Author Topic: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two  (Read 7266 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #285 on: November 12, 2018, 12:54:AM »
Here are some more of Steven Avery's letters from jail.








"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #286 on: November 12, 2018, 12:56:AM »
Here are some more of Steven Avery's letters from jail.


Threatening to kill people and kill their children also!
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #287 on: November 12, 2018, 12:01:PM »
Threatening to kill people and kill their children also!

I Wouldn’t want this guy as my next door neighbor.
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23428
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #288 on: November 12, 2018, 05:05:PM »
I Wouldn’t want this guy as my next door neighbor.

Me either - but I wouldn't want several people as neighbours. Many people make threats - it doesn't mean they would go ahead and act on them. Avery had never threatened Teresa and he surely would have known he would be a suspect - but then again, perhaps he really is that much of a moron. I think he is most likely guilty BUT (like Bamber), I feel that some of it was engineered and that Brendan is not a reliable witness because of the methods employed to interrogate him.

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #289 on: November 14, 2018, 03:59:PM »
Me either - but I wouldn't want several people as neighbours. Many people make threats - it doesn't mean they would go ahead and act on them. Avery had never threatened Teresa and he surely would have known he would be a suspect - but then again, perhaps he really is that much of a moron. I think he is most likely guilty BUT (like Bamber), I feel that some of it was engineered and that Brendan is not a reliable witness because of the methods employed to interrogate him.


Why on earth would they "engineer" evidence? There is so much why bother? You could take half the evidence away and still a jury would find him guilty. (Unlike Bamber)

Also there are many witnesses that have no motive to lie. (Unlike Bamber)


According to Rachel Haggs who worked with Teresa at Auto Trader

"RACHEL went on to indicate that she had learned STEVEN AVERY had made inappropriate comments to TERESA in the past and further had come out of the house on a previous occasion wearing only a towel."

According to Dawn Pliszka who also worked with Teresa at AutoTrader

"DAWN did tell me TERESA had confided in her about STEVEN AVERY on one prior occasion. She states STEVEN had come out of the house wearing nothing but a towel one time and TERESA was somewhat concerned by that."


photo studio owner who worked with Teresa.

"He said TERESA told him she had some problems with male clients over the summer after the photo shoot; and while filling out paperwork and taking payment, she often was invited into the homes. He said TERESA said some males become verbally or physically flirtatious offering her drinks, etc. PEARCE said that he had warned her to be careful, being alone and often times in rural areas."


According to a Plumber named Michael Osmumso.

"STEVEN stated people go missing all the time and this girl may "have left for Mexico.""

Why would Steven be telling people she may have left for Mexico? ...hhhhhm
« Last Edit: November 14, 2018, 04:00:PM by David1819 »
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
« Last Edit: November 14, 2018, 04:33:PM by David1819 »
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23428
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #291 on: November 14, 2018, 07:40:PM »

Why on earth would they "engineer" evidence? There is so much why bother? You could take half the evidence away and still a jury would find him guilty. (Unlike Bamber)

Also there are many witnesses that have no motive to lie. (Unlike Bamber)


According to Rachel Haggs who worked with Teresa at Auto Trader

"RACHEL went on to indicate that she had learned STEVEN AVERY had made inappropriate comments to TERESA in the past and further had come out of the house on a previous occasion wearing only a towel."

According to Dawn Pliszka who also worked with Teresa at AutoTrader

"DAWN did tell me TERESA had confided in her about STEVEN AVERY on one prior occasion. She states STEVEN had come out of the house wearing nothing but a towel one time and TERESA was somewhat concerned by that."


photo studio owner who worked with Teresa.

"He said TERESA told him she had some problems with male clients over the summer after the photo shoot; and while filling out paperwork and taking payment, she often was invited into the homes. He said TERESA said some males become verbally or physically flirtatious offering her drinks, etc. PEARCE said that he had warned her to be careful, being alone and often times in rural areas."


According to a Plumber named Michael Osmumso.

"STEVEN stated people go missing all the time and this girl may "have left for Mexico.""

Why would Steven be telling people she may have left for Mexico? ...hhhhhm

It's only genuine evidence if it's not engineered and you have been brain washed re: Bamber. I'm not suggesting Avery is innocent just that the police tampered with the evidence and that Brendan's testimony should never have been allowed. You have to invest an outlandish theory to explain why so many witnesses would lie in the Bamber case - including how an old farmer was able to bully EP into fitting up and innocent Jeremy.

