They couldn't make up their mind if she was shot in the garage or killed in the bedroom.
Making a Murder - Netflix Original Series
214,226 Views |
1382 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by Pluralizes Everythings
Yep. They even jackhammered the bedroom and found nothing.
Keeper of The Spirits
Joined:
Nov 12, 2008
Posts:
8,432
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Anonymous was threatening to release the records themselves if the police dont
What records?
i agree with the defense, something fishy happened with the jurors during the deliberation
The FBI blood expert was also laughable.... Not only did he come up with a test in a few days that without a doubt could find there was No preservatives in the three swabs he tested... But also could say for sure that the three he didn't test also didn't have the preservative.
Keeper of The Spirits
Joined:
Nov 12, 2008
Posts:
8,432
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Call logs between Lenk and Colburn
WHAT THE F?? This show is hugely addictive.
I'm on ep 7, and trying to keep an open mind, but holy hell, this just screams 'frame up'. As soon as the key was found in his room on the 7th or 8th search, it was pretty obvious.
I agree with other posters - I'm not sure why they framed him; because they were ticked about the lawsuit, or had evidence of other crimes but couldn't convict him on those, but as slimy and sketchy as these folks are, I'm willing to bet it's because they were mad about the lawsuit.
Brendan's first lawyer is a world-class jacka**. He was so condescendingly oblivious to the idea that he should even try to mount a defense. Every time I saw his smarmy smile, I wanted to throw something at my tv. And what was that form O'Kelly tried to get him to sign??? It seemed like he was working for the prosecution, not Brendan.
The DA made my skin crawl even before I heard about the texts. When he gave that press conference prefaced by telling everyone under the age of 15 to leave the room, my mouth hung open. In what world was the content of that press conference acceptable? It sounded more like a dramatic reading than a presentation of information.
Also, super crooked judge. That was obvious when he ruled that Brendan's confession was admissible. It was painfully obvious that Brendan had ZERO clue what was happening.
Finally, the DNA expert's testimony was uncomfortable to watch, particularly when the defense asked her about the note from the police to 'place her (Teresa) in the room and garage'. She also had a very unfortunate hair style.
I don't know if Steven is guilty, but I tend to think he's not. I definitely think her ex boyfriend knows something. How could he not remember with whom he was first questioned?
I love the defense attorneys.
The whole state of Wisconsin gets a bad wrap in this series - almost to the point that they are Deliverance-esque backwoods hillbillies. I am definitely convinced that I will never go. Not that I would have anyway...
I'm on ep 7, and trying to keep an open mind, but holy hell, this just screams 'frame up'. As soon as the key was found in his room on the 7th or 8th search, it was pretty obvious.
I agree with other posters - I'm not sure why they framed him; because they were ticked about the lawsuit, or had evidence of other crimes but couldn't convict him on those, but as slimy and sketchy as these folks are, I'm willing to bet it's because they were mad about the lawsuit.
Brendan's first lawyer is a world-class jacka**. He was so condescendingly oblivious to the idea that he should even try to mount a defense. Every time I saw his smarmy smile, I wanted to throw something at my tv. And what was that form O'Kelly tried to get him to sign??? It seemed like he was working for the prosecution, not Brendan.
The DA made my skin crawl even before I heard about the texts. When he gave that press conference prefaced by telling everyone under the age of 15 to leave the room, my mouth hung open. In what world was the content of that press conference acceptable? It sounded more like a dramatic reading than a presentation of information.
Also, super crooked judge. That was obvious when he ruled that Brendan's confession was admissible. It was painfully obvious that Brendan had ZERO clue what was happening.
Finally, the DNA expert's testimony was uncomfortable to watch, particularly when the defense asked her about the note from the police to 'place her (Teresa) in the room and garage'. She also had a very unfortunate hair style.
I don't know if Steven is guilty, but I tend to think he's not. I definitely think her ex boyfriend knows something. How could he not remember with whom he was first questioned?
I love the defense attorneys.
The whole state of Wisconsin gets a bad wrap in this series - almost to the point that they are Deliverance-esque backwoods hillbillies. I am definitely convinced that I will never go. Not that I would have anyway...
quote:They jackhammered the garage. The bedroom is in a trailer so they wouldn't have to jackhammer it, they could just take it apart.
