quote:

---

So, would the scenario be that Edwards stalked Avery's place on Halloween waiting for somebody to show up and Teresa happened to be that unfortunate person? So he killed her in the afternoon and then did what? Continued to stalk the Avery place all night and saw that he was burning stuff, and so he decided to burn her himself and plant the bones later? Wouldn't he have then planted the car himself? Then that wouldn't explain why Colburn called in her plates early. If he ran into her car on Avery's lot, then I would think he would have just reported finding it there.

---

If he found the car on the property but was not authorized to be on the property, it would be an illegal search and the car and all evidence it leads to would be thrown out. Well, should be thrown out. I don't have faith in the judges in Wisconsin to make a proper ruling.

quote:

---

quote:

---

So, would the scenario be that Edwards stalked Avery's place on Halloween waiting for somebody to show up and Teresa happened to be that unfortunate person? So he killed her in the afternoon and then did what? Continued to stalk the Avery place all night and saw that he was burning stuff, and so he decided to burn her himself and plant the bones later? Wouldn't he have then planted the car himself? Then that wouldn't explain why Colburn called in her plates early. If he ran into her car on Avery's lot, then I would think he would have just reported finding it there.

---

If he found the car on the property but was not authorized to be on the property, it would be an illegal search and the car and all evidence it leads to would be thrown out. Well, should be thrown out. I don't have faith in the judges in Wisconsin to make a proper ruling.

---

I'm no lawyer, but if people in general were permitted to drive on his lot looking for parts, then I don't think a cop doing so would jeopardize the evidence. Opening the car and stuff would probably be a different story.

Just listened to Brendan's first interview (Nov 7). Its strange that he wasn't more of a suspect right off the bat. I wonder why the investigators waited until March (after the cousin went to school counselors and then told police that Brendan was involved) to further investigate Brendan.

The interview was before they found her remains in the fire pit or even knew she was dead.

He straight up lied to the investigators several times in the interview. First saying he never saw Theresa or her car when he got off the bus. Then when the investigators said the school bus driver saw her and that he would have had to walk right past where she was to get from school bus to his house, Brendan admits he did see her outside the van taking pictures. Then he says she left while he and Blaine were walking to their house from the school bus and that they even had to get out of the road to let her pass. Then he says he actually made it in to the house and she was still there and he watched her from the window for 5 minutes because he wanted to go ask Steve how much he was selling the van for. He says he watched her until she left, then after spending 5 minutes watching her, he decided not to go ask Steve anything because he thought Steve was probably tired.

This was right after the car was found on the Avery property, so the police ask Brendan if Steve ever went near her car and he says no. Then later, they tell Brendan that they are going to be getting fingerprints from the car and ask him if there would be any reason why Steve's or Brendan's fingerprints might be found. Brendan says that maybe Steves will be found because Steve told him he had touched the car.

Brendan also lies about his interaction with Steve that night, neglecting to mention the bonfire he helped Steve build. Instead he says he only saw Steve for a little bit after Steve came to his house and asked him to help move a jeep into the garage. He does mention a bonfire, but he says that there was supposed to be a bonfire Thursday night (Theresa went missing Monday), and that was the one he had invited friends to come to, but they didn't end up having the bonfire because Steven and Barb got into an argument about something.

Another strange moment from the interview was when the investigators ask Brendan how he thinks Theresa's family feels not knowing where she is, and he says something along the lines of, now they know how I felt when Steve was taken away for 18 years. Kind of a bizarre answer.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

So, would the scenario be that Edwards stalked Avery's place on Halloween waiting for somebody to show up and Teresa happened to be that unfortunate person? So he killed her in the afternoon and then did what? Continued to stalk the Avery place all night and saw that he was burning stuff, and so he decided to burn her himself and plant the bones later? Wouldn't he have then planted the car himself? Then that wouldn't explain why Colburn called in her plates early. If he ran into her car on Avery's lot, then I would think he would have just reported finding it there.

---

If he found the car on the property but was not authorized to be on the property, it would be an illegal search and the car and all evidence it leads to would be thrown out. Well, should be thrown out. I don't have faith in the judges in Wisconsin to make a proper ruling.

