If you are to take her at her claim, and unless she has call recordings from the conversation(which she doesn't), then what she is actually saying is her cell phone left the property, and his didn't. Big distinction.

Obviously she knows that and is using social media to continue the narrative that MaM has started in regards to SA.

That's hardly "airtight".

Finally finished this up, and it may have been talked about in one of the other 37 pages but I haven't gone over them...

While I understand a lot of people questioning the validity of Dassey's confession, did anyone else find it just a bit odd that the pictures he drew of how they had Teresa tied up he later claimed he just got from a book 'Kiss The Girls' ?

Dassey's spare time involves "bombfires", video games, tv and saying "yeah"... The kid isn't finding a cozy spot and diving into a James Patterson novel.

While it's obvious from the interviews we saw that Dassey was pushed into confessing certain things, it's also pretty obvious he was coached to say certain things when he was on the stand.

Was the movie Kiss the Girls that different from the book? It came out in 97, so Brendan had plenty of opportunity to watch it. I haven't seen it in at least a decade, so I couldn't tell you much about it other than the clever use of milk.

Interesting commentary from Pastor who lives in this area

https://ethikapolitika.org/2016/02/15/making-a-murderer-and-the-danger-of-our-virtues/

http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/18/making-a-murderer-displays-prejudice-alright-but-not-the-one-youve-heard/

quote:

---

Was the movie Kiss the Girls that different from the book? It came out in 97, so Brendan had plenty of opportunity to watch it. I haven't seen it in at least a decade, so I couldn't tell you much about it other than the clever use of milk.

---

He said he got the idea of the picture from "reading books", when asked what books he said "Kiss The Girls".

Again, not saying Dassey was involved (or not), but if you're going to knock the way the interrogators coerced a confession, it's also fair to bring up how his claims that the confession was "made up" was obviously coached.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Was the movie Kiss the Girls that different from the book? It came out in 97, so Brendan had plenty of opportunity to watch it. I haven't seen it in at least a decade, so I couldn't tell you much about it other than the clever use of milk.

---

He said he got the idea of the picture from "reading books", when asked what books he said "Kiss The Girls".

Again, not saying Dassey was involved (or not), but if you're going to knock the way the interrogators coerced a confession, it's also fair to bring up how his claims that the confession was "made up" was obviously coached.

---

I'll agree as would most people that Brendan wasn't spending his time reading novels for fun. But it is also plausible that someone that knows he is really dumb (he laments this several times in calls to his mom) would say he got it from the book rather than the movie so he could sound more intelligent that he actually is. I think someone else said on here that the cutting the hair is part of the movie, but not part of the book. I never read the book and haven't seen the movie in forever, so I couldn't tell you.

Dassey just doesn't strike me as the type of kid that is going to know something he saw on the TV was also a book.

Someone told him to say that.

And the fact that the picture he drew happens to show handcuffs and leg irons that Steven Avery actually owned... Well at a certain point you start realizing that even if his confession was coerced by the police and maybe he didn't actually help rape or kill her, he saw her.

And Avery making repeated calls to Halbach's phone using *67.

I'm not going to say the police didn't plant evidence because there is always that possibility... but when you start reading the details that the show left out, you see why the show left it out -- because it's pretty damning in regards to Steven Avery's character.

quote:

---

Dassey just doesn't strike me as the type of kid that is going to know something he saw on the TV was also a book.

Someone told him to say that.

And the fact that the picture he drew happens to show handcuffs and leg irons that Steven Avery actually owned... Well at a certain point you start realizing that even if his confession was coerced by the police and maybe he didn't actually help rape or kill her, he saw her.

And Avery making repeated calls to Halbach's phone using *67.

I'm not going to say the police didn't plant evidence because there is always that possibility... but when you start reading the details that the show left out, you see why the show left it out -- because it's pretty damning in regards to Steven Avery's character.

---

The big obvious problem being none of TH's DNA was on anything in SA's house, including the bed and leg shackles. There really is no evidence that Brendan saw or participated in anything. You have a confession that was obviously really coerced and is not supported by evidence. In fact, the evidence contradicts his confession.

SA's attorneys said that he regularly used *67 for calls because he was somewhat infamous and didn't like the attention.

