Jeremy Bamber Forum

OTHER HIGH PROFILE CASES => Other high profile cases => Topic started by: Caroline on October 19, 2018, 10:23:PM

Title: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 19, 2018, 10:23:PM
Just started watching this - just making a thread for comments.

If Avery is innocent, then Bobby Dassey is surely involved?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 20, 2018, 11:59:AM
Just started watching this - just making a thread for comments.

If Avery is innocent, then Bobby Dassey is surely involved?

There is a lot of evidence against Avery that the show does not mention. For example

1. Avery kept requesting from Auto Trader specifically that they send Teresa Halbach down to take photos of cars.  Halbach once describes Avery meeting her almost naked (wearing just a towel)

2. Teresa only had two weeks left at this job. She was leaving because she didnt like it. Probably due the point I raised above.

3. In Brendan Dasseys confession. He desribes using some BDSM type restraints while he and avery raped her. Avery actually owned what Dassey desribed.

4. In Brendan Dasseys confession. He mentions he helped Avery clean up the floor of the crime scene with bleach. The jeans that Brendan Dassey admits wearing on the night in question were covered in bleach stains!

5. The bullet recovered from Averys garage that had the victims DNA on it. Was fired from Averys gun that he kept above his bed.

6. Steven Avery's blood was found INSIDE the victims car near the ignition. Avery had a cut finger on the day in question.

7. Avery at first denied having a bonfire on the night. Later admitted that he did have a bonfire. Were the victims charred remains were.  ::)

And so. Even the most dedicated of Avery supporters conceed that Avery and Brendan were cleaning the garage with bleach and having a bonfire that night. They just cant admit the obvious implications of that.

Lets face it. An unprejudiced documentary would be about a creepy guy killing an autotrader employee that he became obsessed with. That is not going to get much viewers.

I found the first series to be emotionally manipulative and manipulative all over for the sake of getting veiwers.  I have no plan to watch the second for that reason :-\
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 20, 2018, 12:52:PM
dassey is almost certanly innocent im not sure about avery though.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 20, 2018, 01:08:PM
dassey is almost certanly innocent im not sure about avery though.


They cant both be innocent. Brendan Dassey does not deny helping Avery clean the garage with bleach and having a bonfire that night.


The only way he can innocent is if he was too stupid to work out what was happening.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 20, 2018, 01:13:PM

They cant both be innocent. Brendan Dassey does not deny helping Avery clean the garage with bleach and having a bonfire that night.


The only way he can innocent is if he was too stupid to work out what was happening.

what evdence do they have aginst dacy other than a corced confession nothing that i can see.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 20, 2018, 02:32:PM
There is a lot of evidence against Avery that the show does not mention. For example

1. Avery kept requesting from Auto Trader specifically that they send Teresa Halbach down to take photos of cars.  Halbach once describes Avery meeting her almost naked (wearing just a towel)

2. Teresa only had two weeks left at this job. She was leaving because she didnt like it. Probably due the point I raised above.

3. In Brendan Dasseys confession. He desribes using some BDSM type restraints while he and avery raped her. Avery actually owned what Dassey desribed.

4. In Brendan Dasseys confession. He mentions he helped Avery clean up the floor of the crime scene with bleach. The jeans that Brendan Dassey admits wearing on the night in question were covered in bleach stains!

5. The bullet recovered from Averys garage that had the victims DNA on it. Was fired from Averys gun that he kept above his bed.

6. Steven Avery's blood was found INSIDE the victims car near the ignition. Avery had a cut finger on the day in question.

7. Avery at first denied having a bonfire on the night. Later admitted that he did have a bonfire. Were the victims charred remains were.  ::)

And so. Even the most dedicated of Avery supporters conceed that Avery and Brendan were cleaning the garage with bleach and having a bonfire that night. They just cant admit the obvious implications of that.

Lets face it. An unprejudiced documentary would be about a creepy guy killing an autotrader employee that he became obsessed with. That is not going to get much viewers.

I found the first series to be emotionally manipulative and manipulative all over for the sake of getting veiwers.  I have no plan to watch the second for that reason :-\

Most of what you have described above has been explained in the new series. His new lawyer is looking at the science and recreating the scene. I haven't made my mind up about guilt or innocence but if he is innocent, Dassey's brother would certainly be a suspect.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 20, 2018, 05:24:PM
Most of what you have described above has been explained in the new series. His new lawyer is looking at the science and recreating the scene. I haven't made my mind up about guilt or innocence but if he is innocent, Dassey's brother would certainly be a suspect.

Explained how?

He doesn’t have a new lawyer. Kathrine Zellner has been representing him for almost three years now. She has said a lot but never proved anything. She once tried to argue the burned remains is not Theresa despite her burned belongings being found among the bones. To me it’s just throwing mud and see what sticks.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 20, 2018, 06:04:PM
what evdence do they have aginst dacy other than a corced confession nothing that i can see.

Have you actually read what Brendan said? or just running with what you've been told?

Brendan has an IQ below 70 and the information he gave matched the scene and was very consistent with everything.

I found the part bellow rather interesting.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 20, 2018, 08:02:PM
Have you actually read what Brendan said? or just running with what you've been told?

Brendan has an IQ below 70 and the information he gave matched the scene and was very consistent with everything.

I found the part bellow rather interesting.

that means abslutly nothing the police could of fed him that info.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 20, 2018, 08:20:PM
that means abslutly nothing the police could of fed him that info.


Or he witnessed the murder and helped his uncle dispose of the body.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Zoso on October 20, 2018, 11:46:PM
Explained how?

He doesn’t have a new lawyer. Kathrine Zellner has been representing him for almost three years now. She has said a lot but never proved anything. She once tried to argue the burned remains is not Theresa despite her burned belongings being found among the bones. To me it’s just throwing mud and see what sticks.

Watch it
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on October 21, 2018, 12:55:PM
There is a lot of evidence against Avery that the show does not mention. For example

1. Avery kept requesting from Auto Trader specifically that they send Teresa Halbach down to take photos of cars.  Halbach once describes Avery meeting her almost naked (wearing just a towel) not true see documents and see season 2

2. Teresa only had two weeks left at this job. She was leaving because she didnt like it. Probably due the point I raised above. Not true as above

3. In Brendan Dasseys confession. He desribes using some BDSM type restraints while he and avery raped her. Avery actually owned what Dassey desribed. Did you see the dataset interview and the techniques they used are now being used to show police how not to interview a mentally challenged person etc etc

4. In Brendan Dasseys confession. He mentions he helped Avery clean up the floor of the crime scene with bleach. The jeans that Brendan Dassey admits wearing on the night in question were covered in bleach stains! No not covered. No blood not a speck where someone was supposed to have been shot in the head twice and who had been raped and throat cut beforehand . Dust still everywhere 

5. The bullet recovered from Averys garage that had the victims DNA on it. Was fired from Averys gun that he kept above his bed. It was planted you will see how in season 2

6. Steven Avery's blood was found INSIDE the victims car near the ignition. Avery had a cut finger on the day in question. Season 2

7. Avery at first denied having a bonfire on the night. Later admitted that he did have a bonfire. Were the victims charred remains were.  ::) the bones were found on 3 different locations 2 of them not on the Avery property. They were clearly planted as she was killed off his property. Season 2 explains this

And so. Even the most dedicated of Avery supporters conceed that Avery and Brendan were cleaning the garage with bleach and having a bonfire that night. They just cant admit the obvious implications of that.

Lets face it. An unprejudiced documentary would be about a creepy guy killing an autotrader employee that he became obsessed with. That is not going to get much viewers.

I found the first series to be emotionally manipulative and manipulative all over for the sake of getting veiwers.  I have no plan to watch the second for that reason :-\

Just had to log back in for this, David please watch the second season before making claims that are false. You seem to be reading stuff in papers etc instead of reading the documents. He and Brendan are innocent. In season 2 you will see what corruption there is .
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on October 21, 2018, 12:57:PM
Most of what you have described above has been explained in the new series. His new lawyer is looking at the science and recreating the scene. I haven't made my mind up about guilt or innocence but if he is innocent, Dassey's brother would certainly be a suspect.

Hi Caroline hope you’re well.
have you watched both one and season 2. Im on board with innocence
Both are compelling and good viewing
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 21, 2018, 02:03:PM
Just had to log back in for this, David please watch the second season before making claims that are false. You seem to be reading stuff in papers etc instead of reading the documents. He and Brendan are innocent. In season 2 you will see what corruption there is .

I finished watching the 1st series thinking Avery was innocent then read into the documents you suggest I read and realised the show was a load of misleading crap.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 21, 2018, 05:13:PM
the thing i find strangest about this case is avery faling to crush the victems car seeing as his buisnes is crushing.

now i know hes not exactly a clever man but surely even he would think to do that.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 21, 2018, 06:30:PM
Hi Caroline hope you’re well.
have you watched both one and season 2. Im on board with innocence
Both are compelling and good viewing

Hi Notsure :) - Yes, I did watch the first series and was kind of left with more questions than answers. However, Kathleen Zellner is trying to recreate the crime scene to see if what was actually found on the day, is plausible - which is interesting (especially when they tried to recreate the blood stain near the ignition and couldn't). The problem with trying to recreate things though is that you're not using the actual evidence or the same individuals. There may have been something unique about the way Avery tried to start the car which they simply can't recreate. I don't have a guilty/innocent opinion at the moment but I think Bobby Dassey's evidence is dodgy.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on October 21, 2018, 06:51:PM
Yes I can’t understand why he won’t talk if he’s innocent. . The whole thing is a complete mess. Zellner is trying to test the evidence which is a good thing. She needs to get her hands on the Rav 4 and they have been very reluctant to let her have any evidence at all. I think Kratz is a narcissist. What a wholly!

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 22, 2018, 01:45:PM
Hi Notsure :) - Yes, I did watch the first series and was kind of left with more questions than answers. However, Kathleen Zellner is trying to recreate the crime scene to see if what was actually found on the day, is plausible - which is interesting (especially when they tried to recreate the blood stain near the ignition and couldn't). The problem with trying to recreate things though is that you're not using the actual evidence or the same individuals. There may have been something unique about the way Avery tried to start the car which they simply can't recreate. I don't have a guilty/innocent opinion at the moment but I think Bobby Dassey's evidence is dodgy.

The prosecution already recreated the crime scene at his murder trial. Kathleen Zellner is selling a dead horse.

Here are all of Steven Avery's contradictory statements -

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8cx6xz/bad_luck_steve_contradictions/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8cx6xz/bad_luck_steve_contradictions/)


Well done to whoever put that together.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 22, 2018, 02:29:PM
the problem is the avery to be innocent wouldent that reuire someone to have killed the victem just to frame him im not saying that couldent happen but  it sounds a tad unlikely.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 22, 2018, 03:51:PM
The prosecution already recreated the crime scene at his murder trial. Kathleen Zellner is selling a dead horse.

Here are all of Steven Avery's contradictory statements -

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8cx6xz/bad_luck_steve_contradictions/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/8cx6xz/bad_luck_steve_contradictions/)


Well done to whoever put that together.

You really need to watch series 2 , this thread is about discussing what is in that show and you can't really contribute properly unless you have seen it imo i'm sure you will enjoy it any true crime buff would

I binge watched it over the weekend,
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 22, 2018, 03:51:PM
On the blood disconnect, could it be that blood was left after a clean up?

I am having some difficulty getting my head round the blood being obtained from the sink

1. this meant someone needed to have known SA had bled in that sink AND not cleaned it up
2. they would have had to then go get it when it was still wet , yet there was wet AND dry FLAKES found in the car that belonged to SA
3. SA saw tail lights and head lights yet didn't think to go check his trailer

The Computer is described as the Dassey computer, and mention is made of Bobbie having the most access to the computer but also it is stated that Brendan also had access although not as much, could he have seen the images? is that where the rape and torture description in his confession came from?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 22, 2018, 03:53:PM
Hi Notsure :) - Yes, I did watch the first series and was kind of left with more questions than answers. However, Kathleen Zellner is trying to recreate the crime scene to see if what was actually found on the day, is plausible - which is interesting (especially when they tried to recreate the blood stain near the ignition and couldn't). The problem with trying to recreate things though is that you're not using the actual evidence or the same individuals. There may have been something unique about the way Avery tried to start the car which they simply can't recreate. I don't have a guilty/innocent opinion at the moment but I think Bobby Dassey's evidence is dodgy.

