quote:

---

quote:

---

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?

---

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.

---

Yep. If we are to go down that road, the theory would be that they planted the evidence they did because it was more damning and would better ensure a guilty verdict of a guy they thought did it

So then who killed her if not Steve (Someone the evidence all points to) or the cops (someone who has some indirect benefit from)?

Assuming Steve didn't do it, whoever murdered her also buried the body where steve would be implicated. That requires remarkable foresight or quick wits.

[copy]
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? [/copy]

This is exactly what the evidence points to. Like has already been mentioned, I doubt the cops killed her. But it's pretty clear that someone else killed her and then the cops framed Avery, at least with the evidence we were shown in the documentary. Maybe they thought he actually killed her, or maybe not (they didn't even really try to find out), but that really doesn't matter.

I'm surprised to see you say he had motive. I thought that was a huge hole in the state's case and the documentary didn't mention it much. The fact that someone could have gotten mad about something and then killed someone isn't motive. If it was, then every single Person could have motive in every single case.

I usually don't think convicts are innocent (I think the serial guy from season one committed the murder) but I definitely think Avery was framed in this case. The only question is whether they framed a
Man who committed murder or framed an innocent man again (they more or less framed him in 1985).

The body wasn't buried. There were just bone fragments on the ground. It's possible the murderer or the cops moved the bone fragments.

There's no way the cops discovered the location of her body and moved the bones. It would be entirely unnecessary with the car and key.

Her body was moved by the murderer.

quote:

---

So then who killed her if not Steve (Someone the evidence all points to) or the cops (someone who has some indirect benefit from)?

Assuming Steve didn't do it, whoever murdered her also buried the body where steve would be implicated. That requires remarkable foresight or quick wits.

---

Who the **** knows, but it's not our job to know. The documentary is about the case as it pertains to Steve and Brendan. Not "who else would have done this?"

We don't even know everything presented in the trial, much less who all was there that day, who was in Teresa's life, what her old cell records were, what other Avery family was around that area and/or living on the land or staying on it, etc. We only know what the creators decided to show us.

Im sort of confused by your persistence on the who if not Steve. That wasn't the main point of the doc. And "who if not Steve" would be a different doc that would include a ton of investigating.

You're asking a question that takes so much more knowledge of the case and details than what we were given to even begin forming a theory.

Lol seriously? The entire purpose of the series was to postulate the question "is he innocent?" The follow up to that question, "if not him, then who?"

I'm facilitating a relevant discussion. I don't understand why you're so quick to defend him.

quote:

---

Who the **** knows, but it's not our job to know. The documentary is about the case as it pertains to Steve and Brendan. Not "who else would have done this?"

---

This is why I ultimately found Serial more entertaining. It did both.

quote:

---

Lol seriously? The entire purpose of the series was to postulate the question "is he guilty or not?" The follow up to that question, "if not him, then who?"

I'm facilitating a relevant discussion. I don't understand why you're so quick to defend him.

---

Fify.

I'm not defending anyone. The last 2 pages it just seems like you've been on a different track and I'm trying to figure it out.

There's a huge difference between not guilty and innocent. No one, even his lawyers with the best of intentions, were trying to prove he was innocent. Just that he was not guilty based of the evidence the state presented.

The whodunit part is obviously a natural question, but you won't ever truly get answers on that considering the documentary doesn't show everything and every aspect and we aren't up there going through l the evidence and the property, interviewing people etc.

quote:

---

Her body was burned elsewhere and dumped in Averys firepit. No other reasons for her bones to show up in a gravel pit miles away.

Theres a reason the cops didnt use a standard grid method when recovering the bones. It would look like they were dumped post burning.

---

Well, that's assuming the cops weren't simply negligent.

But yes, if the bones were dumped by the cops they wouldn't want to reveal that fact with the grid analysis. However, I'm saying the cops wouldn't need to dump her bones. Playing along with the frame angle, the cops already setup the car, key and bullet. That's more than enough to seal Averys guilt. Moving the body only risks them being seen during the dumping.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Who the **** knows, but it's not our job to know. The documentary is about the case as it pertains to Steve and Brendan. Not "who else would have done this?"

---

This is why I ultimately found Serial more entertaining. It did both.

---

I think I agree, and this is why I've been really interested in vultures "what was left out" articles because what soured me the most about serial was how flippant they were in so many areas of their series, and I think they were manipulating the story way more than MaM.

