okay i dont think the blood was tampered with....and why was the seal on the evidence box broken..those types of errors lead to reasonable doubt....now remember the jurors heard all of the evidence ..that is what we have not done...heard all the evidence


----------



## ClosedCaption

rightwinger said:


> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ClosedCaption said:
> 
> 
> 
> The police have no answers for the following:
> 
> Why was Averys blood vial tampered with?
> 
> Why did the police who were at the scene never sign in? And why did he give 2 different times of arrival under oath that contridict each other?
> 
> Why can't anyone else duplicate the method for EDTA testing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's one big problem with this crucial piece of evidence in favor of Steven Avery on 'Making a Murderer'
> 
> that court papers from Avery's appeal show prison nurse Marlene Kraintz was set to testify in Avery's trial for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach that she punctured a hole in the test tube of Avery's blood, and in fact such holes are commonplace, because that's often how the blood gets put in the tube in the first place.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, so look at the tube.  Why is there dried blood between the cap and glass if someone only used a syringe?  It would've had to be opened for that to happen.  The nurse did that too?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Moot
> 
> Because none of THAT blood was found in the car
Click to expand...


There was no independent testing.


----------



## ClosedCaption

strollingbones said:


> okay i dont think the blood was tampered with....and why was the seal on the evidence box broken..those types of errors lead to reasonable doubt....now remember the jurors heard all of the evidence ..that is what we have not done...heard all the evidence



The evidence box was opened and retaped. If someone pin pricked it...ok, but how does blood get dried up on the outside?

But like all the other questionable things that went on the Prosecution just did what rightwinger is doing.  Just say it's a moot point and assert there's no reasonable doubt because they say so


----------



## james bond

Here's one scientist's opinion of the EDTA test done by the FBI.

"The testing that would have been required to scientifically validate this test would have required some time. After following standard validation procedures, I would have taken blood from an EDTA vial (any blood) and put it onto a vehicle surface. After the blood was completely dry, I would have used the same blood swabbing and collection procedure used during the investigation, and then tested that sample. This would be a positive control, since the technician would know that there was EDTA in that sample. Does the newly-developed test detect the EDTA? If so, repeat it at least 10 times, and you have a strong scientific ground to make the statement that there was no EDTA present in the blood from the vehicle. If the test does not detect EDTA from the experiment above, one cannot make any mention about the presence or absence of EDTA in the blood swabs from the vehicle because the test could not detect EDTA amounts that small."

Full article here
A Scientist Explained Why The Blood Evidence Used In ‘Making A Murderer’ Is Complete And Utter Garbage

This vial of blood is the most controversial piece of evidence in the 'Making a Murderer' mystery -- here's how the test that was run on it works
This vial of blood is the most controversial piece of evidence in the 'Making a Murderer' mystery — here’s how the test that was run on it works


----------



## james bond

New evidence.

'Making a Murderer' fans say this death certificate supports the theory that police framed Steven Avery

"Newly surfaced evidence is being seen as more proof of a potential police conspiracy to frame "Making a Murderer" subject Steven Avery.

A death certificate for Teresa Halbach, which Business Insider confirmed is authentic with the Manitowoc County Register of Deeds, has been released to media as a result of the Freedom of Information Act.

Some news outlets and blogs are using it to support the theory of a police conspiracy to frame Avery, who was convicted for the murder of Halbach.

The theorists point to botched and incorrectly filled-out areas of the certificate as signs that the Manitowoc police department rushed the certificate in order to file murder charges against Avery. At the very least, it serves as an example of the messy investigation surrounding the Halbach murder case.

*Here's what the bloggers are pointing out:*

*1.* There's a "no" in response to "Body Found" (Box 5), yet there's a "yes" under "Autopsy Performed" (Box 39).

*2.* For the immediate cause of death (Box 38a), "undetermined" is written in, and then crossed out.

*3.* Yet without Halbach's remains and an undertimined cause of death, under manner of death (Box 22), "homicide" is written.

*4.* The certificate was issued on November 10. The bone fragments only arrived at the Calumet County Coroner on November 9. The remains weren't officially confirmed until January 19."