I think Kathleen Zeller is a first class lawyer, her work on this case is impressive, why the heck the original defence team didnt hire a ballistics and blood splatter expert i do not know!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 22, 2018, 03:54:PM
Just started watching this - just making a thread for comments.

If Avery is innocent, then Bobby Dassey is surely involved?

I suspect Bobby said in evidence that he saw TH go into SA trailer in return for the cops not prosecuting him for the filth he had on his computer, as far as i am aware he was never prosecuted for that, makes you wonder why doesn't it
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 22, 2018, 03:55:PM
I keep coming back to the fact that if SA is innocent he is the most unluckiest guy ever, twice being the miscarriage of justice , does anyone know of any other case like that in the world? I don't
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 22, 2018, 03:56:PM
Hi Notsure :) - Yes, I did watch the first series and was kind of left with more questions than answers. However, Kathleen Zellner is trying to recreate the crime scene to see if what was actually found on the day, is plausible - which is interesting (especially when they tried to recreate the blood stain near the ignition and couldn't). The problem with trying to recreate things though is that you're not using the actual evidence or the same individuals. There may have been something unique about the way Avery tried to start the car which they simply can't recreate. I don't have a guilty/innocent opinion at the moment but I think Bobby Dassey's evidence is dodgy.

I thought that mark on the dash board was not dissimillar to the shape of the key fob, but i am not clear if any of SA's blood was found on it, i think it might have swung on the key and left a mark on the dashboard having been covering in SA's blood from it dripping down from his open cut.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 22, 2018, 03:59:PM

Or he witnessed the murder and helped his uncle dispose of the body.

the police did feed him the information, its clear in the confession they did.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 22, 2018, 07:09:PM
You really need to watch series 2 , this thread is about discussing what is in that show and you can't really contribute properly unless you have seen it imo i'm sure you will enjoy it any true crime buff would

I binge watched it over the weekend,

Thanks Indigo, I specifically wrote 'season 2' to distinguish it from the other thread.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 22, 2018, 07:19:PM
On the blood disconnect, could it be that blood was left after a clean up?

I am having some difficulty getting my head round the blood being obtained from the sink

1. this meant someone needed to have known SA had bled in that sink AND not cleaned it up
2. they would have had to then go get it when it was still wet , yet there was wet AND dry FLAKES found in the car that belonged to SA
3. SA saw tail lights and head lights yet didn't think to go check his trailer

The Computer is described as the Dassey computer, and mention is made of Bobbie having the most access to the computer but also it is stated that Brendan also had access although not as much, could he have seen the images? is that where the rape and torture description in his confession came from?

I agree about the sink. The only people who could have known about his cut were his family and relatives and I don't think any one of those would think about using a dropper to frame him. It's possible that the police turned up at his trailer while he was out but that's pretty far fetched.

Like I said, not comfortable with Bobby Dassey.

I am only up to episode 5 - I'll watch some later.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 22, 2018, 09:40:PM
I agree about the sink. The only people who could have known about his cut were his family and relatives and I don't think any one of those would think about using a dropper to frame him. It's possible that the police turned up at his trailer while he was out but that's pretty far fetched.

Like I said, not comfortable with Bobby Dassey.

I am only up to episode 5 - I'll watch some later.

be interested to hear your thoughts when you've watched it all.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 22, 2018, 10:19:PM
the police did feed him the information, its clear in the confession they did.

Watch it and listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYOaIDxirHE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYOaIDxirHE)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJt6j5E1y_s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJt6j5E1y_s)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 22, 2018, 11:50:PM
Watch it and listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYOaIDxirHE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYOaIDxirHE)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJt6j5E1y_s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJt6j5E1y_s)

Where are the interviews previous this this one? - I have only listened to half of the first link and can't believe you don't think he's being manipulated!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 23, 2018, 02:54:AM
Where are the interviews previous this this one? - I have only listened to half of the first link and can't believe you don't think he's being manipulated!

After describing how he raped Teressa and helped Avery kill her.

Police: Why did you take part in it?

BD: I dunno

Police: I'm giving you an oportunity to tell us why you did this 

--long pause--

Police: Everyone has a reason for doing things. What was your reason for this?

BD: To see how it felt

Police: To see how what felt?

BD: Sex




This is not a coerced confession.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 23, 2018, 08:33:AM
After describing how he raped Teressa and helped Avery kill her.

Police: Why did you take part in it?

BD: I dunno

Police: I'm giving you an oportunity to tell us why you did this 

--long pause--

Police: Everyone has a reason for doing things. What was your reason for this?

BD: To see how it felt

Police: To see how what felt?

BD: Sex




This is not a coerced confession.

Yes it is coerced , you cannot pick and choose the odd phrase in isolation you need to see the whole thing and the fact they kept telling him he hadn’t told them everything . There was no evidence whatsoever that she was raped.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 23, 2018, 08:34:AM
Watch it and listen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYOaIDxirHE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYOaIDxirHE)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJt6j5E1y_s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJt6j5E1y_s)

Read judge deffin’s judgement I’m on a train atm can’t find the link but I will do
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 23, 2018, 12:49:PM
After describing how he raped Teressa and helped Avery kill her.

Police: Why did you take part in it?

BD: I dunno

Police: I'm giving you an oportunity to tell us why you did this 

--long pause--

Police: Everyone has a reason for doing things. What was your reason for this?

BD: To see how it felt

Police: To see how what felt?

BD: Sex




This is not a coerced confession.

Of course it is ........ also, you didn't post his initial interview - you need to hear the whole thing instead of cherry picking sections in isolation.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 23, 2018, 07:14:PM
Of course it is ........ also, you didn't post his initial interview - you need to hear the whole thing instead of cherry picking sections in isolation.

If its a coerced confession then why did Brendan make up the rape? The investigators had no idea of a rape until Brendan flat out told them the details.  ::)

In his cross examination he denies having gone to his uncles and claims that he made it all up. When asked why he told the police there was blood in the garage he answered because it was the color red. Here he slips up big time because he is now saying he was at his uncles garage and saw the red stuff on the floor.  ::)

Q: You made that all up?
A: Yes.
Q: You just happened to know Teresa's words?
A: No.
Q: How do you know what she said?
A: I made it up.
A: You made it up?
A: Yes.
Q: You made up the part that you raped her?
A: Yes.
Q: You made up the part that she told you not to do it?
A: Yes.
Q: To do the right thing?
A: Yes.
Q: And to tell your uncle not to do it?
A: Yes.
Q: You made that up?
A: Yes.

Q: Now, Mr. Dassey, didn't you tell your mother in a phone call on May 13 that you had gone over to  your Uncle Steven's after school and  she came home?
A: Yes.
Q: You did?
A: Yes.
Q: And, again, on May 15, the first tape we played, she's asking you why you didn't tell her. Why didn't you?
A: Because it didn't happen.
Q: Why did you tell her you went over there, sir?
A: I don't know.
Q: You lied to your mother as well?
A: Yes
Q: You've heard Detective Wiegert testify on Friday and Saturday morning; right?
A: Yes.
Q: And he said he had no idea that there was a sexual assault?
A: Yes.
Q: You were the one who brought up the fact of a sexual assault; right?
A: Yes.
Q: You brought up the rape; right?
A: Yes.
Q: You went over to your uncle's cabin because you knew you were going to have sex; right?
A: No.
Q: Why did you tell the police that your Uncle Steven was proud of you for what you had done?
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you say that you sexually assaulted her
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you say you put your penis in her for five minutes?
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you tell the police that you thought it was blood in the garage?
A: Because it was the color of red.
Q: Because it was the color of red?
A: Yeah


LOL
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 23, 2018, 07:54:PM
If its a coerced confession then why did Brendan make up the rape? The investigators had no idea of a rape until Brendan flat out told them the details.  ::)

In his cross examination he denies having gone to his uncles and claims that he made it all up. When asked why he told the police there was blood in the garage he answered because it was the color red. Here he slips up big time because he is now saying he was at his uncles garage and saw the red stuff on the floor.  ::)

Q: You made that all up?
A: Yes.
Q: You just happened to know Teresa's words?
A: No.
Q: How do you know what she said?
A: I made it up.
A: You made it up?
A: Yes.
Q: You made up the part that you raped her?
A: Yes.
Q: You made up the part that she told you not to do it?
A: Yes.
Q: To do the right thing?
A: Yes.
Q: And to tell your uncle not to do it?
A: Yes.
Q: You made that up?
A: Yes.

Q: Now, Mr. Dassey, didn't you tell your mother in a phone call on May 13 that you had gone over to  your Uncle Steven's after school and  she came home?
A: Yes.
Q: You did?
A: Yes.
Q: And, again, on May 15, the first tape we played, she's asking you why you didn't tell her. Why didn't you?
A: Because it didn't happen.
Q: Why did you tell her you went over there, sir?
A: I don't know.
Q: You lied to your mother as well?
A: Yes
Q: You've heard Detective Wiegert testify on Friday and Saturday morning; right?
A: Yes.
Q: And he said he had no idea that there was a sexual assault?
A: Yes.
Q: You were the one who brought up the fact of a sexual assault; right?
A: Yes.
Q: You brought up the rape; right?
A: Yes.
Q: You went over to your uncle's cabin because you knew you were going to have sex; right?
A: No.
Q: Why did you tell the police that your Uncle Steven was proud of you for what you had done?
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you say that you sexually assaulted her
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you say you put your penis in her for five minutes?
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you tell the police that you thought it was blood in the garage?
A: Because it was the color of red.
Q: Because it was the color of red?
A: Yeah


LOL

Was she raped?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 23, 2018, 08:50:PM
Was she raped?

Yes she was raped. I should also add that Brendan told his younger cousin Kayla about it long before he told the police. Kayla then told her school counsellors and that's how the police ended up questioning Brendan at the school in the first place.


Q: All right. Kayla is telling her counselors of a conversation she had with you. She's telling her counselors in January that she talked to you in December and that you had told her about body parts. How could that be?
A: I don't know.



Q: Directing your attention to January of 2006, early January, did you have occasion to have contact with a student by the name of Kayla Avery?
A: Yes.
Q: Urn, would you describe for us, urn, first and foremost, how that contact occurred?
A: Kayla came into the counseling office and asked to speak to a counselor.
Q: All right. And, urn, who was present when she came in and asked to speak with a counselor?
A: It was myself and Karen Baumgartner.
Q: Tell us what happened?
A: Kayla came in, urn, to the office, and, urn, she was asked by Ms. Baumgarner -- Ms. Baumgartner if she minded that I was there, and Kayla aid, no. And she said she was there because she Was feeling scared.
Q: All right. Let me stop you there, first, and ask who else, if anyone, was present for this conversation?
A: No one else.
Q: All right. So there's just the three of you?
A: Correct.
Q: All right. And did Kayla reveal to the two of you why she was feeling scared and why she wanted to talk?
A: Yes.
Q: And what did she tell you?
A: She told us that she was scared, urn, because her uncle, Steven Avery, had asked one of her cousins to help move a body.


Still watching this bullshit TV show? 
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 23, 2018, 09:07:PM
Yes she was raped. I should also add that Brendan told his younger cousin Kayla about it long before he told the police. Kayla then told her school counsellors and that's how the police ended up questioning Brendan at the school in the first place.


Q: All right. Kayla is telling her counselors of a conversation she had with you. She's telling her counselors in January that she talked to you in December and that you had told her about body parts. How could that be?
A: I don't know.



Q: Directing your attention to January of 2006, early January, did you have occasion to have contact with a student by the name of Kayla Avery?
A: Yes.
Q: Urn, would you describe for us, urn, first and foremost, how that contact occurred?
A: Kayla came into the counseling office and asked to speak to a counselor.
Q: All right. And, urn, who was present when she came in and asked to speak with a counselor?
A: It was myself and Karen Baumgartner.
Q: Tell us what happened?
A: Kayla came in, urn, to the office, and, urn, she was asked by Ms. Baumgarner -- Ms. Baumgartner if she minded that I was there, and Kayla aid, no. And she said she was there because she Was feeling scared.
Q: All right. Let me stop you there, first, and ask who else, if anyone, was present for this conversation?
A: No one else.
Q: All right. So there's just the three of you?
A: Correct.
Q: All right. And did Kayla reveal to the two of you why she was feeling scared and why she wanted to talk?
A: Yes.
Q: And what did she tell you?
A: She told us that she was scared, urn, because her uncle, Steven Avery, had asked one of her cousins to help move a body.


Still watching this bullshit TV show?