---

I'm no lawyer, but if people in general were permitted to drive on his lot looking for parts, then I don't think a cop doing so would jeopardize the evidence. Opening the car and stuff would probably be a different story.

---

If a cop was off duty and was looking for a T56, it might be a different story. But I don't think an on-duty cop can search a private business without permission.

I think that is also why they had a non-cop find it on the 5th after they called in the plates on the 3rd. They person that found it was a private investigator and knew police protocol. For instance, she called in just the last four digits of the VIN, not the entire 17 digits. Your average woman probably wouldn't know to do that.

forgot to post the link



they evidently interview him in a car with hazard lights on, so the blinker sound gets pretty annoying

quote:

---

quote:

---

Yea that guy is a lunatic, but the theory has credibility if they can somehow prove that it's the serial killer in the background of the documentary.

---

it's most likely Avery's dad.

---

I haven't had the time to go through the story on this dude....is there footage in the documentary that some are saying has him in it?

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Yea that guy is a lunatic, but the theory has credibility if they can somehow prove that it's the serial killer in the background of the documentary.

---

it's most likely Avery's dad.

---

I haven't had the time to go through the story on this dude....is there footage in the documentary that some are saying has him in it?

---

http://imgur.com/a/4Eu95

Gallery of everyone.

Avery's dad has a big beard. Probably not him.

the guy on the right is serial killer edward wayne edwards.

They're trying to say that's him in the background. Looks more like Steven's dad when he had his buzz cut going on.

Allen Avery around the time of the trial:





He had shorter hair than that at times too. The beard and interviews were not during the time of the trial. His look changed a lot throughout the doc.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

So, would the scenario be that Edwards stalked Avery's place on Halloween waiting for somebody to show up and Teresa happened to be that unfortunate person? So he killed her in the afternoon and then did what? Continued to stalk the Avery place all night and saw that he was burning stuff, and so he decided to burn her himself and plant the bones later? Wouldn't he have then planted the car himself? Then that wouldn't explain why Colburn called in her plates early. If he ran into her car on Avery's lot, then I would think he would have just reported finding it there.

---

If he found the car on the property but was not authorized to be on the property, it would be an illegal search and the car and all evidence it leads to would be thrown out. Well, should be thrown out. I don't have faith in the judges in Wisconsin to make a proper ruling.

---

I'm no lawyer, but if people in general were permitted to drive on his lot looking for parts, then I don't think a cop doing so would jeopardize the evidence. Opening the car and stuff would probably be a different story.

---

If a cop was off duty and was looking for a T56, it might be a different story. But I don't think an on-duty cop can search a private business without permission.

I think that is also why they had a non-cop find it on the 5th after they called in the plates on the 3rd. They person that found it was a private investigator and knew police protocol. For instance, she called in just the last four digits of the VIN, not the entire 17 digits. Your average woman probably wouldn't know to do that.

---

So say, Colburn secretly sneaks onto the property, see's the car, calls in the plates, and confirms it's her car. Then he could easily have left and gotten official permission to search the lot since Taresa was last seen at Avery's lot. In fact I'm sorta surprised that wasn't one of the first things done. Another thing, her car didn't have plates when it was found. So what plates would Colburn have called in if he had first seen it on Avery's property? It doesn't make sense for him to call in the plates, and then later for somebody to come back and remove the plates. I'd think they would have been removed before it got to the lot.

quote:

---

the guy on the right is serial killer edward wayne edwards.

They're trying to say that's him in the background. Looks more like Steven's dad when he had his buzz cut going on.

---

I bet if we could get a moving video shot, it would be more obvious.

If he wants to deny that he was calling in the plates while being in the car's presence, he could easily just remove the plates and throw it in a nearby trunk. Then he says "Well, see, I couldn't call in the plates because there were no plates on the car!"

I actually have a recollection of that shot and it's pretty obvious it was Steven's dad. If it's the shot in thinking of, they show him soon thereafter wearing those same clothes.

quote:

---

If he wants to deny that he was calling in the plates while being in the car's presence, he could easily just remove the plates and throw it in a nearby trunk. Then he says "Well, see, I couldn't call in the plates because there were no plates on the car!"