Also, if a contractor was late to a job (and TH was late), you might get them to answer a call with *67 while you might not if they saw who it was. The *67 really doesn't show anything nefarious.

The show tried to get Kratz and the police to be on the show. Their letter to Kratz to get him to do interviews was actually read into evidence in the trial. They refused. So the filmmakers asked for a list of their strongest evidence that they would like to appear in the film. Kratz provided them with a list and they included everything from the list. You can only give so much from one side when that side refuses to participate.

The issue is you can't look at peculiar things that favored one side of the story (like believing that the car was found in the junkyard that quickly) but then gloss over peculiar things that favored the other side (like the *67, the reports that Avery requested Halbach multiple times, the reports that Halbach specifically said she didn't feel comfortable around Avery and had to rebuff his advances).

I get that the documentary can only "work with what they have", but that doesn't change that it completely glossed over a side of Avery that paints quite a different picture than some country bumpkin that was accused of something he didn't do 15 years ago.

The guy doused a cat in gasoline and threw it into a bonfire and had previously threatened to kill his ex-wife. Does that make him guilty? No... But it sure makes me question him a lot more than some grand conspiracy among the police force and the death of Teresa Halbach by the hands of some mystery mastermind.

quote:

---

Interesting commentary from Pastor who lives in this area

https://ethikapolitika.org/2016/02/15/making-a-murderer-and-the-danger-of-our-virtues/

http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/18/making-a-murderer-displays-prejudice-alright-but-not-the-one-youve-heard/

---

Interesting. I agree with this quote on matters larger than what Steve Avery did or didn't do:

quote:

---

Coastal Elites Fiddle While Middle America Burns

---

quote:

---

The issue is you can't look at peculiar things that favored one side of the story (like believing that the car was found in the junkyard that quickly) but then gloss over peculiar things that favored the other side (like the *67, the reports that Avery requested Halbach multiple times, the reports that Halbach specifically said she didn't feel comfortable around Avery and had to rebuff his advances).

---

I've never seen anyone say anything about her having to rebuff his advances.

Also, anyone saying she was uncomfortable going there doesn't make much sense and sounds more like Monday morning quarterbacking considering she willingly went there multiple times. Not like it was easy to hide who lived on AVERY RD.

*67 doesn't prove anything. She obviously would have known who she was talking to once she picked up the phone. There is no evidence that he ever called her outside of normal work phone calls such when she was running late on Oct 31.

quote:

---

I get that the documentary can only "work with what they have", but that doesn't change that it completely glossed over a side of Avery that paints quite a different picture than some country bumpkin that was accused of something he didn't do 15 years ago.

The guy doused a cat in gasoline and threw it into a bonfire and had previously threatened to kill his ex-wife. Does that make him guilty? No... But it sure makes me question him a lot more than some grand conspiracy among the police force and the death of Teresa Halbach by the hands of some mystery mastermind.

---

They were making a documentary about the failings of a justice system and the things like the cat or the death threat wouldn't be material from the case and would be excluded from the case and the prosecutor would be barred from bringing them up. I'm not arguing that Avery is a good person, because I don't believe he is, but none of those things are evidence that he committed murder. I think it is very possible that Avery committed the murder AND that the police framed him. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.

I agree. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying i think he should have been convicted or that the case was handled correctly. But to simply say that this show was about the failings of the justice system is silly. It was framed in a way to show that Avery didn't do it and he was railroaded by the police.

As for Halbach/Avery:

-- In the months leading up to Halbach's disappearance, Avery had called Auto Trader several times and always specifically requested Halbach to come out and take the photos.

-- Halbach had complained to her boss that she didn't want to go out to Avery's trailer anymore, because once when she came out, Avery was waiting for her wearing only a towel.


Does that make him guilty of killing her? Of course not. But when the victim previously complained to her boss about being uncomfortable around a guy that happened to be the last person she was seen with and who has a violent history... Well it certainly sheds a little more light on the "relationship" between Avery and Halbach that the documentary conveniently left out.

Requesting the same girl to come take pictures that has already complained to her boss that she feels uncomfortable around you... Using *67 to call her cell phone so that she is more likely to pick it up... Using a fake name when requesting her.