How do you know she was raped?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 23, 2018, 09:31:PM
How do you know she was raped?

he doesnt because there was no evidence she was raped.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 23, 2018, 09:35:PM
If its a coerced confession then why did Brendan make up the rape? The investigators had no idea of a rape until Brendan flat out told them the details.  ::)

In his cross examination he denies having gone to his uncles and claims that he made it all up. When asked why he told the police there was blood in the garage he answered because it was the color red. Here he slips up big time because he is now saying he was at his uncles garage and saw the red stuff on the floor.  ::)

Q: You made that all up?
A: Yes.
Q: You just happened to know Teresa's words?
A: No.
Q: How do you know what she said?
A: I made it up.
A: You made it up?
A: Yes.
Q: You made up the part that you raped her?
A: Yes.
Q: You made up the part that she told you not to do it?
A: Yes.
Q: To do the right thing?
A: Yes.
Q: And to tell your uncle not to do it?
A: Yes.
Q: You made that up?
A: Yes.

Q: Now, Mr. Dassey, didn't you tell your mother in a phone call on May 13 that you had gone over to  your Uncle Steven's after school and  she came home?
A: Yes.
Q: You did?
A: Yes.
Q: And, again, on May 15, the first tape we played, she's asking you why you didn't tell her. Why didn't you?
A: Because it didn't happen.
Q: Why did you tell her you went over there, sir?
A: I don't know.
Q: You lied to your mother as well?
A: Yes
Q: You've heard Detective Wiegert testify on Friday and Saturday morning; right?
A: Yes.
Q: And he said he had no idea that there was a sexual assault?
A: Yes.
Q: You were the one who brought up the fact of a sexual assault; right?
A: Yes.
Q: You brought up the rape; right?
A: Yes.
Q: You went over to your uncle's cabin because you knew you were going to have sex; right?
A: No.
Q: Why did you tell the police that your Uncle Steven was proud of you for what you had done?
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you say that you sexually assaulted her
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you say you put your penis in her for five minutes?
A: I don't know.
Q: Why did you tell the police that you thought it was blood in the garage?
A: Because it was the color of red.
Q: Because it was the color of red?
A: Yeah


LOL

he was "guessing " what they wanted him to say just like he guessed what his teachers at school wanted him to say when he didnt know the answers, he was 16 , extremely low IQ and other disabilities , here is Duffin's judgement https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/read-judges-full-decision-making-a-murderer-brendan-dassey-conviction-overturned-390030681.html
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 23, 2018, 10:02:PM
How do you know she was raped?


The perperators own admission of doing such. She was then killed to prevent her from reporting it to the police.


Come on you are not that stupid.

 


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 23, 2018, 10:06:PM

The perperators own admission of doing such. She was then killed to prevent her from reporting it to the police.


Come on you are not that stupid.

So you don't know she was raped. Thought not!

At this point David, I'm telling you to pack in the personal bullshit - it's what you always do when you get caught out and no, I'm not that stupid and certainly not that stupid to fall for you half baked misleading crap. You don't know she was raped - FACT!



Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 23, 2018, 10:08:PM
he doesnt because there was no evidence she was raped.

Oh I was well aware that he didn't know  ;)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 23, 2018, 10:09:PM
he was "guessing " what they wanted him to say just like he guessed what his teachers at school wanted him to say when he didnt know the answers, he was 16 , extremely low IQ and other disabilities , here is Duffin's judgement https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/read-judges-full-decision-making-a-murderer-brendan-dassey-conviction-overturned-390030681.html

Agreed!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 23, 2018, 10:33:PM
he was "guessing " what they wanted him to say just like he guessed what his teachers at school wanted him to say when he didnt know the answers, he was 16 , extremely low IQ and other disabilities , here is Duffin's judgement https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/read-judges-full-decision-making-a-murderer-brendan-dassey-conviction-overturned-390030681.html

Brendan had allready admitted his involment to Kayla Avery almost three months prior to the police questioning.

Brendan admitted to Kayla that he helped Steve move the body from the garage to the bonfire pit. At this time the police nor the media knew the garage was the murder scene and was only later proven as such. Hence Brendan knows only what someone involved could know.

Kayla also said that Brendan told her that Terressa was pinned down on a mattress also

If Brendan made it all up how could he have made up and told the same story Kayla told the school staff? He cant. He told the police exactly what he told Kayla. Because that is what took place!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 23, 2018, 11:36:PM
Brendan had allready admitted his involment to Kayla Avery almost three months prior to the police questioning.

Brendan admitted to Kayla that he helped Steve move the body from the garage to the bonfire pit. At this time the police nor the media knew the garage was the murder scene and was only later proven as such. Hence Brendan knows only what someone involved could know.

Kayla also said that Brendan told her that Terressa was pinned down on a mattress also

If Brendan made it all up how could he have made up and told the same story Kayla told the school staff? He cant. He told the police exactly what he told Kayla. Because that is what took place!

You mean like how Bamber told Julie that he arranged the deaths of his family?

If you know she made the statement, you will also know that she retracted it.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 24, 2018, 02:06:AM
You mean like how Bamber told Julie that he arranged the deaths of his family?

If you know she made the statement, you will also know that she retracted it.

Mugford/Bamber is the complete opposite.

Kayla words and Brendans words match the crime scene. They cannot both have made up the same thing by chance. Kayla and Brendan have both told the same details only someone involved in crime could know.


Kayla retracted her statement at Dasseys trial because she didn't want to help send her cousin to prison. (Another complete opposite of the Bamber case)

Q: You also told the officers that Brendan told you he saw Teresa alive and pinned up, didn't you?
A: Yes.
Q: All right. And you love Brendan; right?
A: Yes. Very much.
Q: And you wouldn't tell -- You wouldn't say anything like that to get him in trouble, would you?
A: No. Not really.
Q: All right. But yet you told the officers that those were the conversations you had with Brendan; isn't that right?
A: Yes.
Q: All right. You told -- You told the officers that Brendan told you he had seen Teresa pinned up in Steven's trailer, didn't you?
A: Yes.


Its rather obvious she told the school staff and the police under the impession Brendan had only seen what he said he saw not that he participated.

Furthermore if you watch Brendans police interviews he claims Bobby Dassey had gone out hunting that night. This is also coroborated by another hunter around that time. Brendan's brother had gone out with friends for trick or treating also.

This leaves only Steven Avery at scene of crime. The same Steven Avery who is the last person to see her alive. The same Steven Avery who called her twice shortly before her death from his mobile with the caller ID blocked. The same Steven Avery who had this poor womans bones and charred bellongings in his burn barrel.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 24, 2018, 06:04:AM

The perperators own admission of doing such. She was then killed to prevent her from reporting it to the police.


Come on you are not that stupid.

A coerced confession is NO confession , there is no corroboration , no dna evidence in the bedroom of rape not one single piece ! no evidence at all that TH was ever in that room!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 24, 2018, 06:05:AM
Mugford/Bamber is the complete opposite.

Kayla words and Brendans words match the crime scene. They cannot both have made up the same thing by chance. Kayla and Brendan have both told the same details only someone involved in crime could know.


Kayla retracted her statement at Dasseys trial because she didn't want to help send her cousin to prison. (Another complete opposite of the Bamber case)

Q: You also told the officers that Brendan told you he saw Teresa alive and pinned up, didn't you?
A: Yes.
Q: All right. And you love Brendan; right?
A: Yes. Very much.
Q: And you wouldn't tell -- You wouldn't say anything like that to get him in trouble, would you?
A: No. Not really.
Q: All right. But yet you told the officers that those were the conversations you had with Brendan; isn't that right?
A: Yes.
Q: All right. You told -- You told the officers that Brendan told you he had seen Teresa pinned up in Steven's trailer, didn't you?
A: Yes.


Its rather obvious she told the school staff and the police under the impession Brendan had only seen what he said he saw not that he participated.

Furthermore if you watch Brendans police interviews he claims Bobby Dassey had gone out hunting that night. This is also coroborated by another hunter around that time. Brendan's brother had gone out with friends for trick or treating also.

This leaves only Steven Avery at scene of crime. The same Steven Avery who is the last person to see her alive. The same Steven Avery who called her twice shortly before her death from his mobile with the caller ID blocked. The same Steven Avery who had this poor womans bones and charred bellongings in his burn barrel.

Wrong! for gawd sake watch part 2  ::)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 24, 2018, 06:15:AM
Kayla's statement  ::)

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/41m7fi/kaylas_written_statement_about_brendan_march_7/

Fassbender.... oh boy!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 24, 2018, 09:22:AM
Wrong! for gawd sake watch part 2  ::)

Avery admits he is the last person to see her alive.  ::)


That show is not going to fool me again.


You are essentially trying to argue that someone else burned Teressa's body infront of Averys home and he never noticed anything. Give up already.


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 24, 2018, 06:00:PM
Avery admits he is the last person to see her alive.  ::)


That show is not going to fool me again.


You are essentially trying to argue that someone else burned Teressa's body infront of Averys home and he never noticed anything. Give up already.

In part 2 you will see evidence that indicates the body could not have been burned in an open pit , they have he world leading expert on it
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 24, 2018, 07:17:PM
In part 2 you will see evidence that indicates the body could not have been burned in an open pit , they have he world leading expert on it

Dr. John DeHaan, who has almost 50 years’ experience working with fires and bombs, said several pieces of evidence tell him Halbach was burned elsewhere, and her bones were planted behind Avery’s garage.

Burning a body in an open-air burn pit takes six to eight hours to accomplish thermal destruction to the degree I observed in Dr. Eisenberg’s reports and photos,” DeHaan wrote in the affidavit. “It is my opinion that the burned bones found in Steven Avery’s burn pit could not have been burned to the degree I observed after four hours of burning in an open-air pit like the one behind Steven Avery’s garage.
“Burning a body in an open-air burn pit takes six to eight hours to accomplish thermal destruction to the degree I observed in Dr. Eisenberg’s reports and photos,” DeHaan wrote in the affidavit. “It is my opinion that the burned bones found in Steven Avery’s burn pit could not have been burned to the degree I observed after four hours of burning in an open-air pit like the one behind Steven Avery’s garage.

Halbach’s body, he said, was burned in a vented, yet enclosed vessel that radiates a uniform amount of heat, something consistent with a metal burn barrel.

And what about the tire wires Wisconsin crime experts say were intertwined with Halbach’s bones? They weren’t, says DeHaan because the tires and the bones were not burned in the same fire.

“During fire exposure, the steel multistrand wires degrade, break, and fray to form bristles that readily trap any material coming into contact with them, during or after the fire,” says DeHaan. “Small calcined bone fragments are especially easy to trap. This has been observed in test fires where the tires were under or alongside a burned body as well as on top.”

https://www.inquisitr.com/4301682/making-a-murderer-fire-expert-teresa-halbach-not-burned-in-steven-averys-fire-pit/

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 25, 2018, 09:51:AM
Dr. John DeHaan, who has almost 50 years’ experience working with fires and bombs, said several pieces of evidence tell him Halbach was burned elsewhere, and her bones were planted behind Avery’s garage.

Burning a body in an open-air burn pit takes six to eight hours to accomplish thermal destruction to the degree I observed in Dr. Eisenberg’s reports and photos,” DeHaan wrote in the affidavit. “It is my opinion that the burned bones found in Steven Avery’s burn pit could not have been burned to the degree I observed after four hours of burning in an open-air pit like the one behind Steven Avery’s garage.
“Burning a body in an open-air burn pit takes six to eight hours to accomplish thermal destruction to the degree I observed in Dr. Eisenberg’s reports and photos,” DeHaan wrote in the affidavit. “It is my opinion that the burned bones found in Steven Avery’s burn pit could not have been burned to the degree I observed after four hours of burning in an open-air pit like the one behind Steven Avery’s garage.

Halbach’s body, he said, was burned in a vented, yet enclosed vessel that radiates a uniform amount of heat, something consistent with a metal burn barrel.

And what about the tire wires Wisconsin crime experts say were intertwined with Halbach’s bones? They weren’t, says DeHaan because the tires and the bones were not burned in the same fire.

“During fire exposure, the steel multistrand wires degrade, break, and fray to form bristles that readily trap any material coming into contact with them, during or after the fire,” says DeHaan. “Small calcined bone fragments are especially easy to trap. This has been observed in test fires where the tires were under or alongside a burned body as well as on top.”

https://www.inquisitr.com/4301682/making-a-murderer-fire-expert-teresa-halbach-not-burned-in-steven-averys-fire-pit/


You do realise that Brendan describes Steve crushing up the bones with a shovel then taking the bones out the burn barrel with a bucket and then burying them behind his garage where the fire pit is?