Yep. They even jackhammered the bedroom and found nothing.
http://www.vulture.com/2015/12/making-a-murderer-episodes-2-4.html
Another "what was left out" article. Nothing major yet. Hope Vulture is able to discover and report on all of the evidence in the case that was left out when they do the later episodes.
Another "what was left out" article. Nothing major yet. Hope Vulture is able to discover and report on all of the evidence in the case that was left out when they do the later episodes.
That's right. My mistake. Thanks.
I was kind of appalled at how many times the police lied on the stand. It was all little things, but still you would expect better.
I was absolutely shocked that the police never even asked the roommate and boyfriend where they were when she disappeared.
I was absolutely shocked that the police never even asked the roommate and boyfriend where they were when she disappeared.
quote:Not only was the ex boyfriend not questioned, he was allowed onto the Avery property to help "collect evidence".
I was kind of appalled at how many times the police lied on the stand. It was all little things, but still you would expect better.
I was absolutely shocked that the police never even asked the roommate and boyfriend where they were when she disappeared.
Holy ****.
This should be required watching for all teenagers. I'm certainly going to make sure my kids see this as an example to never talk to the police about anything, ever, without a lawyer in the room.
This should be required watching for all teenagers. I'm certainly going to make sure my kids see this as an example to never talk to the police about anything, ever, without a lawyer in the room.
Well damn. Gonna have to check this out.
Business Insider picked up on the Anonymous story
https://twitter.com/OPAVERYDASSEY
I think that's going to be the handle info gets released on.
Their "Tow Theory" is interesting with those photos that show the under wheel well and blinker light ripped out when the 2 people "happened upon" the car discovering it for the first time.
I think that's going to be the handle info gets released on.
Their "Tow Theory" is interesting with those photos that show the under wheel well and blinker light ripped out when the 2 people "happened upon" the car discovering it for the first time.
quote:Did the police have a description of the key?
As soon as the key was found in his room on the 7th or 8th search, it was pretty obvious.
Hey, I know we're in an auto salvage yard with potentially thousands of auto keys and we've already torn this trailer apart including, "shaking that bookcase". But don't touch that random key I just found. I think it's 'key', heh, evidence.
And Colburn's call to dispatch with confirming the license plate of the missing car. It was all so bizarre with Colburn and Lenk.
Those guys had no business being on a search committee, much less the guys who stumble on all the key evidence on the 9th visit of a case that is in a neighboring county.
Those guys had no business being on a search committee, much less the guys who stumble on all the key evidence on the 9th visit of a case that is in a neighboring county.
Interesting. I'm guessing Anonymous will provide phone records showing that Colburn placed a call to Lenk shortly after calling in the license plate of Halbach's vehicle.
Or immediately before, as in he wanted instruction as to what to do.
Also found it interesting that Colburn was the one who paraded Brendan Dassey from the courthouse out in front of the press after the guilty verdict was read. No humility whatsoever.
Setting Brendan Dassey aside, do y'all honestly believe that 2 cops (with no prior criminal history), lay in wait for a random woman to appear on the Avery residence, take her/kill her/burn her body/bury it at the Avery's, AND plant the necessary evidence without anyone finding out?
There's some weird coincidences, but to plant the evidence, they would have to have committed the crime themselves. That's very very far fetched. (More far fetched IMO than Steve Avery having committed the crime himself)
There's some weird coincidences, but to plant the evidence, they would have to have committed the crime themselves. That's very very far fetched. (More far fetched IMO than Steve Avery having committed the crime himself)
quote:
Setting Brendan Dassey aside, do y'all honestly believe that 2 cops (with no prior criminal history), lay in wait for a random woman to appear on the Avery residence, take her/kill her/burn her body/bury it at the Avery's, AND plant the necessary evidence without anyone finding out?
There's some weird coincidences, but to plant the evidence, they would have to have committed the crime themselves. That's very very far fetched. (More far fetched IMO than Steve Avery having committed the crime himself)
No.
If a truth machine came out today, and all it told us was that Steve had nothing to do with Teresa's death, I still wouldn't think they killed her and planted the evidence.