'Making a Murderer' fans say this death certificate supports the theory that police framed Steven Avery


----------



## rightwinger

rightwinger said:


> iamwhatiseem said:
> 
> 
> 
> What those like rightwinger keep forgetting...jurors can only convict someone based exclusively and entirely *on only what the prosecution shows. *
> Jurors cannot base their decision on anything else but what the prosecution states, and how the defense answers those charges.
> In saying that, there is no way - no how - not on this planet or any other planet did Steven Avery, or anyone else for that matter, murder Theresa Halbach in the way the prosecution said it happen. However and whoever murdered this woman, did not murder her anywhere on Steven Avery's property, PERIOD. Didn't happen.
> I do not know if Avery killed this woman, but what I do know is that there were other suspects who had motive and access to Theresa...and they were all not even questioned. I do know that the evidence on the scene was almost beyond a doubt -  at the very least altered if not planted.
> Steven Avery and Dassey were convicted of the same crime, where the SAME PROSECUTOR PRESENTED TOTALLY DIFFERENT EVIDENCE AND TOTALLY DIFFERENT METHOD OF DEATH...how the f*ck is that possible??
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I could not see how Dassey could be convicted of worse crimes than Avery was charged with
> 
> They did not even bring up Dassey's wild, ever changing stories during Avery's trial
> 
> But what evidence was there to convict Avery?
> 
> Last known person to see her alive
> He specifically requested she come to take pictures (lured her to the property)
> Her car was found on his property
> No evidence of her ever being off the property. No witnesses, no phone calls after seeing Avery.
> Avery's blood and sweat were found in the car
> The keys to the car were in his room
> The charred remains were found 30 feet from his trailer
> 
> If I was on the jury, I would have convicted
Click to expand...

The conviction of Dassey has been thrown out

"Making a Murderer:" Brendan Dassey's conviction overturned - CNN.com


----------



## rightwinger

Dassey, then 16, confessed to authorities that he had assisted his uncle in raping and killing Halbach. He later recanted. 
Federal judge William E. Duffin overturned Dassey's conviction based on the way the confession was attained, calling it "so clearly involuntary in a constitutional sense that the court of appeals' decision to the contrary was an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law."
The judge said he didn't believe investigators tried to trick Dassey into confessing but instead misunderstood the constitutional ramifications of telling him that they already knew everything that happened and he would be OK if he told the truth.
"Dassey's confession was, as a practical matter, the entirety of the case against him," the judge wrote.


----------



## james bond

This is great news.  If he was my kin, I would celebrate with him and then tell him to leave the state.  Start life elsewhere, but not near Wisconsin.


----------



## 4Nines

After watching the documentary I was shocked how they handled Dassey and the lack of adult support with the law for that kid. His family didn't do him any justice and neither did the system.


----------



## rightwinger

4Nines said:


> After watching the documentary I was shocked how they handled Dassey and the lack of adult support with the law for that kid. His family didn't do him any justice and neither did the system.



I watched the entire ten hours expecting a Perry Mason moment proving that Avery didn't do it...that moment never came. Avery is guilty as hell

That Dassey got convicted based on that illegal interrogation and the ridiculous story he told was beyond belief. If the story Dassey told was true, there would be reams of physical evidence to support it....there was none


----------



## james bond

rightwinger said:


> 4Nines said:
> 
> 
> 
> After watching the documentary I was shocked how they handled Dassey and the lack of adult support with the law for that kid. His family didn't do him any justice and neither did the system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire ten hours expecting a Perry Mason moment proving that Avery didn't do it...that moment never came. Avery is guilty as hell
> 
> That Dassey got convicted based on that illegal interrogation and the ridiculous story he told was beyond belief. If the story Dassey told was true, there would be reams of physical evidence to support it....there was none
Click to expand...


Most cases, you do not get the Perry Mason moment.  That's tv or movie drama.  In the OJ trial, we did get it and it was the the glove doesn't fit moment.  What it means is one side did not do their homework.

With Avery, one has to look at the circumstances of his second arrest.  There was a parade of law enforcement vehicles that converged upon his business.  I've been called to gang turf wars in Cali and there were less leo's involved than that.  And why did it take so long to catalog all the evidence and yet it was only after two investigators Coburn and Lenz (who were the two being sued in the $36 M wrongful conviction) went back in 6 mths later, that they found the bullet.  Investigators scrubbed that place and could not find a bullet?  Furthermore, this single bullet was found on the floor in Avery's garage and found in a single test to have Teresa’s DNA.  Yet, how does one explain a bullet that theoretically went through Teresa land on the garage floor without leaving a single drop of blood or hair follicle?