---

I think that if this was the case, then he wouldn't have been a deer in the headlights when asked about that in court. He would have had an excuse ready to go.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If he wants to deny that he was calling in the plates while being in the car's presence, he could easily just remove the plates and throw it in a nearby trunk. Then he says "Well, see, I couldn't call in the plates because there were no plates on the car!"

---

I think that if this was the case, then he wouldn't have been a deer in the headlights when asked about that in court. He would have had an excuse ready to go.

---

I don't think he is that smart. I don't think anyone from that little county is that smart.

I mean, he had like two years to come up for an excuse as to why he was calling in the plates and still couldn't do it. Clarke95 came up with a pretty good one on here "I had the plates written down, but forgot why I wrote them down, so I called the plates in. Someone had told me that was the missing girl's plates, but I forgot to write that part down." Done. All that needs to be said.

I think Colburn is like Roscoe from Dukes of Hazzard.

He's just a dumbass that got in the way early...in the 1985 case. And people within the dept realized he was an ally and could get him to do their bidding. He's too scared to stand up to them and too stupid to do what they ask without implicating himself and others.

One of the biggest questions still lingering for me was the obvious tampering of evidence (blood tube) from the 1985 case. It didn't appear that the state even attempted to defend or offer an explanation as to why the evidence seals were cut. Who would be in charge of making sure a county or municipal law enforcement is following proper procedures and preserving some chain of custody for evidence?

Wasn't Colborn's first interaction with Avery not from the 1985 case and investigation, but for working at the jail when receiving info in the 90's about Avery's possible innocence and he didn't submit that information up the chain?

My guess is that he probably called up Lenk or whoever and said he got some info, and they said "bury it. Avery's a ******* and deserves to be in jail" so he never followed through until Avery was about to get released years later, when he submitted it to cover his ass

quote:

---

Wasn't Colborn's first interaction with Avery not from the 1985 case and investigation, but for working at the jail when receiving info in the 90's about Avery's possible innocence and he didn't submit that information up the chain?

---

Yep. He did write a report about it almost a decade later, though.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

If he wants to deny that he was calling in the plates while being in the car's presence, he could easily just remove the plates and throw it in a nearby trunk. Then he says "Well, see, I couldn't call in the plates because there were no plates on the car!"

---

I think that if this was the case, then he wouldn't have been a deer in the headlights when asked about that in court. He would have had an excuse ready to go.

---

I don't think he is that smart. I don't think anyone from that little county is that smart.

I mean, he had like two years to come up for an excuse as to why he was calling in the plates and still couldn't do it. Clarke95 came up with a pretty good one on here "I had the plates written down, but forgot why I wrote them down, so I called the plates in. Someone had told me that was the missing girl's plates, but I forgot to write that part down." Done. All that needs to be said.

---

I don't think Clarke95's excuse would hold much water because of the timing. It happened to be in the few days after she went missing and before they found her car. If I wrote a license plate down 5 days ago, and saw it today, I would easily remember why I wrote it down. A year later, I probably wouldn't. Unless the claim is that he had 4 or 5 plates written down and forgot which was which. Then you would think he would list several plates though, not just that one. And you would think the prosecutor would have pointed that out in trial after the defense questioned him.

Also, I'm not sure what Colburn removing the plates would solve. It would make him have to go get a screw driver and take those off while on Avery's property. I'd think that in that situation, he'd want to get the hell out of there, so that he wouldn't implicate himself. If anything, him removing the plates after calling it in would implicate him in something shady. He would be better off leaving them on in this scenario. I can see him taking it off if he's storing the car or towing it somewhere himself. But not if it's already on Avery's property.

The only guy that it makes sense to remove the plates if done so on Avery's property is Avery himself. Anybody else who wanted to frame Avery would want to keep those plates on.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

If he wants to deny that he was calling in the plates while being in the car's presence, he could easily just remove the plates and throw it in a nearby trunk. Then he says "Well, see, I couldn't call in the plates because there were no plates on the car!"

---

I think that if this was the case, then he wouldn't have been a deer in the headlights when asked about that in court. He would have had an excuse ready to go.

---

I don't think he is that smart. I don't think anyone from that little county is that smart.