Seriously Caroline. This is embarrasing.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 25, 2018, 10:32:AM
A recorded conversation between Dassey and his mother in prison.


Janda: "What all happened? What are you talking about?"
Dassey: "About what me and Steven did that day."
Janda: "So Steven did do it?"
Dassey: "Yeah."
Janda: "Uh, he makes me so sick."
Dassey: "I don't even know how I'm gonna do it in court though."
Janda: "What do you mean?"
Dassey: "I ain't gonna face him."
Janda: "Who?"
Dassey: "Steven."
Janda: "You know what Brendan?"
Dassey: "What?"
Janda: "He did it. You do what you gotta do. So in those statements you did all that to her too?"
Dassey: "Some of it."

Give up Already!!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 25, 2018, 12:10:PM
Dr. John DeHaan, who has almost 50 years’ experience working with fires and bombs, said several pieces of evidence tell him Halbach was burned elsewhere, and her bones were planted behind Avery’s garage.

Burning a body in an open-air burn pit takes six to eight hours to accomplish thermal destruction to the degree I observed in Dr. Eisenberg’s reports and photos,” DeHaan wrote in the affidavit. “It is my opinion that the burned bones found in Steven Avery’s burn pit could not have been burned to the degree I observed after four hours of burning in an open-air pit like the one behind Steven Avery’s garage.
“Burning a body in an open-air burn pit takes six to eight hours to accomplish thermal destruction to the degree I observed in Dr. Eisenberg’s reports and photos,” DeHaan wrote in the affidavit. “It is my opinion that the burned bones found in Steven Avery’s burn pit could not have been burned to the degree I observed after four hours of burning in an open-air pit like the one behind Steven Avery’s garage.

Halbach’s body, he said, was burned in a vented, yet enclosed vessel that radiates a uniform amount of heat, something consistent with a metal burn barrel.

And what about the tire wires Wisconsin crime experts say were intertwined with Halbach’s bones? They weren’t, says DeHaan because the tires and the bones were not burned in the same fire.

“During fire exposure, the steel multistrand wires degrade, break, and fray to form bristles that readily trap any material coming into contact with them, during or after the fire,” says DeHaan. “Small calcined bone fragments are especially easy to trap. This has been observed in test fires where the tires were under or alongside a burned body as well as on top.”

https://www.inquisitr.com/4301682/making-a-murderer-fire-expert-teresa-halbach-not-burned-in-steven-averys-fire-pit/

i canget that the bones could of been planted but te ustion to me is why would they.

everything averys supporters have stated are possble but they just sound a tad unlikely.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 25, 2018, 12:13:PM
were was avery when people supposedly planting human remains in his scrap yard how did they do this without him noticing.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 25, 2018, 12:43:PM
were was avery when people supposedly planting human remains in his scrap yard how did they do this without him noticing.


Avery claims he was at home alone all night. And did'nt use his burn pit or burn barrell that night. Despite numerous witnesses seeing him having a bonfire later that night.

Also how did the "real killer" get the rife from Stevens home and put it back without him knowing?  How did the "real killer" shoot Teressa in his garage multiple times without him hearing?

Brendans older brother is out hunting with a friend. Brendans younger brothers are out trick or treating. This leaves only Steven and Brendan near the crime scene.

The whole argument for their innocence is absolutely unequivocally laughable.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on October 25, 2018, 05:12:PM
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/steven-averys-lawyer-zellner-offers-10000-in-proof-of-guilt-challenge-197517/

Collect your 10k David .
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on October 25, 2018, 05:14:PM
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/597a4c40ff7c509fce44a62f/1501187137394/Final+Avery+100+Questions+7-27.pdf
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 25, 2018, 06:06:PM
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/steven-averys-lawyer-zellner-offers-10000-in-proof-of-guilt-challenge-197517/

Collect your 10k David .

I have read through all the questions before. I can answer most of them but some are deliberately written in such a way its not really possible to answer them. Some questions are not even questions. for example "question" 25

"Provide any re-enactment videos or photographs, conducted with a similar bookcase, which demonstrate that Ms. Halbach’s sub-key could have been dislodged by the “none too gentle” twisting and turning of the bookcase, fallen through the gap between the back panel and the frame of the bookcase, and landed by Mr. Avery’s slippers located on the northwest side of the bookcase."

This is not a question.

This whole thing was written not to be completed.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 25, 2018, 07:09:PM

You do realise that Brendan describes Steve crushing up the bones with a shovel then taking the bones out the burn barrel with a bucket and then burying them behind his garage where the fire pit is?


Seriously Caroline. This is embarrasing.

Yes, you are embarrassing David - on that, we can agree.

Not sure why you keep referring to Brenden's description when it has been established (and agreed by judges) that they were coerced and officers supplied information to him.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 25, 2018, 07:22:PM
A recorded conversation between Dassey and his mother in prison.


Janda: "What all happened? What are you talking about?"
Dassey: "About what me and Steven did that day."
Janda: "So Steven did do it?"
Dassey: "Yeah."
Janda: "Uh, he makes me so sick."
Dassey: "I don't even know how I'm gonna do it in court though."
Janda: "What do you mean?"
Dassey: "I ain't gonna face him."
Janda: "Who?"
Dassey: "Steven."
Janda: "You know what Brendan?"
Dassey: "What?"
Janda: "He did it. You do what you gotta do. So in those statements you did all that to her too?"
Dassey: "Some of it."

Give up Already!!

Do you actually know what a debate is? Or are you such a supercilious prick that the ONLY way you can discuss a topic is to try and have your opinion accepted by everyone?

Have you noticed how dead the forum is? At least we're trying to spark debate!

I haven''t made my mind up about Avery but this thread isn't to discuss what has gone before, it's to discuss what came from the new series and from your posts, you clearly have no idea. Either watch the show and contribute something constructive or take you own advice above!

By the way, the phone call with his mother happened AFTER police told him to call her and tell her he had confessed!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 25, 2018, 07:26:PM

Avery claims he was at home alone all night. And did'nt use his burn pit or burn barrell that night. Despite numerous witnesses seeing him having a bonfire later that night.

Also how did the "real killer" get the rife from Stevens home and put it back without him knowing?  How did the "real killer" shoot Teressa in his garage multiple times without him hearing?

Brendans older brother is out hunting with a friend. Brendans younger brothers are out trick or treating. This leaves only Steven and Brendan near the crime scene.

The whole argument for their innocence is absolutely unequivocally laughable.

Why? Because a bullet was found with Teresa's DNA on it? You really should watch the series - but then again, your supercilious bragging is a source of much amusement!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 25, 2018, 07:28:PM
I have read through all the questions before. I can answer most of them but some are deliberately written in such a way its not really possible to answer them. Some questions are not even questions. for example "question" 25

"Provide any re-enactment videos or photographs, conducted with a similar bookcase, which demonstrate that Ms. Halbach’s sub-key could have been dislodged by the “none too gentle” twisting and turning of the bookcase, fallen through the gap between the back panel and the frame of the bookcase, and landed by Mr. Avery’s slippers located on the northwest side of the bookcase."

This is not a question.

This whole thing was written not to be completed.

Then go ahead!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 25, 2018, 07:31:PM
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55203379e4b08b1328203a7d/t/597a4c40ff7c509fce44a62f/1501187137394/Final+Avery+100+Questions+7-27.pdf

no forensic evdence in the trialer is a hard one to explianif avery did it.

he could of cleaned it up but how dos he know what to clean hes not af forensic expert

and that would reuire some intense cleaning
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 25, 2018, 07:32:PM
no forensic evdence in the trialer is a hard one to explianif avery did it.

he could of cleaned it up but how dos he know what to clean hes not af forensic expert

and that would reuire some intense cleaning

Apparently so given that Brendan said he cut her throat.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 25, 2018, 07:41:PM
Apparently so given that Brendan said he cut her throat.

and neather of them are exactl genuise so i cant see them  being able to get rid of evdence that well.

i mean how can destroy evdence that you cant see like dna.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 25, 2018, 07:56:PM
and neather of them are exactl genuise so i cant them  being able to get rid of evdence that well.

i mean how can destroy evdence that you cant see like dna.

Agreed and they were so adept at getting rid of evidence (on the one hand) but Steven left just enough blood in the car to implicate himself.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 25, 2018, 08:10:PM
Agreed and they were so adept at getting rid of evidence (on the one hand) but Steven left just enough blood in the car to implicate himself.

and makes no attempt to get rid of car even though his profession is get rid of cars.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 10:23:AM
Yes, you are embarrassing David - on that, we can agree.


I was referring to you. Fact is you hate to agree with me on anything. Even if it requires you to end up supporting this scummy murdering rapist who also molested his underage niece and threw a cat into a fire.

Evidence against Avery is overwhelming. You either have to agree with me or let your credibility on this forum sink even lower than it already has. You don’t want either but I think agreeing with me is the best option here for you.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 26, 2018, 11:00:AM
After watching MAM1 I was leaning towards SA guilt however having watched MAM2 I am now leaning the other way!  :o

Does anyone know if SA is a psychopath? did he get tested?

why would he go to all those lengths the prosecution claim to destroy evidence of the body and not go to the same lengths to destroy evidence of her vehicle ? they couldn't make that vehicle look more like it was planted if they tried! it was a half arsed attempt at concealing it with some branches and bits of wood, pathetic!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 26, 2018, 11:01:AM
Avery admits he is the last person to see her alive.  ::)


That show is not going to fool me again.


You are essentially trying to argue that someone else burned Teressa's body infront of Averys home and he never noticed anything. Give up already.

oh no, Bobbie was
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 11:04:AM
no forensic evdence in the trialer is a hard one to explianif avery did it.


No it is not. All he has to do is burn the bed sheets.


Just because no DNA was found does not mean it was never there. This was back in 2005 DNA technology was not as good as it is now.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 26, 2018, 11:06:AM
no forensic evdence in the trialer is a hard one to explianif avery did it.

he could of cleaned it up but how dos he know what to clean hes not af forensic expert

and that would reuire some intense cleaning

I agree and because it's not there means it didn't happen.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 11:13:AM
I agree and because it's not there means it didn't happen.


Wrong.

Q. Okay. Let me ask it this way, that was poorly
phrased. Looking at this exhibit on the screen
right now, which is a photograph of the garage,
if somebody had cleaned that garage floor with
bleach before the police came, you would not
expect to find any DNA would you?

A. If it was cleaned thoroughly enough and the
bleach destroyed all the DNA, no, I wouldn't.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 26, 2018, 11:16:AM
I was referring to you. Fact is you hate to agree with me on anything. Even if it requires you to end up supporting this scummy murdering rapist who also molested his underage niece and threw a cat into a fire.

Evidence against Avery is overwhelming. You either have to agree with me or let your credibility on this forum sink even lower than it already has. You don’t want either but I think agreeing with me is the best option here for you.

No, I have agreed with you in the past however, the thread is about the new series which you haven't watched. While we're on the subject, I feel the same way about Bamber and my credibility doesn't go anywhere simply because I don't agree with you.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 26, 2018, 11:19:AM

Wrong.

Q. Okay. Let me ask it this way, that was poorly
phrased. Looking at this exhibit on the screen
right now, which is a photograph of the garage,
if somebody had cleaned that garage floor with
bleach before the police came, you would not
expect to find any DNA would you?


A. If it was cleaned thoroughly enough and the
bleach destroyed all the DNA, no, I wouldn't.


No blood or DNA in the bedroom or marks on the bed where she was supposed to have been both tied and chained.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 26, 2018, 11:23:AM
oh no, Bobbie was

From his own admission, he stated that he saw her drive off and disappeared himself. Her phone pinged off a tower a couple of miles down the road away from the Avery property! AND someone reported seeing her car along the same road a couple of days before being found on the Avery property and a report was never filed - it just turned up on the Avery lot. Her day planner which had entries written that afternoon was found BACK t her apartment when she didn't have time to return there. How did it get from her car to her apartment when her car was missing?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 12:02:PM
 ::)


"You're going to hear Brendan tell the
officers that the vehicle was driven down to that
pit area that we, uh, talked about, that it was '
concealed with branches and a car hood, and the
license plates were removed, and Steven Avery,
for some reason, went underneath the hood of, uh,
Teresa's vehicle

Brendan Dassey will tell you that the
garage that, thereafter, when they walked back,
that the garage was cleaned with bleach, was
cleaned with gas, was cleaned with paint thinner,
that Mr. Avery took the Toyota key, put it into
his bedroom, that Teresa's clothes were thrown
onto the fire.