Then the topper of all toppers is Coburn and Lenz found the majority of the evidence used in the Avery's trial.  Tremendous amounts of conflict of interest and bias here.


----------



## rightwinger

james bond said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4Nines said:
> 
> 
> 
> After watching the documentary I was shocked how they handled Dassey and the lack of adult support with the law for that kid. His family didn't do him any justice and neither did the system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire ten hours expecting a Perry Mason moment proving that Avery didn't do it...that moment never came. Avery is guilty as hell
> 
> That Dassey got convicted based on that illegal interrogation and the ridiculous story he told was beyond belief. If the story Dassey told was true, there would be reams of physical evidence to support it....there was none
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most cases, you do not get the Perry Mason moment.  That's tv or movie drama.  In the OJ trial, we did get it and it was the the glove doesn't fit moment.  What it means is one side did not do their homework.
> 
> With Avery, one has to look at the circumstances of his second arrest.  There was a parade of law enforcement vehicles that converged upon his business.  I've been called to gang turf wars in Cali and there were less leo's involved than that.  And why did it take so long to catalog all the evidence and yet it was only after two investigators Coburn and Lenz (who were the two being sued in the $36 M wrongful conviction) went back in 6 mths later, that they found the bullet.  Investigators scrubbed that place and could not find a bullet?  Furthermore, this single bullet was found on the floor in Avery's garage and found in a single test to have Teresa’s DNA.  Yet, how does one explain a bullet that theoretically went through Teresa land on the garage floor without leaving a single drop of blood or hair follicle?
> 
> Then the topper of all toppers is Coburn and Lenz found the majority of the evidence used in the Avery's trial.  Tremendous amounts of conflict of interest and bias here.
Click to expand...


Conflict of interest doesn't negate that Avery was guilty as hell. He specifically asked for this woman to be sent to take pictures and was the last person to see her. I can see planting a speck o blood or some car keys. Planting a vehicle and her remains outside his door is much harder to buy

I think Dassey may have helped to dispose of the body but was in no way involved in the murder. The kid is borderline retarded and was bullied by the interrogators as well as provided with facts about the case


----------



## james bond

rightwinger said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4Nines said:
> 
> 
> 
> After watching the documentary I was shocked how they handled Dassey and the lack of adult support with the law for that kid. His family didn't do him any justice and neither did the system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire ten hours expecting a Perry Mason moment proving that Avery didn't do it...that moment never came. Avery is guilty as hell
> 
> That Dassey got convicted based on that illegal interrogation and the ridiculous story he told was beyond belief. If the story Dassey told was true, there would be reams of physical evidence to support it....there was none
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most cases, you do not get the Perry Mason moment.  That's tv or movie drama.  In the OJ trial, we did get it and it was the the glove doesn't fit moment.  What it means is one side did not do their homework.
> 
> With Avery, one has to look at the circumstances of his second arrest.  There was a parade of law enforcement vehicles that converged upon his business.  I've been called to gang turf wars in Cali and there were less leo's involved than that.  And why did it take so long to catalog all the evidence and yet it was only after two investigators Coburn and Lenz (who were the two being sued in the $36 M wrongful conviction) went back in 6 mths later, that they found the bullet.  Investigators scrubbed that place and could not find a bullet?  Furthermore, this single bullet was found on the floor in Avery's garage and found in a single test to have Teresa’s DNA.  Yet, how does one explain a bullet that theoretically went through Teresa land on the garage floor without leaving a single drop of blood or hair follicle?
> 
> Then the topper of all toppers is Coburn and Lenz found the majority of the evidence used in the Avery's trial.  Tremendous amounts of conflict of interest and bias here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Conflict of interest doesn't negate that Avery was guilty as hell. He specifically asked for this woman to be sent to take pictures and was the last person to see her. I can see planting a speck o blood or some car keys. Planting a vehicle and her remains outside his door is much harder to buy
> 
> I think Dassey may have helped to dispose of the body but was in no way involved in the murder. The kid is borderline retarded and was bullied by the interrogators as well as provided with facts about the case
Click to expand...