I keep waiting for this huge story to come out about the 2 girls who made this and some smoking gun they conveniently ignored to make a story, but so far there hasn't been much other than what you'd naturally expect

Their were bones found in 3 different locations. Somebody at some point moved bones. Maybe it was Avery but why do that if you were going to burn her in the fire pit? Why not just burn the entire body at the same location?

quote:

---

quote:

---

Lol seriously? The entire purpose of the series was to postulate the question "is he guilty or not?" The follow up to that question, "if not him, then who?"

I'm facilitating a relevant discussion. I don't understand why you're so quick to defend him.

---

Fify.

I'm not defending anyone. The last 2 pages it just seems like you've been on a different track and I'm trying to figure it out.

There's a huge difference between not guilty and innocent. No one, even his lawyers with the best of intentions, were trying to prove he was innocent. Just that he was not guilty based of the evidence the state presented.

The whodunit part is obviously a natural question, but you won't ever truly get answers on that considering the documentary doesn't show everything and every aspect and we aren't up there going through l the evidence and the property, interviewing people etc.

---

Lol clearly I won't ever know, I had no delusions otherwise. It's a question that can be thought out however and we can draw our own conclusions.

You're getting to hung up on my opinion and willingness to discuss.

I'm not hung up on your opinion or willingness to discuss. As I said, you were on a different track as I was reading your responses and I was just trying to figure it out. Not wrong right, bad or good. Was just trying to make sense of where you were going

Im not sure I know your opinion, and I know you don't know mine because I don't think I've stated it. But you're free to ask.

[copy] But yes, if the bones were dumped by the cops they wouldn't want to reveal that fact with the grid analysis. However, I'm saying the cops wouldn't need to dump her bones. Playing along with the frame angle, the cops already setup the car, key and bullet. That's more than enough to seal Averys guilt. Moving the body only risks them being seen during the dumping. [/copy]

The bones were found before the car, key and bulllet so they were most likely moved there before the cAr and bulllet were planted. You seem to think the cops already had the car and key and bullet as evidence and then decided to add the bones to the evidence. That's not how it played out. They added the car and key and bullet to the bones, maybe bc they thought it might be discovered that the bones had been moved.

When it was discovered is irrelevant to the fact it was already done. The car, key and bullet were naturally harder to find and would naturally be found later.

I've already stated my opinion. I think he did it and I think the negligence of the police officers caused the case to be more complicated than it should have been.

Gotcha.

quote:

---

In reply to mavsfan4ever
When it was discovered is irrelevant to the fact it was already done. The car, key and bullet were naturally harder to find and would naturally be found later.

---

The key and bullet were definitely planted after the bones. They were almost certainly planted near the time they were found. If the key was planted earlier, it would have been found earlier.

I guess you could argue that the car was planted at the same time as the bones but it wasn't before.

She looked like she would.

quote:

---

I can't say for certain that Avery didn't kill her.

But I can say for certain that the local legal system in that area is crooked as ****.

---

Fify. It spanned 2 counties

Speaking of who done it, the judge ruled out the possibility of the defense to even point put some one other than Steven or Brendan. If they could I think they would've been able to point to the ex boyfriend as a possibility.

quote:

---

Speaking of who done it, the judge ruled out the possibility of the defense to even point put some one other than Steven or Brendan. If they could I think they would've been able to point to the ex boyfriend as a possibility.

---

Exactly. And I'm not sure they were even able to openly theorize the police might have planted evidence to ensure a verdict. They had to imply it by asking the questions of the police officers and then say "someone"

Man I saw this last week and need to RE watch it, haha

One episode in and I'm hooked. What a story.

How did HBO turn this down?

quote:

---

quote:

---

I can't say for certain that Avery didn't kill her.

But I can say for certain that the local legal system in that area is crooked as ****.

---

Fify. It spanned 2 counties

---

**** like this goes down across the country.... Maybe not the Avery frame job, but the coerced confession of the poor dummy is detective 101....

Careers are made based on convictions, not justice.....

It's a ****ed up country....

Just finished. Amazing and stunning is all I can say. The arrogance & smugness of the people that are supposed to represent the people/state is disgusting. Poor & dumb is tough to overcome even with good defense lawyers. You see what the court appointed one gets you.

quote:

---

Was there anyone who was a more obvious worm than the first court appointed attorney? All the way down to his haircut, that guy just came off as cheap, dirty, and an opportunist. He took the case die headlines and wanted a quick plea to not have to try

---

It's the system.... Public defenders chew & spit these poor shmucks out to unopposed DA's for personal gain.....

This has been going on forever...

This documentary exposes a micro fraction of the system at large

yeah...everything about that guy (looks/mannerisms) was extremely punchable and that was before he revealed his character.