They're statements from Brendan.
Remember this. Brendan's telling you that her
clothes were thrown on the fire, that Avery's
finger was cut and actively bleeding at the time,
that Teresa's cell phone and camera were burned
in the burn barrel earlier that day, and that
Steven's girlfriend, Jodi, Jodi Stachowski, had
called Steven Avery's house at least twice while
Brendan was at the house.

Those are the statements of an
individual. The details of an individual who's
committed rape and murder and mutilation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

She gets a full profile that's Steven Avery's sweat.
Steven Avery's sweat is found on the hood latch, just
like it should happen if Brendan is to believed that
Uncle Steve went under the hood.
Again, facts not known by law
enforcement at the time Brendan made these
statements.

Brendan says that the garage floor was
cleaned with paint thinner. You're going to hear
from a man by the name of John Ertl, from the
Crime Lab, who will talk about a three- or
four-foot circle, just to the left and behind the
riding tractor, uh, which is a big bleach stain.
Uh, Mr. Ertl will talk about that bleach stain.
You'll see that bleach and paint thinner are
recovered. Uh, but perhaps most importantly,
Brendan, himself, hands over to Investigator
Fassbender his jeans. He says, these were the
pants I was wearing that night, and these pants
are splashed with bleach from cleaning uncle
Steve's garage.
Brendan said that, uh, Teresa's
Halbach's, uh, key was put into the bedroom. You
already know that the key was found in Uncle
Steve's bedroom.


---------------------------------------

Brendan says that Teresa's cell phone
and camera were burned in Avery's burn barrel.
Burn barrel was outside the car. You're going to
hear and read a report from a gentleman by the
name of Curtis Thomas. Mr. Thomas works at the
FBI in Virginia. Mr. Thomas got to see all these
electronics which were recovered from Mr. Avery's
burn barrell guess what was in there?
Teresa Halbach's Motorola V3 RAZR cell phone,
Teresa Halbach's PowerShot A310 digital camera
are found, just like Brendan said they would be.
Lastly, did Avery's girlfriend call
twice on October 31? Phone records will indicate
that a woman by the name of Jodi Stachowski, the
girlfriend of Steven Avery, called twice on the
31st, just like Brendan said.
"

Gee poor Brendan. He made up so much stuff that just so happened to be true!  ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 12:35:PM
 ::)

Brendan describes Steven taking Teresa's bones out of the burn barrel smashing them with a shovel and then hiding them behind the garage.


Come Stevens trial two years later the forensic expert confirms this is indeed what happened!


A. Well, we have actually been able to recover
fragmentary teeth, facial bones, very small bones
from the body, including even we found bones from
the middle ear, which are about a millimeter in
size, in one of these locations where the bones
have been moved to.

Q. In other words, they have survived -- some of
these small bones have survived moving?
A. Yes, they have.
Q. And then identifiable in another place?
A. Yes, that's correct.



Just how did Brendan make up all this stuff that just so happened to match the crime scene before the details transpired at trial?  ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Its a mystery... ::)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 01:13:PM
Here is another good point the prosecutor pointed out. All the other photos Teresa took for Steven the car was then left on display for customers to look at. Yet why did the van that Teresa took photos of not end up there like all the others? Because Steven knows there will no auto trader advert since he has killed Teresa and burned her camera.



You heard from the supervisor of Auto
Trader, Ms Schuster, that Ms Halbach had taken
six prior photos at the Avery salvage property.
And we put these six photos, early on, into the
case, into evidence. You can note on most of the
photos, just how close they are in proximity to
Mr. Avery's trailer.
These photos, as you heard, were taken,
the first on June 20th, and the last on October
10th, of 2005. I think the inference that you
also may want to draw on as you think weeks ahead
from the presentation of this evidence is, after
these photos are taken, after a car goes into
Auto Trader Magazine, what's done with it.
You can actually answer that question by
some of the other photos that I showed you.
What's done with these cars doesn't do Mr. Avery

any good, or whoever is selling a car, any good,
to leave these items back by Mr. Avery's garage,
or back by his trailer.
But after the Auto Trader picture is
taken, these items are put up on the corner, what
is called the corner by the business property.
We know that because of Ms Buchner, Lisa Buchner,
when she testified in this case, that she
testified that she saw a woman taking pictures of
cars that were for sale. And, in fact, we
pointed out these two vehicles, the Grand Prix
and the Blazer, that Ms Halbach had earlier, or
just within the last month or six weeks had taken
photographs of.

And, so, when a photo is taken, when it
goes into the Auto Trader, and when it has to be
sold, it makes sense to put those vehicles up in
a place where people will see them. People that
are coming into the auto salvage business, people
that will drive by, as you remember the overall
view of this property, that will drive by those
vehicles and might naturally get out and take a
picture and they might want to buy that kind of
vehicle.

Now, we have also heard, and I will
argue, importantly, that the van that Ms Halbach
took a picture of, remained in exactly the same
location, remained there from the 31st, when Ms
Halbach took the picture, at least through the
5th, when the officers took control of the scene.
Now, I'm going to argue and you should
ask yourself why, you should ask yourself why,
what inference can I draw by that. I will argue
that the inference is that Mr. Avery knows that
the van is not going in the Auto Trader Magazine.
Mr. Avery knows that that picture is never going
to make it to Auto Trader, because he's taken the
camera and he's burned it. He's put it into the
burn barrel.






Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 26, 2018, 02:39:PM
I'm not even reading David's posts any more, despite not having watched series two he still keeps banging on about stuff that has in fact been dealt with in series 2 so its a waste of time reading his posts,
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 26, 2018, 03:20:PM
Here is another good point the prosecutor pointed out. All the other photos Teresa took for Steven the car was then left on display for customers to look at. Yet why did the van that Teresa took photos of not end up there like all the others? Because Steven knows there will no auto trader advert since he has killed Teresa and burned her camera.



You heard from the supervisor of Auto
Trader, Ms Schuster, that Ms Halbach had taken
six prior photos at the Avery salvage property.
And we put these six photos, early on, into the
case, into evidence. You can note on most of the
photos, just how close they are in proximity to
Mr. Avery's trailer.
These photos, as you heard, were taken,
the first on June 20th, and the last on October
10th, of 2005. I think the inference that you
also may want to draw on as you think weeks ahead
from the presentation of this evidence is, after
these photos are taken, after a car goes into
Auto Trader Magazine, what's done with it.
You can actually answer that question by
some of the other photos that I showed you.
What's done with these cars doesn't do Mr. Avery

any good, or whoever is selling a car, any good,
to leave these items back by Mr. Avery's garage,
or back by his trailer.
But after the Auto Trader picture is
taken, these items are put up on the corner, what
is called the corner by the business property.
We know that because of Ms Buchner, Lisa Buchner,
when she testified in this case, that she
testified that she saw a woman taking pictures of
cars that were for sale. And, in fact, we
pointed out these two vehicles, the Grand Prix
and the Blazer, that Ms Halbach had earlier, or
just within the last month or six weeks had taken
photographs of.

And, so, when a photo is taken, when it
goes into the Auto Trader, and when it has to be
sold, it makes sense to put those vehicles up in
a place where people will see them. People that
are coming into the auto salvage business, people
that will drive by, as you remember the overall
view of this property, that will drive by those
vehicles and might naturally get out and take a
picture and they might want to buy that kind of
vehicle.

Now, we have also heard, and I will
argue, importantly, that the van that Ms Halbach
took a picture of, remained in exactly the same
location, remained there from the 31st, when Ms
Halbach took the picture, at least through the
5th, when the officers took control of the scene.
Now, I'm going to argue and you should
ask yourself why, you should ask yourself why,
what inference can I draw by that. I will argue
that the inference is that Mr. Avery knows that
the van is not going in the Auto Trader Magazine.
Mr. Avery knows that that picture is never going
to make it to Auto Trader, because he's taken the
camera and he's burned it. He's put it into the
burn barrel.


Probably because the car wasn't his, it was his sisters.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 03:33:PM
Probably because the car wasn't his, it was his sisters.

No he left the van near his trailer and didn't bother putting it in the display area for customers to look at because he knew there would be no auto trader advert for it. How did he know this?  he had killed the photographer and burned her camera.  ;D

Circumstancial evidence. You know.. the kind of stuff you like to protend exists against Jeremy.  ;D

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6736.msg308517.html#msg308517 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6736.msg308517.html#msg308517)

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 26, 2018, 04:36:PM
No he left the van near his trailer and didn't bother putting it in the display area for customers to look at because he knew there would be no auto trader advert for it. How did he know this?  he had killed the photographer and burned her camera.  ;D

Circumstancial evidence. You know.. the kind of stuff you like to protend exists against Jeremy.  ;D

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6736.msg308517.html#msg308517 (http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,6736.msg308517.html#msg308517)

No what? Are you saying it was his car?

I don't 'protend' anything and I don't think 'protend' is actually a thing?

Back to 'trolling' for old posts or did your errrrr PM buddy dig it out for you?  ::)

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 06:32:PM
 ::)


"I am the owner of Avery’s Auto Salvage in Two Rivers Wisconsin. I was at the salvage yard the day the girl came to take a picture of the Dodge mini-van. Steven went down to the trailer house that he is staying in with the girl. I don ’t know the girl’s name but she is the one who normally came to take pictures. I don ’t know if Steven was in the girl’s vehicle or if he took his own. Steve was gone for about 10 minutes and I did not see the girl after they went to take the pictures or before. I asked Steven where he went and he told me to take pictures with the girl to place in a magazine to sell the van. Steven told me that the girl left. Just Steve, my brother Earl and l were at the salvage yard that day."


Why did Steve tell the salvage yard owner the girl had left? Steve nor anyone else reported seeing her leave. Nor could she have left because she was a pile of bones and ashes behind Steve's garage.  ::)

Why would the guy who has this woman's bones and ashes hidden behind his property be disonest and tell people she had left?

(https://i.redd.it/b1tifaxls3t01.png)

 ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 26, 2018, 07:00:PM
::)


"I am the owner of Avery’s Auto Salvage in Two Rivers Wisconsin. I was at the salvage yard the day the girl came to take a picture of the Dodge mini-van. Steven went down to the trailer house that he is staying in with the girl. I don ’t know the girl’s name but she is the one who normally came to take pictures. I don ’t know if Steven was in the girl’s vehicle or if he took his own. Steve was gone for about 10 minutes and I did not see the girl after they went to take the pictures or before. I asked Steven where he went and he told me to take pictures with the girl to place in a magazine to sell the van. Steven told me that the girl left. Just Steve, my brother Earl and l were at the salvage yard that day."


Why did Steve tell the salvage yard owner the girl had left? Steve nor anyone else reported seeing her leave. Nor could she have left because she was a pile of bones and ashes behind Steve's garage.  ::)

Why would the guy who has this woman's bones and ashes hidden behind his property be disonest and tell people she had left?



 ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

What did he have time to do in 10 minutes?


https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/making-a-murderer-defense-implicates-new-avery-nephew-in-murder-126346/


However, according to Zellner’s motion, Bobby and Brendan’s older brother Bryan Dassey told Department of Justice officials in November 2005 that Bobby had told him that he did see Halbach leave the property that day. Bryan Dassey recently doubled down on his recollection, signing an affidavit stating, “I distinctly remember Bobby telling me, ‘Steven could not have killed her because I saw her leave the property on October 31, 2005.'”



Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on October 26, 2018, 07:15:PM
https://twitter.com/i/moments/1054799869938987012
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 26, 2018, 07:49:PM
https://twitter.com/i/moments/1054799869938987012

Interesting - thanks
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 10:07:PM
Its has also become apparent to me that the vial of Avery's blood that the police had since 1996 cant have been used to plant the blood in Teressa's car. Because Avery's blood in the car had none of the preservative EDTA present in them. The vial has been scientifically excluded.

"And this planting, this vial planting
defense, even from a common sense standpoint, is
absolutely ludicrous.
But what we were able to do, what you
heard, is scientifically exclude that vial of
blood. You heard from Dr. LeBeau, who testified
that this blood is loaded with EDTA and this
blood, and this blood, and this blood, have no
detectable levels of EDTA. And so instead of
calling all of the people with keys and with
codes, and people in the Clerk's Office, and who
might have seen Lieutenant Lenk or Colborn, or
all those kinds of things, instead of doing it
that way, we only had to call one witness, who
scientifically could tell you that there is
absolutely no way that that vial of blood was
used to plant.
In fact, that very question was asked of
Dr. LeBeau, the head of the toxicology section,
or the unit at the FBI. And he said, by a
reasonable degree of scientific certainty, this
vial of blood is excluded, that means it's not
it, it's excluded as the source of those three
bloodstains."