This isn't a case of who committed the crime, but whether justice was served and it wasn't due to the planted evidence and forced confessions.  Avery is going to look guilty because the police made him the murderer in order to get rid of his lawsuit and because they didn't like him.   Avery was proven innocent the first time and he deserves a chance to prove his innocence again.  The first time, the police did not bother to check out the real culprit.  They had a vendetta against Avery and it continued with his second trial.


----------



## rightwinger

james bond said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4Nines said:
> 
> 
> 
> After watching the documentary I was shocked how they handled Dassey and the lack of adult support with the law for that kid. His family didn't do him any justice and neither did the system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire ten hours expecting a Perry Mason moment proving that Avery didn't do it...that moment never came. Avery is guilty as hell
> 
> That Dassey got convicted based on that illegal interrogation and the ridiculous story he told was beyond belief. If the story Dassey told was true, there would be reams of physical evidence to support it....there was none
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most cases, you do not get the Perry Mason moment.  That's tv or movie drama.  In the OJ trial, we did get it and it was the the glove doesn't fit moment.  What it means is one side did not do their homework.
> 
> With Avery, one has to look at the circumstances of his second arrest.  There was a parade of law enforcement vehicles that converged upon his business.  I've been called to gang turf wars in Cali and there were less leo's involved than that.  And why did it take so long to catalog all the evidence and yet it was only after two investigators Coburn and Lenz (who were the two being sued in the $36 M wrongful conviction) went back in 6 mths later, that they found the bullet.  Investigators scrubbed that place and could not find a bullet?  Furthermore, this single bullet was found on the floor in Avery's garage and found in a single test to have Teresa’s DNA.  Yet, how does one explain a bullet that theoretically went through Teresa land on the garage floor without leaving a single drop of blood or hair follicle?
> 
> Then the topper of all toppers is Coburn and Lenz found the majority of the evidence used in the Avery's trial.  Tremendous amounts of conflict of interest and bias here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Conflict of interest doesn't negate that Avery was guilty as hell. He specifically asked for this woman to be sent to take pictures and was the last person to see her. I can see planting a speck o blood or some car keys. Planting a vehicle and her remains outside his door is much harder to buy
> 
> I think Dassey may have helped to dispose of the body but was in no way involved in the murder. The kid is borderline retarded and was bullied by the interrogators as well as provided with facts about the case
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't a case of who committed the crime, but whether justice was served and it wasn't due to the planted evidence and forced confessions.  Avery is going to look guilty because the police made him the murderer in order to get rid of his lawsuit and because they didn't like him.   Avery was proven innocent the first time and he deserves a chance to prove his innocence again.  The first time, the police did not bother to check out the real culprit.  They had a vendetta against Avery and it continued with his second trial.
Click to expand...

With Avery, Justice was served, a murderer is in prison

Dassey served ten years in prison because he was a minor, mentally challenged and bullied into a false confession


----------



## james bond

rightwinger said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4Nines said:
> 
> 
> 
> After watching the documentary I was shocked how they handled Dassey and the lack of adult support with the law for that kid. His family didn't do him any justice and neither did the system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire ten hours expecting a Perry Mason moment proving that Avery didn't do it...that moment never came. Avery is guilty as hell
> 
> That Dassey got convicted based on that illegal interrogation and the ridiculous story he told was beyond belief. If the story Dassey told was true, there would be reams of physical evidence to support it....there was none
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most cases, you do not get the Perry Mason moment.  That's tv or movie drama.  In the OJ trial, we did get it and it was the the glove doesn't fit moment.  What it means is one side did not do their homework.
> 
> With Avery, one has to look at the circumstances of his second arrest.  There was a parade of law enforcement vehicles that converged upon his business.  I've been called to gang turf wars in Cali and there were less leo's involved than that.  And why did it take so long to catalog all the evidence and yet it was only after two investigators Coburn and Lenz (who were the two being sued in the $36 M wrongful conviction) went back in 6 mths later, that they found the bullet.  Investigators scrubbed that place and could not find a bullet?  Furthermore, this single bullet was found on the floor in Avery's garage and found in a single test to have Teresa’s DNA.  Yet, how does one explain a bullet that theoretically went through Teresa land on the garage floor without leaving a single drop of blood or hair follicle?
> 
> Then the topper of all toppers is Coburn and Lenz found the majority of the evidence used in the Avery's trial.  Tremendous amounts of conflict of interest and bias here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Conflict of interest doesn't negate that Avery was guilty as hell. He specifically asked for this woman to be sent to take pictures and was the last person to see her. I can see planting a speck o blood or some car keys. Planting a vehicle and her remains outside his door is much harder to buy
> 
> I think Dassey may have helped to dispose of the body but was in no way involved in the murder. The kid is borderline retarded and was bullied by the interrogators as well as provided with facts about the case
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't a case of who committed the crime, but whether justice was served and it wasn't due to the planted evidence and forced confessions.  Avery is going to look guilty because the police made him the murderer in order to get rid of his lawsuit and because they didn't like him.   Avery was proven innocent the first time and he deserves a chance to prove his innocence again.  The first time, the police did not bother to check out the real culprit.  They had a vendetta against Avery and it continued with his second trial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With Avery, Justice was served, a murderer is in prison
> 
> Dassey served ten years in prison because he was a minor, mentally challenged and bullied into a false confession
Click to expand...