Again... Doesn't make him guilty, but certainly paints a different picture... One of a guy that certainly had a liking for a young girl and a young girl that certainly did not feel comfortable around him.

quote:

---

I agree. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying i think he should have been convicted or that the case was handled correctly. But to simply say that this show was about the failings of the justice system is silly. It was framed in a way to show that Avery didn't do it and he was railroaded by the police.

---

There is pretty much no question the police framed Avery in 85. He lost almost two decades of his life, and lost probably the two best decades of his life. Can you imagine if you lost your entire twenties and thirties because a group of cops framed you?

Then in this, there are very, very questionable actions by the same ****ing cops. Every 'key' piece of evidence was found by the cops from the department that wasn't supposed to have any association whatsoever with the case. The key, the garage, etc. All found by those cops after multiple other searches by cops from another county yielded nothing. Not to mention the blatant mishandling of evidence (bones, pit, blood, etc.)

Without the police acting so shady, there is no documentary. They made the documentary by their actions. They weren't supposed to be on the property, but they were finding the key in a really obvious place after EIGHT searches by the police that was supposed to be there. I have no doubt that key was planted. None.

quote:

---

As for Halbach/Avery:

-- In the months leading up to Halbach's disappearance, Avery had called Auto Trader several times and always specifically requested Halbach to come out and take the photos.

---

Maybe he really liked her minivan pictures. Maybe their other photographer was an ass. She was on his property numerous times and never got murdered any other time. Specifically requesting a specific photographer doesn't mean they are obsessing over someone. I don't think A&M basketball is going to kill me because I do a great job shooting their games and they keep calling me and requesting me to shoot their games.

quote:

---

-- Halbach had complained to her boss that she didn't want to go out to Avery's trailer anymore, because once when she came out, Avery was waiting for her wearing only a towel.

---

There is an interview with her coworker and said it wasn't a situation where he was hitting on her or that she was really uncomfortable, but more of an "eeww, he's gross" off handed statement. Maybe she was scheduled at 2 and showed up at 10 and he wasn't prepared for her to be there. We don't know the situation. Again, not evidence that he did anything wrong. I've answered in a towel to sign for a package with a FedEx guy. I wasn't hitting on him, just wasn't expecting him.

quote:

---

Does that make him guilty of killing her? Of course not. But when the victim previously complained to her boss about being uncomfortable around a guy that happened to be the last person she was seen with and who has a violent history... Well it certainly sheds a little more light on the "relationship" between Avery and Halbach that the documentary conveniently left out.

---

Again, I don't think you can find anything that said she was uncomfortable being there. The coworker clearly said it was an "Eww, he was in a towel" not a "He was nearly naked and hit on me" situation.

quote:

---

Requesting the same girl to come take pictures that has already complained to her boss that she feels uncomfortable around you...

---

Again, there is no evidence that she was uncomfortable. And she chose to go there anyway.

quote:

---

Using *67 to call her cell phone so that she is more likely to pick it up...

---

Totally reasonable thing to do with a contractor that is late for a scheduled time.

quote:

---

Using a fake name when requesting her.

---

He used his sister's name, who is the person selling the car. It's not like she is going to be completely surprised at who lives on Avery Road.

quote:

---

Again... Doesn't make him guilty, but certainly paints a different picture... One of a guy that certainly had a liking for a young girl and a young girl that certainly did not feel comfortable around him.

---

There is no evidence she didn't feel comfortable there and she voluntarily chose to go there on the day she was murdered.

I was wondering why his new lawyer who just happened to get real concerned with his innocence after his story became so popular, was tweeting so damn much about all of her insights.

Now it makes a little more sense:

No idea how to make twitter links work

quote:

---

I was wondering why his new lawyer who jist happened to get real concerned with his innocence after his story became so popular, was tweeting so damn much about all of her insights.

Now it makes a little more sense:

---

"The Lawfirm of Kathleen T. Zellner and Associates are working pro bono. The donations raised will be used to pay for new scientific testing required to obtain the release of Mr. Avery."

So, she is doing it to score some scientific research money?

Good for her. Still explains the twitter dump.

For as much as she has put out on twitter, seems like it should only be a matter of time before he is set free. I guess we will see.