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 26, 2018, 10:49:PM
Its has also become apparent to me that the vial of Avery's blood that the police had since 1996 cant have been used to plant the blood in Teressa's car. Because Avery's blood in the car had none of the preservative EDTA present in them. The vial has been scientifically excluded.

"And this planting, this vial planting
defense, even from a common sense standpoint, is
absolutely ludicrous.
But what we were able to do, what you
heard, is scientifically exclude that vial of
blood. You heard from Dr. LeBeau, who testified
that this blood is loaded with EDTA and this
blood, and this blood, and this blood, have no
detectable levels of EDTA. And so instead of
calling all of the people with keys and with
codes, and people in the Clerk's Office, and who
might have seen Lieutenant Lenk or Colborn, or
all those kinds of things, instead of doing it
that way, we only had to call one witness, who
scientifically could tell you that there is
absolutely no way that that vial of blood was
used to plant.
In fact, that very question was asked of
Dr. LeBeau, the head of the toxicology section,
or the unit at the FBI. And he said, by a
reasonable degree of scientific certainty, this
vial of blood is excluded, that means it's not
it, it's excluded as the source of those three
bloodstains."


Also dealt with in series 2  ::)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 26, 2018, 11:15:PM
The police had no opportunity to plant the blood.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Adam on October 27, 2018, 09:10:AM
Know nothing about this case. But it seems a civilised discussion was taking place. What a pity David posted another picture.

But if he's allowed to do it, he will.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 09:36:AM
Know nothing about this case.


They are arguing for Averys innocence. This man who has his blood inside the victims car, the victims bones hidden behind his property and the murder weapon hanging on his wall.

This is why I am laughing Adam.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Adam on October 27, 2018, 09:47:AM

They are arguing for Averys innocence. This man who has his blood inside the victims car, the victims bones hidden behind his property and the murder weapon hanging on his wall.

This is why I am laughing Adam.

Sounds like a police frame to me !
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 27, 2018, 11:26:AM
i can see both sides on face of it hes cliams of innocence do sound absurd but at the same time how do you explian the lack of fronsic trace evdence in his trailer.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 11:56:AM

They are arguing for Averys innocence. This man who has his blood inside the victims car, the victims bones hidden behind his property and the murder weapon hanging on his wall.

This is why I am laughing Adam.

Actually (you moron), that's not what was being argued but you're too deranged to understand. We are discussing the new series and the new evidence - you haven't watched it so no sweet FA about it. As usual though, you can't help setting yourself up as an authority! No matter what the case, up you come pretending you know all about it  ::)

I think I have repeated several times now that I haven't completely made up my mind and haven't actually said innocent or guilty but so what if someone does think he's innocent? You think Bamber is and have several bonkers theories to go along with it.

No wonder new posters are put off posting with arseholes like you. You're not even half as clever as you believe you are and over the past two years (or so), you have just become a nuisance poster who turns up to disrupt. Crawl back in your hole before the sunlight dries you out!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 12:09:PM
i can see both sides on face of it hes cliams of innocence do sound absurd but at the same time how do you explian the lack of fronsic trace evdence in his trailer.

The stuff that David is posting is from series 1. There s lots of new evidence and it was that that we were trying to discuss. I give up now because there is little point with that idiot stalking the board. Indigo is a relatively new poster and they can't be bothered either. Like the board can afford to loose posters.  >:(
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 12:51:PM
i can see both sides on face of it hes cliams of innocence do sound absurd but at the same time how do you explian the lack of fronsic trace evdence in his trailer.


There is forensic evidence in his trailer. The murder weapon and the victim's car key was found inside it!
Only Steve has a key to his trailer  ;D


Police cadaver dog sniffed round the whole junk yard and only gave signals to the police in two place's

1) Teresa Hallbach's car (this is how it found found in the first place)

2) Averys's Garage/Trailer
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 01:15:PM

There is forensic evidence in his trailer. The murder weapon and the victim's car key was found inside it!
Only Steve has a key to his trailer  ;D


Police cadaver dog sniffed round the whole junk yard and only gave signals to the police in two place's

1) Teresa Hallbach's car (this is how it found found in the first place)

2) Averys's Garage/Trailer

Again, old news. You're out of touch David.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 02:11:PM
Actually (you moron), that's not what was being argued but you're too deranged to understand. We are discussing the new series and the new evidence - you haven't watched it so no sweet FA about it. As usual though, you can't help setting yourself up as an authority! No matter what the case, up you come pretending you know all about it  ::)

That's because I am using the case evidence as a whole to refute the BS this show peddles.

I think I have repeated several times now that I haven't completely made up my mind and haven't actually said innocent or guilty but so what if someone does think he's innocent? You think Bamber is and have several bonkers theories to go along with it.

The Bamber theory is not bonkers. Even you think he was framed with the silencer. You even conceed Julie was not truthfull. What is bonkers is the idea that he was behined all of Julie's lies and that he is somehow guilty because 30 years later he said he had a bath that night contrary to 1985 he wasnt too sure if he had a bath than night or not.

No wonder new posters are put off posting with arseholes like you. You're not even half as clever as you believe you are and over the past two years (or so), you have just become a nuisance poster who turns up to disrupt. Crawl back in your hole before the sunlight dries you out!

Back in projection room are we?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 02:31:PM
Sounds like a police frame to me !


Indeed. Last year Zellner got him to change his story and it all came back to him  ::)

This is from Avery new witness statement from June of last year

"on November 4th, I woke up at 6:00 a.m and went into the bathroom to take a shower. I saw that most of the blood on my sink, which I had not cleaned up the previous night, was gone It seemed to me that the blood had been cleaned up. I did not clean the blood and none of my family members had been in my trailer"

So the police sneeked into his bathroom while he was asleep and extracted his wet blood from his sink (they just happned to know it would be there). They then managed to keep the blood wet until the car was discovered to then plant inside the car.  ::)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 02:37:PM
That's because I am using the case evidence as a whole to refute the BS this show peddles.

The Bamber theory is not bonkers. Even you think he was framed with the silencer. You even conceed Julie was not truthfull. What is bonkers is the idea that he was behined all of Julie's lies and that he is somehow guilty because 30 years later he said he had a bath that night contrary to 1985 he wasnt too sure if he a bath than night or not.

Back in projection room are we?

You're not using the case evidence because you don't know the latest findings, you're just repeating the same stuff and ignoring what others are saying. It's what you always do.

Your theories on the Bamber case are bonkers, trying to convince people that YOU can tell June had LM but Sheila didn't from a grainy old orange tinted picture but ignoring the dried cracked blood on Sheila's face and the discoloration. The ONLY reason you are able to drum up support is because certian innocent supporters will agree with anything as long as it's in favour of innocence.

Your notion that the police built a case around RWB is also nuts and that ultimately, HE was behind Julie's evidence - crackers! Oh and that the blood from the silence came from the buckets!!  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Best ask Bamber about those buckets!!  :-X :-X

Grow up David!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 02:43:PM

Indeed. Last year Zellner got him to change his story and it all came back to him  ::)

This is from Avery new witness statement from June of last year

"on November 4th, I woke up at 6:00 a.m and went into the bathroom to take a shower. I saw that most of the blood on my sink, which I had not cleaned up the previous night, was gone It seemed to me that the blood had been cleaned up. I did not clean the blood and none of my family members had been in my trailer"

So the police sneeked into his bathroom while he was asleep and extracted his wet blood from his sink (they just happned to know it would be there). They then managed to keep the blood wet until the car was discovered to then plant inside the car.  ::)

Perhaps they added it to a bucket of water?  ::)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 27, 2018, 02:51:PM

They are arguing for Averys innocence. This man who has his blood inside the victims car, the victims bones hidden behind his property and the murder weapon hanging on his wall.

This is why I am laughing Adam.

i thought  the blood was on the car door handle i dident know there was any inside the car.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 03:30:PM
i thought  the blood was on the car door handle i dident know there was any inside the car.

There was a smear of blood near the ignition. Exactly where Steve would have placed his cut right finger had he drove the car! Since this blood was smeared onto the plastic it had to have been wet when it was placed there.

If Steve had left blood on his sink they basically have 15 minutes to steal the blood from his sink and smear it on the car. Even thou they hadn't even discovered the car yet.  :-\

"On December 1, 2016, I was present at Ms . Zellner's law office, where I observed fresh
blood, collected from a volunteer, being dripped into a sink. It is my understanding that
this sink was in the bathroom of Steven Avery's trailer in October and November 2005
and had been removed and transported to Ms. Zellner 's law office. I observed the fresh
blood coagulate and dry. The fresh blood began to dry and coagulate approximately 15
minutes after it was deposited in the sink. At that time, I observed blood flakes begin to
form in the sink. After approximately 28 minutes, all of the blood was dry."



There was also Steve's DNA in her car that did not come from blood. The defence at trial argued that the police used a Saliva swap from Avery that was kept in the Sheriffs office to plant the DNA there.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 07:14:PM
i thought  the blood was on the car door handle i dident know there was any inside the car.

There was NONE on the door handle, NONE on the steering wheel and NONE on the keys. They tried several times to to transfer blood  to the area where it was found in Teresa's car but were unable to. David's post above doesn't take account of the new evidence because he doesn't know it.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 07:57:PM
Stuart H. James forensic scientist and bloodstain pattern analyst with James and Associates
Forensic Consultants, Inc. in Fort Lauderdale, Florida states in his sworn affidavit;

OPINIONS REGARDING MS. HALBACH'S RA V-4-IGNITION STAIN

27. Through a series of experiments that I observed, I have concluded to a reasonable degree
of scientific certainty that the distribution of Mr. Avery's blood in various locations in the
passenger compartment of the RA V-4 are not consistent with purposeful behavior. The
prosecution told the jury that all of the blood deposited in the RA V-4 was from the cut on
the middle finger of Mr. Avery's right hand and that he was actively bleeding.
TT:2/12:85. However, there was no blood on the door handle, key, gearshift, interior
hood release, hood latch, hood prop, and battery cable.
28. It is my opinion that Mr. Avery's blood in the RA V-4 is consistent with being randomly
distributed from a source because his blood is present in some locations but absent is
some reasonably anticipated locations, such as those listed in ~ 27. The absence of blood
stains in these locations is inconsistent with an active bleeder.
29. The bloodstains belonging to Mr. Avery are consistent with an explanation other than Mr.
A very being in the RAV -4 and depositing his blood in those locations with his actively
bleeding cut finger. I-lad Mr. A very been actively bleeding in the RA V-4, it is my
opinion that his blood and bloody fingerprints would have been deposited elsewhere in
the vehicle.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 08:30:PM
There was NONE on the door handle, NONE on the steering wheel and NONE on the keys. They tried several times to to transfer blood  to the area where it was found in Teresa's car but were unable to. David's post above doesn't take account of the new evidence because he doesn't know it.


Why would there be blood on the door handle and steering wheel when the cut is on the upper part of his finger? The part of his finger that is cut is not coming into contact with those areas. If he was cut under his finger then that would be a valid point. But he wasn't.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 08:35:PM
Stuart H. James forensic scientist and bloodstain pattern analyst with James and Associates
Forensic Consultants, Inc. in Fort Lauderdale, Florida states in his sworn affidavit;

OPINIONS REGARDING MS. HALBACH'S RA V-4-IGNITION STAIN

27. Through a series of experiments that I observed, I have concluded to a reasonable degree
of scientific certainty that the distribution of Mr. Avery's blood in various locations in the
passenger compartment of the RA V-4 are not consistent with purposeful behavior. The
prosecution told the jury that all of the blood deposited in the RA V-4 was from the cut on
the middle finger of Mr. Avery's right hand and that he was actively bleeding.
TT:2/12:85. However, there was no blood on the door handle, key, gearshift, interior
hood release, hood latch, hood prop, and battery cable.
28. It is my opinion that Mr. Avery's blood in the RA V-4 is consistent with being randomly
distributed from a source because his blood is present in some locations but absent is
some reasonably anticipated locations, such as those listed in ~ 27. The absence of blood
stains in these locations is inconsistent with an active bleeder.
29. The bloodstains belonging to Mr. Avery are consistent with an explanation other than Mr.
A very being in the RAV -4 and depositing his blood in those locations with his actively
bleeding cut finger. I-lad Mr. A very been actively bleeding in the RA V-4, it is my
opinion that his blood and bloody fingerprints would have been deposited elsewhere in
the vehicle.