I'd want and hope the police would follow up with that weird boyfriend/roommate who was sketchy as ****, had scratches on his hands, and was deleting Teresa's most recent voicemails from her phone after he said he "guessed" the password.
It's hard for us to come up with what happened when the police used tunnel vision on Steve and his family so quickly, either by arrogance and stupidity, or because they used the opportunity to frame him.
My assumption would be that they might have stumbled on to the car or crime scene, and then at that time decided to use it to frame Steve when they knew she was heading out to his house to take photos.
However, and this is very important...the job of that jury was not to decide on Steve's innocence. It was to decide if the state provided enough evidence in the trial to prove his GUILT beyond a reasonable doubt. "Looks like he probably did it" would mean Not Guilty.
They had some footage of Kratz in that trial saying some ridiculous things that pissed me off that the other attorneys seemingly didn't go after(or if they did, it was left out of the doc) when Kratz was basically misleading the jury into what they need to decide with the case. I need to go back and re-watch the clips that upset me the most. It was irresponsible for a prosecutor to say what he said, and even worse that the judge didn't immediately shut him down.
Do you believe someone with an IQ of 70 who was about to become a multimillionaire and was in, by all accounts, a stable relationship would murder some random woman and then have the wherewithal to completely erase all evidence of said murder except for a bullet fragment?
That is much less likely to me.
That is much less likely to me.
quote:I'm having a hard time understanding your post.quote:
Setting Brendan Dassey aside, do y'all honestly believe that 2 cops (with no prior criminal history), lay in wait for a random woman to appear on the Avery residence, take her/kill her/burn her body/bury it at the Avery's, AND plant the necessary evidence without anyone finding out?
There's some weird coincidences, but to plant the evidence, they would have to have committed the crime themselves. That's very very far fetched. (More far fetched IMO than Steve Avery having committed the crime himself)
No.
If a truth machine came out today, and all it told us was that Steve had nothing to do with Teresa's death, I still wouldn't think they killed her and planted the evidence.
I'd want and hope the police would follow up with that weird boyfriend/roommate who was sketchy as ****, had scratches on his hands, and was deleting Teresa's most recent voicemails from her phone after he said he "guessed" the password.
It's hard for us to come up with what happened when the police used tunnel vision on Steve and his family so quickly, either by arrogance and stupidity, or because they used the opportunity to frame him.
My assumption would be that they might have stumbled on to the car or something, and then at that time decided to use it to frame Steve when they knew she was heading out to his house to take photos.
Scenario A: Steve Avery committed the crime himself and everything else was coincidence.
Scenario B: Steve Avery committed the crime himself and the cops recovered the evidence elsewhere and planted it in a location that would more assuredly incriminate Steve Avery.
Scenario C: Someone else was able to kill Halbach, bury her on Avery's residence, and plant the evidence not only on his property but inside his very home without being seen or leaving behind evidence. (This would require an ungodly amount of foresight, planning and luck)
I think scenario A is what happened. Steve Avery already had a history of violence and his low IQ only strengthens the case for him to commit an act of murder, IMO. Why was there no blood? That's easy. The body was shot somewhere other than the garage and the bullet found was exactly what the defense alleged, it was contaminated with Halbach's DNA due to a lack of care from the analyst.
quote:He was riding high from his recently granted freedom and promise of money. It'd be hard not to feel invincible. Attractive young girl stops by, rebuffs your advances, and he kills her. His low IQ means he's less likely to be a stable, forward thinking, individual.
Do you believe someone with an IQ of 70 who was about to become a multimillionaire and was in, by all accounts, a stable relationship would murder some random woman and then have the wherewithal to completely erase all evidence of said murder except for a bullet fragment?
That is much less likely to me.
As for the evidence, see my post above. She was murdered and shot somewhere other than the garage.
quote:quote:I'm having a hard time understanding your post.quote:
Setting Brendan Dassey aside, do y'all honestly believe that 2 cops (with no prior criminal history), lay in wait for a random woman to appear on the Avery residence, take her/kill her/burn her body/bury it at the Avery's, AND plant the necessary evidence without anyone finding out?
There's some weird coincidences, but to plant the evidence, they would have to have committed the crime themselves. That's very very far fetched. (More far fetched IMO than Steve Avery having committed the crime himself)
No.