I mean, he had like two years to come up for an excuse as to why he was calling in the plates and still couldn't do it. Clarke95 came up with a pretty good one on here "I had the plates written down, but forgot why I wrote them down, so I called the plates in. Someone had told me that was the missing girl's plates, but I forgot to write that part down." Done. All that needs to be said.

---

I don't think Clarke95's excuse would hold much water because of the timing. It happened to be in the few days after she went missing and before they found her car. If I wrote a license plate down 5 days ago, and saw it today, I would easily remember why I wrote it down. A year later, I probably wouldn't. Unless the claim is that he had 4 or 5 plates written down and forgot which was which. Then you would think he would list several plates though, not just that one. And you would think the prosecutor would have pointed that out in trial after the defense questioned him.

Also, I'm not sure what Colburn removing the plates would solve. It would make him have to go get a screw driver and take those off while on Avery's property. If anything, him removing the plates after calling it in would implicate him in something shady. He would be better off leaving them on in this scenario. I can see him taking it off if he's storing the car or towing it somewhere himself.

---

It is better than the excuse he came up with, which is staring at the man asking questions and hoping he goes away.

You also went to A&M. He was a jail guard that slid into a job as a cop in the middle of no where. He clearly isn't that intelligent.

did anyone watch The Staircase when it aired years ago on Sundance? Apparently it's extremely well done.

You can watch the eps on their website now. Going to begin these. Also interesting, Mike Nifong was working on the prosecution on this case.

http://www.sundance.tv/watch-now/the-staircase/4687933180001/crime-or-accident

It's not a GREAT excuse...but it's better than "uhhhh. I don't know why I called in". Worst witness prep ever.

I'm curious why he wrote that report 10 years later. Why CREATE a paper trail for the report? Why put today's date - right after Avery was released- instead of back dating it if you're trying to cover your ass?

quote:

---

One of the biggest questions still lingering for me was the obvious tampering of evidence (blood tube) from the 1985 case. It didn't appear that the state even attempted to defend or offer an explanation as to why the evidence seals were cut. Who would be in charge of making sure a county or municipal law enforcement is following proper procedures and preserving some chain of custody for evidence?

---

Theres is an explanation, but obviously the documentary isn't going to get into that because it doesn't fit the filmmakers' agenda.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3400603/Key-Making-Murderer-evidence-disputed-Puncture-hole-blood-vial-allegedly-used-frame-Steven-Avery-standard-practice.html

quote:

---

The series makes no mention of the fact that piercing the seals of such tubes would be standard practice while filling them.

The defense team also presented evidence that the tape sealing the package was legitimately broken on June 19, 2002, by then-district attorney E. James Fitzgerald.

Fitzgerald and members of Avery's defense team recorded breaking into the package during Avery's appeal against his rape conviction while deciding what to send for additional testing.

---

quote:

---

I'm curious why he wrote that report 10 years later. Why CREATE a paper trail for the report? Why put today's date - right after Avery was released- instead of back dating it if you're trying to cover your ass?

---

I think he and his boss were trying to CYA in some way but had no clue how to play it.

quote:

---

It is better than the excuse he came up with, which is staring at the man asking questions and hoping he goes away.

You also went to A&M. He was a jail guard that slid into a job as a cop in the middle of no where. He clearly isn't that intelligent.

---

Clearly the "crapping his pants on the stand' was not a good moment for him. He was obviously caught off guard by that question. I just think that if he were thinking about the plates enough to remove them to cover up his for calling dispatch on Nov 3rd, then he would have thought of a good reason why he made that call in the first place.

I think he found the car off property right after she was reported missing (which is when the plates were called in). Took the plates off himself (not to cover up calling dispatch, but to reduce the chances of being seen towing it) and had the car towed to somewhere more secure. Then he and Lenk could go get the blood and plant it before towing it to Avery's lot. They would have done this late at night. Once they got there, they realized they forgot to put the plates back on, and wanted to get the hell out of there, so they threw the plates in the trunk of a car between the Rav4 and Steven's house and scurried off. That's my theory, at least.

quote:

---

quote:

---

It is better than the excuse he came up with, which is staring at the man asking questions and hoping he goes away.