Circuit Court Judge has already dismissed this stuff.

"The reports submitted by the defendant are equivocal in their conclusions and do not establish an alternate interpretation of the evidence.  Given the totality of evidence submitted at trial and the ambiguous conclusions as stated in the experts’ reports, it cannot be said that a reasonable probability exists that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on these reports.  As such, the defendant has not met his burden in order to obtain a new trial."
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 09:44:PM
Circuit Court Judge has already dismissed this stuff.

"The reports submitted by the defendant are equivocal in their conclusions and do not establish an alternate interpretation of the evidence.  Given the totality of evidence submitted at trial and the ambiguous conclusions as stated in the experts’ reports, it cannot be said that a reasonable probability exists that a different result would be reached at a new trial based on these reports.  As such, the defendant has not met his burden in order to obtain a new trial."



At his trial the defence argued that Bobby Dassey could be the killer and that the police planted the blood from his 1996 blood tube and DNA from his 2003 Saliva swab. Because they jumped to the conclusion it was Steve Avery.

A re-trail would be much of the same except that someone took blood from his sink (withing 15 minutes of him bleeding in the sink) and planted it inside the car in that short time-frame. This whole argument rests on the Stevens recent claims that he noticed blood missing from the sink. Can you expect a reasonable jury to believe this combined with all the circumstancial evidence against him?

Furthermore an expert did testify at his trial that the bloodstain came from a finger.


"Q. And this -- I would like to ask you whether you
have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of
scientific certainty, whether this cut to the
hand is consistent with being the bloody object
that came in contact with the dashboard, by the
ignition switch of the RAV4?
Could the bloodstain that you
observed on the dashboard of Teresa Halbach's
RAV4, have come from a cut to a finger?
A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Stahlke, could you explain, what is
your experience with examining
contact transfer bloodstains.
A. Contact transfer bloodstains is a -- it can be a
transfer of a pattern. You can see in some
stains the outline of a particular -- of the
particular item that is bloody contacting a --
the unstained surface. And in some cases, you
can see the pattern or detail from the bloodied
item that has been transferred, then, onto an
unstained surface.
Q. And have you been to crime scenes and examined
contact transfer stains?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Do you know how many you have been to?
A. Well, I have been to approximately 200 field
responses. Of those, then, over 100 crime
scenes. And in every scene that has blood
present, I examine the stains to determine
whether or not there would be any additional
information that would be gained from those
stains that would be helpful in this
investigation."


I cant see a re-trial having a different outcome than the last.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 10:09:PM

At his trial the defence argued that Bobby Dassey could be the killer and that the police planted the blood from his 1996 blood tube and DNA from his 2003 Saliva swab. Because they jumped to the conclusion it was Steve Avery.

A re-trail would be much of the same except that someone took blood from his sink (withing 15 minutes of him bleeding in the sink) and planted it inside the car in that short time-frame. This whole argument rests on the Stevens recent claims that he noticed blood missing from the sink. Can you expect a reasonable jury to believe this combined with all the circumstancial evidence against him?

Furthermore an expert did testify at his trial that the bloodstain came from a finger.


"Q. And this -- I would like to ask you whether you
have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of
scientific certainty, whether this cut to the
hand is consistent with being the bloody object
that came in contact with the dashboard, by the
ignition switch of the RAV4?
Could the bloodstain that you
observed on the dashboard of Teresa Halbach's
RAV4, have come from a cut to a finger?
A. Yes.
Q. Mr. Stahlke, could you explain, what is
your experience with examining
contact transfer bloodstains.
A. Contact transfer bloodstains is a -- it can be a
transfer of a pattern. You can see in some
stains the outline of a particular -- of the
particular item that is bloody contacting a --
the unstained surface. And in some cases, you
can see the pattern or detail from the bloodied
item that has been transferred, then, onto an
unstained surface.
Q. And have you been to crime scenes and examined
contact transfer stains?
A. Yes, I have.
Q. Do you know how many you have been to?
A. Well, I have been to approximately 200 field
responses. Of those, then, over 100 crime
scenes. And in every scene that has blood
present, I examine the stains to determine
whether or not there would be any additional
information that would be gained from those
stains that would be helpful in this
investigation."


I cant see a re-trial having a different outcome than the last.

It doesn't really matter where he said the blood came from, that could never be proven. However, a blood pattern expert has stated that he doesn't believe that blood could have gotten inside the car from his cut finger and as to your comment about the cut being on top, blood is liquid, it flows and as such, doesn't stay on top. Even if Avery is guilty, there is something wrong with the evidence THAT is the point!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 27, 2018, 11:02:PM
It doesn't really matter where he said the blood came from, that could never be proven. However, a blood pattern expert has stated that he doesn't believe that blood could have gotten inside the car from his cut finger and as to your comment about the cut being on top, blood is liquid, it flows and as such, doesn't stay on top. Even if Avery is guilty, there is something wrong with the evidence THAT is the point!

And a expert at trial said he believe's the stain did come from a finger. There is already counter expert evidence to refute the guy you are quoting.

If Avery is guilty, the blood got there from him driving the victims car. Its really that simple.

The picture I have attached is from a news clip the day the car was found. Here you can see the cut that Avery how claims is the source for all the blood he that he allegedly left in his sink less than 48 hours ago. It looks rather healed to me  :-\

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 27, 2018, 11:39:PM
And a expert at trial said he believe's the stain did come from a finger. There is already counter expert evidence to refute the guy you are quoting.

If Avery is guilty, the blood got there from him driving the victims car. Its really that simple.

The picture I have attached is from a news clip the day the car was found. Here you can see the cut that Avery how claims is the source for all the blood he that he allegedly left in his sink less than 48 hours ago. It looks rather healed to me  :-\

What guy? Trouble is David, you never provide links to these kind of claims - I guess you think your word is good enough - I don't

You saying it's that simple means absolutely nothing. The second series showed the blood spatter expert trying to recreate the stain, he couldn't and no matter how you play it down, if you cut your finger the blood flows from it it's doesn't just stay in the area of the cut so there would be blood at least on the steering wheel and the keys.

It looks healed to you - it looks healed to me because it isn't bleeding but that doesn't mean it was. Cuts can reopen and that one looks quite deep.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 12:30:AM
What guy? Trouble is David, you never provide links to these kind of claims - I guess you think your word is good enough - I don't

You saying it's that simple means absolutely nothing. The second series showed the blood spatter expert trying to recreate the stain, he couldn't and no matter how you play it down, if you cut your finger the blood flows from it it's doesn't just stay in the area of the cut so there would be blood at least on the steering wheel and the keys.

It looks healed to you - it looks healed to me because it isn't bleeding but that doesn't mean it was. Cuts can reopen and that one looks quite deep.

I have posted the relevant part of the trial transcript of the expert I am talking about. The series is very dishonest and one sided. They could have interviewed  the expert at trial that disagrees with them (I am assuming they didn’t) because they only show you what they want to show.

Did you know that Avery was happy to take a polygraph test to prove his innocence over the rape case? He passed the test.

He also told detective’s that he was happy to take a polygraph test to “prove” he didn't kill Teresa. Yet to this day he has avoided taking one. How comes?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 28, 2018, 01:21:AM
I have posted the relevant part of the trial transcript of the expert I am talking about. The series is very dishonest and one sided. They could have interviewed  the expert at trial that disagrees with them (I am assuming they didn’t) because they only show you what they want to show.

Did you know that Avery was happy to take a polygraph test to prove his innocence over the rape case? He passed the test.

He also told detective’s that he was happy to take a polygraph test to “prove” he didn't kill Teresa. Yet to this day he has avoided taking one. How comes?

You haven't posted a link so that people can read it themselves or named the expert in question. What trial are you talking about? There hasn't been a recent trial and Stuart James (the blood expert I quoted) has only recently carried out experiments to try and recreate the stain on the dashboard. His affidavit wasn't available at the trial.

Yes, I did know about the polygraph and although he passed, it didn't affect the outcome so taking one now would be risky. They don't measure truth telling just heart rate and galvanic skin response - in other words 'stress'.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 10:41:AM
if brenden daseys  confesion is genuine shouldent his dna be there as well.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 28, 2018, 12:05:PM
if brenden daseys  confesion is genuine should his dna be there as well.

it should be , along with all the DNA from the bedroom where a supposed rape and torture took place including stabbing TH in the stomach and cutting her throat, not one iota of her blood was found there  ::)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 12:42:PM
You haven't posted a link so that people can read it themselves or named the expert in question.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5691be1b25981daa98f417c8/t/56a6f91025981d11f5754db6/1453783312211/Steven-Avery-Lab-Report.pdf

Done

What trial are you talking about?

Steven Avery's trial!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 12:47:PM
it should be , along with all the DNA from the bedroom where a supposed rape and torture took place including stabbing TH in the stomach and cutting her throat, not one iota of her blood was found there  ::)

but ive seen no mention of any forensic evidence linking to dassey
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 12:51:PM
if brenden daseys  confesion is genuine shouldent his dna be there as well.

No.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 01:03:PM

Brendan Dassey tells the investigators that Steven shot TH with his .22 in the garage. Investigators later find a .22 bullet from Stevens rifle with her DNA on it in the garage.


Brendan Dassey tells investigators that Steven had moved the burned bones from the burn barrell to the burn pit. Later at Stevens trial the experts confirm that some of the bones had been moved to the burn pit.


Brendan Dassey tells investigators that he cleaned up the the spot where TH was shot with bleach. Investigators later find bleach stains on the clothes he was wearing that night.


Brendan Dassey tells investigators that Steven had lifted up a certain part of TH car. Investigators later find Stevens DNA in that exact same spot.


What are the chances of Brendan making up all these things that just so happened to be correct before the investigators even knew about them?  ::)








Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 02:08:PM
No.

are they not supposed to have taken turns raping her if so dasseys dna should certanly be there.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 02:16:PM
are they not supposed to have taken turns raping her if so dasseys dna should certanly be there.

Bit difficult to extract a sperm sample from a rape victim thats been reduced to nothing but bones and ashes.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on October 28, 2018, 02:53:PM
Bit difficult to extract a sperm sample from a rape victim thats been reduced to nothing but bones and ashes.

Omg Davis you are way way behind! Stop talking rubbish and watch series 2. You are just arguing for arguments sake and winding people up. I never saw it before but I do now!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 02:55:PM
Bit difficult to extract a sperm sample from a rape victim thats been reduced to nothing but bones and ashes.

hi dna should be in the trailer along with her dna.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 28, 2018, 03:20:PM
but ive seen no mention of any forensic evidence linking to dassey

that's because there is NO forensic evidence linking him to the crime.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 28, 2018, 03:32:PM
Omg Davis you are way way behind! Stop talking rubbish and watch series 2. You are just arguing for arguments sake and winding people up. I never saw it before but I do now!

Hate to say I told you so but .......  ;)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 03:37:PM
Omg Davis you are way way behind! Stop talking rubbish and watch series 2. You are just arguing for arguments sake and winding people up. I never saw it before but I do now!


No I am not. The target audience for this show is people who don't know anything about the case.

I have looked at all the facts and know the man is guilty as charged. You will have to pay me to sit through a second series of that dishonest and emotionally manipulative show.

PS: Tell me how you are supposed to get evidence of rape from a rape victim that is nothing but bones and ashes. How on earth do you do that?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 28, 2018, 03:47:PM
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5691be1b25981daa98f417c8/t/56a6f91025981d11f5754db6/1453783312211/Steven-Avery-Lab-Report.pdf

Done

Steven Avery's trial!

Thanks BUT you stated yesterday that

And a expert at trial said he believe's the stain did come from a finger. There is already counter expert evidence to refute the guy you are quoting.

Where is this 'new' counter evidence to counter claim Stuart James? James conducted his experiments in recent years and stated this in his affidavit

"All opinions rendered in this affidavit are based on new bloodstain pattern recommended
terminology. Specifically, the use of velocity as a determinative characteristic of bloodstains was abandoned with the production of the Working Group on Bloodstain
Pattern Analysis ("SWGST AIN") terminology. Bloodstain analyst Nick Stahlke
("Stahlke") used velocity to define and interpret the bloodstain pattern observed on the
rear cargo door of Ms. Halbach's
RA V-4. TT:2/27:49."