If a truth machine came out today, and all it told us was that Steve had nothing to do with Teresa's death, I still wouldn't think they killed her and planted the evidence.
I'd want and hope the police would follow up with that weird boyfriend/roommate who was sketchy as ****, had scratches on his hands, and was deleting Teresa's most recent voicemails from her phone after he said he "guessed" the password.
It's hard for us to come up with what happened when the police used tunnel vision on Steve and his family so quickly, either by arrogance and stupidity, or because they used the opportunity to frame him.
My assumption would be that they might have stumbled on to the car or something, and then at that time decided to use it to frame Steve when they knew she was heading out to his house to take photos.
Scenario A: Steve Avery committed the crime himself and everything else was coincidence.
Scenario B: Steve Avery committed the crime himself and the cops recovered the evidence elsewhere and planted it in a location that would more assuredly incriminate Steve Avery.
Scenario C: Someone else was able to kill Halbach, bury her on Avery's residence, and plant the evidence not only on his property but inside his very home without being seen or leaving behind evidence. (This would require an ungodly amount of foresight, planning and luck)
I think scenario A is what happened. Steve Avery already had a history of violence and his low IQ only strengthens the case for him to commit an act of murder, IMO. Why was there no blood? That's easy. The body was shot somewhere other than the garage and the bullet found was exactly what the defense alleged, it was contaminated with Halbach's DNA due to a lack of care from the analyst.
There are a million scenarios other than Steve Avery committed the crime himself.
My point was that if I had to guess based on watching the doc, and if the only piece of info we were given was that Avery 100% had nothing to do with it, and you said "so now what do you think?"...my most confident theory would be that the other guy Ryan Hillegas did it, and the police stumbled upon the remains...OR that another Avery family member or 2 did it, and they tried to frame Steve. At a later point, they were helped(probably unknowingly) by the police who planted key evidence to get a conviction.
My point about the jury was that you can give 700 scenarios of what happened, but it isn't their job to "pick a better one." Their only job is to decide if the state brought sufficient evidence to rule that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if other potential scenarios sound too fishy, you can't decide on a man's life based off that.
quote:Jury education aside, there's no other scenario other than the 3 I outlined. Avery either did it or didn't. If he didn't, someone killed Halbach. Someone buried the body. Someone put the key in his house. Someone put the car in his lot. Someone put the bullet in his garage. And someone did that without being seen or leaving any trace of themselves behind. THAT is the only other scenario for which Avery would be truly not guilty.quote:quote:I'm having a hard time understanding your post.quote:
Setting Brendan Dassey aside, do y'all honestly believe that 2 cops (with no prior criminal history), lay in wait for a random woman to appear on the Avery residence, take her/kill her/burn her body/bury it at the Avery's, AND plant the necessary evidence without anyone finding out?
There's some weird coincidences, but to plant the evidence, they would have to have committed the crime themselves. That's very very far fetched. (More far fetched IMO than Steve Avery having committed the crime himself)
No.
If a truth machine came out today, and all it told us was that Steve had nothing to do with Teresa's death, I still wouldn't think they killed her and planted the evidence.
I'd want and hope the police would follow up with that weird boyfriend/roommate who was sketchy as ****, had scratches on his hands, and was deleting Teresa's most recent voicemails from her phone after he said he "guessed" the password.
It's hard for us to come up with what happened when the police used tunnel vision on Steve and his family so quickly, either by arrogance and stupidity, or because they used the opportunity to frame him.
My assumption would be that they might have stumbled on to the car or something, and then at that time decided to use it to frame Steve when they knew she was heading out to his house to take photos.
Scenario A: Steve Avery committed the crime himself and everything else was coincidence.
Scenario B: Steve Avery committed the crime himself and the cops recovered the evidence elsewhere and planted it in a location that would more assuredly incriminate Steve Avery.
Scenario C: Someone else was able to kill Halbach, bury her on Avery's residence, and plant the evidence not only on his property but inside his very home without being seen or leaving behind evidence. (This would require an ungodly amount of foresight, planning and luck)
I think scenario A is what happened. Steve Avery already had a history of violence and his low IQ only strengthens the case for him to commit an act of murder, IMO. Why was there no blood? That's easy. The body was shot somewhere other than the garage and the bullet found was exactly what the defense alleged, it was contaminated with Halbach's DNA due to a lack of care from the analyst.