You also went to A&M. He was a jail guard that slid into a job as a cop in the middle of no where. He clearly isn't that intelligent.

---

Clearly the "crapping his pants on the stand' was not a good moment for him. He was obviously caught off guard by that question. I just think that if he were thinking about the plates enough to remove them to cover up his for calling dispatch on Nov 3rd, then he would have thought of a good reason why he made that call in the first place.

I think he found the car off property right after she was reported missing (which is when the plates were called in). Took the plates off himself (not to cover up calling dispatch, but to reduce the chances of being seen towing it) and had the car towed to somewhere more secure. Then he and Lenk could go get the blood and plant it before towing it to Avery's lot. They would have done this late at night. Once they got there, they realized they forgot to put the plates back on, and wanted to get the hell out of there, so they threw the plates in the trunk of a car between the Rav4 and Steven's house and scurried off. That's my theory, at least.

---

All of its plausible to me and jobs with my theory that the initial burn spot was the rock quarry. Found her car there and moved it.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

It is better than the excuse he came up with, which is staring at the man asking questions and hoping he goes away.

You also went to A&M. He was a jail guard that slid into a job as a cop in the middle of no where. He clearly isn't that intelligent.

---

Clearly the "crapping his pants on the stand' was not a good moment for him. He was obviously caught off guard by that question. I just think that if he were thinking about the plates enough to remove them to cover up his for calling dispatch on Nov 3rd, then he would have thought of a good reason why he made that call in the first place.

I think he found the car off property right after she was reported missing (which is when the plates were called in). Took the plates off himself (not to cover up calling dispatch, but to reduce the chances of being seen towing it) and had the car towed to somewhere more secure. Then he and Lenk could go get the blood and plant it before towing it to Avery's lot. They would have done this late at night. Once they got there, they realized they forgot to put the plates back on, and wanted to get the hell out of there, so they threw the plates in the trunk of a car between the Rav4 and Steven's house and scurried off. That's my theory, at least.

---

All of its plausible to me and jobs with my theory that the initial burn spot was the rock quarry. Found her car there and moved it.

---

That is my theory too. That she was initially burned in the rock quarry and then moved using the burn barrel to Avery's burn pit. I think she was burned there some more by Steven Avery. I assume you think she was already completely burnt and her bones merely poured there from within the burn barrel by somebody else.

Bones left in the rock quarry had consistent burning with those found in the barrel and at Steven Avery's pit. That's why I think the bones were moved later after they had finished cooling.

quote:

---

Bones left in the rock quarry had consistent burning with those found in the barrel and at Steven Avery's pit. That's why I think the bones were moved later after they had finished cooling.

---

Consistent in what way? Burned about the same amount?

quote:

---

quote:

---

Bones left in the rock quarry had consistent burning with those found in the barrel and at Steven Avery's pit. That's why I think the bones were moved later after they had finished cooling.

---

Consistent in what way? Burned about the same amount?

---

way

The scientific terms from the forensic anthropologist are here a couple pages back, but yes burned the same amount.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Bones left in the rock quarry had consistent burning with those found in the barrel and at Steven Avery's pit. That's why I think the bones were moved later after they had finished cooling.

---

Consistent in what way? Burned about the same amount?

---

I thought they said the bones showed the same amount of burning, which means that if the bones were moved FROM the quarry, the bonfire didn't include them. If the bones were moved TO the quarry, then why only move some of them?

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Bones left in the rock quarry had consistent burning with those found in the barrel and at Steven Avery's pit. That's why I think the bones were moved later after they had finished cooling.

---

Consistent in what way? Burned about the same amount?

---

I thought they said the bones showed the same amount of burning, which means that if the bones were moved FROM the quarry, the bonfire didn't include them. If the bones were moved TO the quarry, then why only move some of them?

---

The forensic anthropologist testified that when bones show up in multiple places it shows that the body's been moved and that the place with the most bones are the place that they were moved to. The place with the least bones is almost always the primary site. The barrel had some bones but they were random from all over the body so it wasn't like a leg has been cut off and stuck in there because there were feet shoulders excetera

Dassey and Avery watching news reports about Teresa.