The fight's not over yet for justice being served as his attorney and innocent project are requesting the appeals ruling be tossed.  It would be based on the improper search that was discussed.


----------



## rightwinger

rightwinger said:


> james bond said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> james bond said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4Nines said:
> 
> 
> 
> After watching the documentary I was shocked how they handled Dassey and the lack of adult support with the law for that kid. His family didn't do him any justice and neither did the system.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I watched the entire ten hours expecting a Perry Mason moment proving that Avery didn't do it...that moment never came. Avery is guilty as hell
> 
> That Dassey got convicted based on that illegal interrogation and the ridiculous story he told was beyond belief. If the story Dassey told was true, there would be reams of physical evidence to support it....there was none
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Most cases, you do not get the Perry Mason moment.  That's tv or movie drama.  In the OJ trial, we did get it and it was the the glove doesn't fit moment.  What it means is one side did not do their homework.
> 
> With Avery, one has to look at the circumstances of his second arrest.  There was a parade of law enforcement vehicles that converged upon his business.  I've been called to gang turf wars in Cali and there were less leo's involved than that.  And why did it take so long to catalog all the evidence and yet it was only after two investigators Coburn and Lenz (who were the two being sued in the $36 M wrongful conviction) went back in 6 mths later, that they found the bullet.  Investigators scrubbed that place and could not find a bullet?  Furthermore, this single bullet was found on the floor in Avery's garage and found in a single test to have Teresa’s DNA.  Yet, how does one explain a bullet that theoretically went through Teresa land on the garage floor without leaving a single drop of blood or hair follicle?
> 
> Then the topper of all toppers is Coburn and Lenz found the majority of the evidence used in the Avery's trial.  Tremendous amounts of conflict of interest and bias here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Conflict of interest doesn't negate that Avery was guilty as hell. He specifically asked for this woman to be sent to take pictures and was the last person to see her. I can see planting a speck o blood or some car keys. Planting a vehicle and her remains outside his door is much harder to buy
> 
> I think Dassey may have helped to dispose of the body but was in no way involved in the murder. The kid is borderline retarded and was bullied by the interrogators as well as provided with facts about the case
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> This isn't a case of who committed the crime, but whether justice was served and it wasn't due to the planted evidence and forced confessions.  Avery is going to look guilty because the police made him the murderer in order to get rid of his lawsuit and because they didn't like him.   Avery was proven innocent the first time and he deserves a chance to prove his innocence again.  The first time, the police did not bother to check out the real culprit.  They had a vendetta against Avery and it continued with his second trial.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> With Avery, Justice was served, a murderer is in prison
> 
> Dassey served ten years in prison because he was a minor, mentally challenged and bullied into a false confession
Click to expand...


Dassey to be released

Free Brendan Dassey on Friday, Wis. judge rules


----------



## rightwinger

Brendan Dassey of 'Making a Murderer' wins ruling - CNN.com

Court rules Dassey confession invalid

State has 90 days to retry. There is no physical evidence against Dassey. Without his confession there is nothing to try him on


----------