I'm guessing he had plenty of attorneys to choose from once the show caught on. She will have plenty of big money making opportunities down the road; I think the fundraising is genuinely for the case.

You certainly seemed to be trying to paint the fund raising as trying to score money off of Avery's notoriety.

quote:

---

I'm guessing he had plenty of attorneys to choose from once the show caught on. She will have plenty of big money making opportunities down the road; I think the fundraising is genuinely for the case.

---

I'm not saying she plans on pocketing the money, but if she is going to be using twitter to collect money for him, it certainly makes sense now why she was using her twitter to get all his fanboys and girls up in arms.

How many twitter followers has she gained since announcing she was taking the case?

I'm sure she is a great attorney and she has a good record with exonerations, but I really wasnt sure what she was hoping to accomplish by tweeting out her case. Thats pretty unorthodox. Now it makes sense.

quote:

---

Since you're too lazy to read the first 36 pages of this thread where this argument was beaten to death and prefer to assume that your argument is somehow different (spoiler: it isn't), allow me to summarize.

---

Woh buddy, sorry for ruffling your feathers posting on a discussion forum. I'll try not to waste your time next time.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I'm guessing he had plenty of attorneys to choose from once the show caught on. She will have plenty of big money making opportunities down the road; I think the fundraising is genuinely for the case.

---

I'm not saying she plans on pocketing the money, but if she is going to be using twitter to collect money for him, it certainly makes sense now why she was using her twitter to get all his fanboys and girls up in arms.

How many twitter followers has she gained since announcing she was taking the case?

I'm sure she is a great attorney and she has a good record with exonerations, but I really wasnt sure what she was hoping to accomplish by tweeting out her case. Thats pretty unorthodox. Now it makes sense.

---

She was super famous before the Avery case. She is one of the highest profile individual attorneys dedicated to exoneration of convicted criminals. She was awarded the American Bar Association's Pursuit of Justice Award in 2012. In 2000, the National Law Journal named her among the top 10 lawyers who always out-prepare their opponents.

Well good she sounds amazing and you seem to know her resume well. So if she can't exonerate him, maybe that will be the end of it. No more excuses about the system being against you when you have the best attorney ever in the history of law on your side and she is tweeting out all this exculpating evidence on a daily basis.

Ive reas most of this thread but its been awhile.

How did they convict when they couldn't find any of her blood?

I mean, I've been watching the OJ show on FX and all they talk about is how much blood there was. I know its fiction as opposed to a documentary, but if he chopped up her body, wouldn't there be massive amounts of blood somewhere? How did he/they manage to clean it all up so effectively? Mastermind at disposing/cleaning up blood but leaves the key in plain sight, the remains in his firepit?

Bases on only the show, I am amazed they convicted. I thought the defense was far superior than the prosecution. The fact that Manitowac Sherrifs Dept was involved at all with the investigation is mind blowing.

Cellphone triangulation shows Halbach drove 12 miles after leaving the Avery property:

http://uproxx.com/tv/making-a-murderer-cell-phone-tower-records-new-evidence/

The only explanation is that Steven was driving around with her cell phone because he killed her.

quote:

---

The only explanation is that Steven was driving around with her cell phone because he killed her.

---

An independent witness said he saw her vehicle leave the property, too.

quote:

---

quote:

---

The only explanation is that Steven was driving around with her cell phone because he killed her.

---

An independent witness said he saw her vehicle leave the property, too.

---

Well that witness would be wrong because key and Manitowoc County

quote:

---

Cellphone triangulation shows Halbach drove 12 miles after leaving the Avery property:

http://uproxx.com/tv/making-a-murderer-cell-phone-tower-records-new-evidence/

---

hard to take this link seriously since uproxx is fodder for idiotic morons.

A distant cousin of mine, David Lee Wiggins, was wrongfully convicted of the rape of a 14 year old girl and spent almost 24 years in prison before DNA testing exonerated him. Needless to say I am not a fan of the cops planting evidence because they "know" someone is guilty, and I feel like that's what happened in the Avery case.

My cousin would most likely not have been convicted without "help" from the police, as you can see by reading his story. It sickens me that there are police, who are there to serve and protect, that will do things like this.