There are a million scenarios other than Steve Avery committed the crime himself.
My point was that if I had to guess based on watching the doc, and if the only piece of info we were given was that Avery 100% had nothing to do with it, and you said "so now what do you think?"...my most confident theory would be that the other guy Ryan Hillegas did it, and the police stumbled upon the remains...OR that another Avery family member or 2 did it, and they tried to frame Steve. At a later point, they were helped(probably unknowingly) by the police who planted key evidence to get a conviction.
My point about the jury was that you can give 700 scenarios of what happened, but it isn't their job to "pick a better one." Their only job is to decide if the state brought sufficient evidence to rule that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if other potential scenarios sound too fishy, you can't decide on a man's life based off that.
Therein lies the problem. Due to lack of evidence connecting him to the crime (her body wasn't buried on the property just some of her charred bones), they used Brendan's contrived story to say the crime scene was the trailer. When that fell apart it changed to the garage where the magic bullet was eventually discovered several months later.
The only physical evidence (that the documentary presents) is questionable at best. Very few prosecutors would pursue a case where you have no murder weapon and no crime scene.
Your contention that she was killed elsewhere is spot on but that isn't the case the prosecution brought forward.
The only physical evidence (that the documentary presents) is questionable at best. Very few prosecutors would pursue a case where you have no murder weapon and no crime scene.
Your contention that she was killed elsewhere is spot on but that isn't the case the prosecution brought forward.
What I'm saying is, I think he killed her. However, I'm less inclined to say that there was enough evidence to convict him.
Basically, Steve Avery had the clearest means, motive, and opportunity. Teresa was at the property while nobody else was around. Steven had a history of aggressive behavior. And he had a gun he wasn't supposed to own, along with a bonfire pit.
He also doesn't have much in the way of an alibi, and there's nothing that obviously rules him out as a suspect. All evidence of his innocence is circumstantial, and can usually be chalked up to him being a bit dim or the incompetence/over-eagerness of the police in investigating him.
Last to see her? Ok doesn't mean he's guilty. Violent history? Ok doesn't mean he killed her. gun? no alibi? blood in her car? Add all these together and there's a 99.9% chance he did it.
Basically, Steve Avery had the clearest means, motive, and opportunity. Teresa was at the property while nobody else was around. Steven had a history of aggressive behavior. And he had a gun he wasn't supposed to own, along with a bonfire pit.
He also doesn't have much in the way of an alibi, and there's nothing that obviously rules him out as a suspect. All evidence of his innocence is circumstantial, and can usually be chalked up to him being a bit dim or the incompetence/over-eagerness of the police in investigating him.
Last to see her? Ok doesn't mean he's guilty. Violent history? Ok doesn't mean he killed her. gun? no alibi? blood in her car? Add all these together and there's a 99.9% chance he did it.
Means and opportunity maybe so. You came up with a motive when asked, but that wasn't ever presented in the documentary as part of the trial. I don't think that's clear by any means. In fact I think it's the missing piece of whatever story the prosecution had.
Could he have killed her, sure. But I don't think the evidence presented (in the doc) points to that.
Could he have killed her, sure. But I don't think the evidence presented (in the doc) points to that.
So what does it point to? 2 cops knowingly framed an innocent man for the murder of an innocent woman over a civil court case?
Unfortunately, yes. I don't think the cops killed her. But their reputations and careers were on the line and I think they took the steps necessary to protect themselves and their families. I believe they saw it as an opportunity to make the Steve Avery problem "go away".
quote:I think the cops thought he was guilty. I don't think they knowingly framed someone that they thought was innocent. I think they thought he was guilty and planted evidence to ensure he was convicted.
So what does it point to? 2 cops knowingly framed an innocent man for the murder of an innocent woman over a civil court case?
Featured Stories
See All
69:56
19h ago
4.5k
11:45
18h ago
1.1k
Scouting Report: No. 13 Texas A&M vs. Texas
by Tom Schuberth
12:13
20h ago
8.4k
Seersucker Ag 2011
How Do the Ags Matchup with Texas (Basketball)?…..
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
12