How is Avery wearing a towel evidence that he killed her?

According to a plumber? Isn't that hearsay? Hmmmmm?

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23428

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #293 on: November 14, 2018, 08:33:PM »
I'm not suggesting Avery is innocent.

Its rather ridiculous to suggest as you now know.

just that the police tampered with the evidence

What evidence and why?

and that Brendan's testimony should never have been allowed.

Brendan Dassey never testified at Avery's trial. The Jury were never told about Brendan Dassey because the prosecution could not even bring him up. Because -

The Sixth Amendment provides that a person accused of a crime has the right to confront a witness against him or her in a criminal action. As well as the right to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses.


You have to invest an outlandish theory to explain why so many witnesses would lie in the Bamber case -including how an old farmer was able to bully EP into fitting up and innocent Jeremy.

Outlandish? The conspiracy needed for Avery being innocent is bigger than Mikes theory of police shooting Sheila.

How is Avery wearing a towel evidence that he killed her?

It has plenty of pervy rapey undertones to it you must admit  ;D

According to a plumber? Isn't that hearsay? Hmmmmm?

No because it came from Steven.


"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23428
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #294 on: November 14, 2018, 10:10:PM »


Its rather ridiculous to suggest as you now know. - No more ridiculous than believing Bamber is innocent.

What evidence and why? The key for starters

Brendan Dassey never testified at Avery's trial. The Jury were never told about Brendan Dassey because the prosecution could not even bring him up. Because -tood trial![/color]

The Sixth Amendment provides that a person accused of a crime has the right to confront a witness against him or her in a criminal action. As well as the right to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses.


Outlandish? The conspiracy needed for Avery being innocent is bigger than Mikes theory of police shooting Sheila.

It has plenty of pervy rapey undertones to it you must admit  ;D

No because it came from Steven.

Its rather ridiculous to suggest as you now know.

What evidence and why?

Brendan Dassey never testified at Avery's trial. The Jury were never told about Brendan Dassey because the prosecution could not even bring him up. Because -

The Sixth Amendment provides that a person accused of a crime has the right to confront a witness against him or her in a criminal action. As well as the right to cross-examine the prosecution's witnesses.

I never said it was used at Avery's trial but it was used to convict Dassey. Had Dassey given his evidence it would have been ripped to shreds because he wouldn't have remembered what he was talked into saying.


Outlandish? The conspiracy needed for Avery being innocent is bigger than Mikes theory of police shooting Sheila. Rubbish!

It has plenty of pervy rapey undertones to it you must admit  ;D - Like the Youtube video you posted above cept the guy in your video was pretty graphic and you thought THAT was funny!

No because it came from Steven. That's not what your post stated, you said that according to the plumber Avery said she might have gone to Mexico. So, did Avery actually say it or did the plumber say he said it? Not that it makes him a killer even if he did say it


Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #295 on: November 17, 2018, 04:25:PM »
And so....

What is everybodies position on this case now? I think Indigo and Caroline have come to thier senses now.

What about Buddy and Jon? or are they still in Netflix fantasy world?
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23428
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #296 on: November 17, 2018, 06:06:PM »
And so....

What is everybodies position on this case now? I think Indigo and Caroline have come to thier senses now.

What about Buddy and Jon? or are they still in Netflix fantasy world?

Come to my senses about what? The thread (for the hundredth time) isn't about guilt or innocence! Why can't you understand that? Maybe one day you will come to yours, but nit today!

Offline David1819

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6497
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #297 on: November 17, 2018, 06:36:PM »
Come to my senses about what? The thread (for the hundredth time) isn't about guilt or innocence! Why can't you understand that? Maybe one day you will come to yours, but nit today!

What’s it about then?
"A theory without facts is fantasy"

Offline Caroline

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 23428
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #298 on: November 17, 2018, 11:16:PM »
What’s it about then?

Like we said from the beginning of the thread 'watch the f'ing series'!


Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14192
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
« Reply #299 on: November 18, 2018, 01:53:PM »
if the dna ws tested correctly in the first place then a retest will see eactly the same thing as the first test so why does the proscution just not agrea to the defence reuest for a retest of the dna.