So methods used in 2005 to interpret blood stain pattern have been abandoned but perhaps this 'new counter claim' you speak of will be more useful than the original findings?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 03:50:PM
that's because there is NO forensic evidence linking him to the crime.

but there should be if he did what he claims to have done

how come avery manages to leave dna and he doesnt.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 04:37:PM
but there should be if he did what he claims to have done

how come avery manages to leave dna and he doesnt.


Because Brendans finger is not bleeding!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 04:58:PM
Thanks BUT you stated yesterday that

Where is this 'new' counter evidence to counter claim Stuart James? James conducted his experiments in recent years and stated this in his affidavit

"All opinions rendered in this affidavit are based on new bloodstain pattern recommended
terminology. Specifically, the use of velocity as a determinative characteristic of bloodstains was abandoned with the production of the Working Group on Bloodstain
Pattern Analysis ("SWGST AIN") terminology. Bloodstain analyst Nick Stahlke
("Stahlke") used velocity to define and interpret the bloodstain pattern observed on the
rear cargo door of Ms. Halbach's
RA V-4. TT:2/27:49."

So methods used in 2005 to interpret blood stain pattern have been abandoned but perhaps this 'new counter claim' you speak of will be more useful than the original findings?


I never said it was "new" I was explaining why Avery was denied a re-trial. And what would happen if such thing took place.

If such a senario took place Nick Stahlke would be called to testify again and say the same things. Stuart James would testify and it would be Nick Stahlke word against Stuart James. The Jury will then have to decied if Steven Avery is the killer or if this stealing blood from his sink and planting it in 15 minutes is plausible.

The same verdict is going to be reached. Guilty.

Nick Stahlke has similar credintials to Stuart James. You need to ask youself why a key expert witness like Nick Stahlke was never mentioned in the show. Because it didn't suit the narrative they wanted to portray.


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 28, 2018, 05:13:PM

No I am not. The target audience for this show is people who don't know anything about the case.

I have looked at all the facts and know the man is guilty is charged. You will have to pay me to sit through a second series of that dishonest and emotionally manipulative show.

PS: Tell me how you are supposed to get evidence of rape from a rape victim that is nothing but bones and ashes. How on earth do you do that?

He stated that he cut her throat and even if the cut wasn't deep enough to cause spurting, the cut is going to continue to bleed. She apparently was also stabbed in the stomach which would generate more blood but not one drop of this blood landed on the carpet, the walls or soaked through to the mattress? There were no scratches on the bed posts where she was supposedly chained and tied and Brendan gave different accounts depending on what the officers 'suggested'. In March he said she was stabbed in the bedroom but there was no trace of blood in the bedroom so in a later interview, Fassbender et al get him to change this to her being stabbed in the garage. Which means she was both stabbed and shot - which makes no sense in itself. He is simply changing his story to accommodate. For instance Brendan didn't provide the idea that Avery lifted the hood on Teresa's car, Fassbender did;

"FASSBENDER: Go ba, I wanna back ya just a bit, you’re down at the car, and you’re
hiding the car, right? (Brendan nods “yes”) Do you recall him taking the plates off?

BRENDAN: Yeah.

FASSBENDER: OK, what else did he do, he did somethin’ else, you need to tell us what he
did, after that car is parked there. It’s extremely important, (pause) Before you guys leave that
car.

BRENDAN: That he left the gun in the car.

FASSBENDER: That’s not what I’m thinkin’ about. He did something to that car. He took
the plates and he, I believe he did something else in that car. (pause).

BRENDAN: I don’t know.

FASSBENDER: OK. Did he, did he, did he go and look at the engine, did he raise the hood
at all or anything like that? To do something to that car?


BRENDAN: Yeah."


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 06:02:PM
He stated that he cut her throat and even if the cut wasn't deep enough to cause spurting, the cut is going to continue to bleed. She apparently was also stabbed in the stomach which would generate more blood but not one drop of this blood landed on the carpet, the walls or soaked through to the mattress? There were no scratches on the bed posts where she was supposedly chained and tied and Brendan gave different accounts depending on what the officers 'suggested'. In March he said she was stabbed in the bedroom but there was no trace of blood in the bedroom so in a later interview, Fassbender et al get him to change this to her being stabbed in the garage. Which means she was both stabbed and shot - which makes no sense in itself. He is simply changing his story to accommodate. For instance Brendan didn't provide the idea that Avery lifted the hood on Teresa's car, Fassbender did;

"FASSBENDER: Go ba, I wanna back ya just a bit, you’re down at the car, and you’re
hiding the car, right? (Brendan nods “yes”) Do you recall him taking the plates off?

BRENDAN: Yeah.

FASSBENDER: OK, what else did he do, he did somethin’ else, you need to tell us what he
did, after that car is parked there. It’s extremely important, (pause) Before you guys leave that
car.

BRENDAN: That he left the gun in the car.

FASSBENDER: That’s not what I’m thinkin’ about. He did something to that car. He took
the plates and he, I believe he did something else in that car. (pause).

BRENDAN: I don’t know.

FASSBENDER: OK. Did he, did he, did he go and look at the engine, did he raise the hood
at all or anything like that? To do something to that car?


BRENDAN: Yeah."


The DNA results of the hood latch were reported on May 8th 2006. Several month after Brendan told them. So they either planted his DNA at the lab to corroborate Brendans account or Brendan was being truthfull. I know what I think.


You also have the Brendan describing her being shot to the left of the head. The forensic anthropologist later confirmed this is what happened.

Brendan describes Steve moving the bones from the barrell to the burn pit. The forensic anthropologist later confirmed this is what happened.


Then you have Brendan telling them she was shot with Avery's .22 in the Garage before they discovered the bullet with DNA on.

Then you have Brendan telling them he cleaned up with bleach before they found out the clothes he was wearing that night had bleach on them.


Brendan knows too much long before the investigators did. If certain things don't make sense then maybe that's because Brendan already admits "some of it" is true and not all.


Janda: "What all happened? What are you talking about?"
Dassey: "About what me and Steven did that day."
Janda: "So Steven did do it?"
Dassey: "Yeah."
Janda: "Uh, he makes me so sick."
Dassey: "I don't even know how I'm gonna do it in court though."
Janda: "What do you mean?"
Dassey: "I ain't gonna face him."
Janda: "Who?"
Dassey: "Steven."
Janda: "You know what Brendan?"
Dassey: "What?"
Janda: "He did it. You do what you gotta do. So in those statements you did all that to her too?"
Dassey: "Some of it."

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 06:18:PM

Because Brendans finger is not bleeding!

so they have cute somomes throat raped them stabed them moved there body then destroyed there body then moved there bones and the only dna evdence is a cut finger.

how come her dna isnt on brendan. how come hr dna is not found in the trailer.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 28, 2018, 06:24:PM

The DNA results of the hood latch were reported on May 8th 2006. Several month after Brendan told them. So they either planted his DNA at the lab to corroborate Brendans account or Brendan was being truthfull. I know what I think.


You also have the Brendan describing her being shot to the left of the head. The forensic anthropologist later confirmed this is what happened.

Brendan describes Steve moving the bones from the barrell to the burn pit. The forensic anthropologist later confirmed this is what happened.


Then you have Brendan telling them she was shot with Avery's .22 in the Garage before they discovered the bullet with DNA on.

Then you have Brendan telling them he cleaned up with bleach before they found out the clothes he was wearing that night had bleach on them.


Brendan knows too much long before the investigators did. If certain things don't make sense then maybe that's because Brendan already admits "some of it" is true and not all.


Janda: "What all happened? What are you talking about?"
Dassey: "About what me and Steven did that day."
Janda: "So Steven did do it?"
Dassey: "Yeah."
Janda: "Uh, he makes me so sick."
Dassey: "I don't even know how I'm gonna do it in court though."
Janda: "What do you mean?"
Dassey: "I ain't gonna face him."
Janda: "Who?"
Dassey: "Steven."
Janda: "You know what Brendan?"
Dassey: "What?"
Janda: "He did it. You do what you gotta do. So in those statements you did all that to her too?"
Dassey: "Some of it."


But Brendan didn't tell them about the hood - Fassbender introduced it. I found that within a  few seconds of reading his transcript. I'm sure I'll find many more.

They had access to Avery's property, how hard do you imagine it is to plant his DNA under the hood? They had no reason to mention it and yet it was THEY who introduced it and then low and behold - DNA is found.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 06:31:PM
so they have cute somomes throat raped them stabed them moved there body then destroyed there body then moved there bones and the only dna evdence is a cut finger.

how come her dna isnt on brendan. how come hr dna is not found in the trailer.

Like Brendan says. Only "some of it" is what he actually done to her. So I will let you work out what is true and what is not. 

The fact of the matter is Brendan gives away too many facts unknown to the police at the time. Enough to establish him as at the very least a accessory/witness to her murder. Finding a few inconsistencies here and there is not going to change that.


Janda: "What all happened? What are you talking about?"
Dassey: "About what me and Steven did that day."
Janda: "So Steven did do it?"
Dassey: "Yeah."
Janda: "Uh, he makes me so sick."
Dassey: "I don't even know how I'm gonna do it in court though."
Janda: "What do you mean?"
Dassey: "I ain't gonna face him."
Janda: "Who?"
Dassey: "Steven."
Janda: "You know what Brendan?"
Dassey: "What?"
Janda: "He did it. You do what you gotta do. So in those statements you did all that to her too?"
Dassey: "Some of it.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 06:56:PM
Like Brendan says. Only "some of it" is what he actually done to her. So I will let you work out what is true and what is not. 

The fact of the matter is Brendan gives away too many facts unknown to the police at the time. Enough to establish him as at the very least a accessory/witness to her murder. Finding a few inconsistencies here and there is not going to change that.


Janda: "What all happened? What are you talking about?"
Dassey: "About what me and Steven did that day."
Janda: "So Steven did do it?"
Dassey: "Yeah."
Janda: "Uh, he makes me so sick."
Dassey: "I don't even know how I'm gonna do it in court though."
Janda: "What do you mean?"
Dassey: "I ain't gonna face him."
Janda: "Who?"
Dassey: "Steven."
Janda: "You know what Brendan?"
Dassey: "What?"
Janda: "He did it. You do what you gotta do. So in those statements you did all that to her too?"
Dassey: "Some of it.


only the police know what was and wasnt unknown yo them.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 07:27:PM
only the police know what was and wasnt unknown yo them.


No. Anyone that can read the date on a lab report or the date on a trial transcript can know what and wasn't known to them.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 08:02:PM
Like Brendan says. Only "some of it" is what he actually done to her. So I will let you work out what is true and what is not. 

The fact of the matter is Brendan gives away too many facts unknown to the police at the time. Enough to establish him as at the very least a accessory/witness to her murder. Finding a few inconsistencies here and there is not going to change that.


Janda: "What all happened? What are you talking about?"
Dassey: "About what me and Steven did that day."
Janda: "So Steven did do it?"
Dassey: "Yeah."
Janda: "Uh, he makes me so sick."
Dassey: "I don't even know how I'm gonna do it in court though."
Janda: "What do you mean?"
Dassey: "I ain't gonna face him."
Janda: "Who?"
Dassey: "Steven."
Janda: "You know what Brendan?"
Dassey: "What?"
Janda: "He did it. You do what you gotta do. So in those statements you did all that to her too?"
Dassey: "Some of it.



in that transcript hes noting about the crime just steve did it.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on October 28, 2018, 08:32:PM

No I am not. The target audience for this show is people who don't know anything about the case.

I have looked at all the facts and know the man is guilty as charged. You will have to pay me to sit through a second series of that dishonest and emotionally manipulative show.

PS: Tell me how you are supposed to get evidence of rape from a rape victim that is nothing but bones and ashes. How on earth do you do that?

That’s complete bollocks. The target audience are well read on this case. Zellner is a renound lawyer who has freed/exonerated 20 men and women. Some on fabricated evidence. I think her experience and theory is well worth listening to, at least then you could give a reasoned response.  There is absolutely no evidence of rape, and never will be. her bones were found in 3/4 different locoations and still only 30% of them have been  found. Quite a lot were found on manitowoc land miles from the salvage yard. Phone pings put Teresa miles from the yard . It’s impossible to burn a body in an open pit in 4 hours. The dogs traced her to the manitowoc land. Etc etc etc

Zellner is testing the evidence, this is what both the prosecution and defence do . And she has challenged anyone in the world to replicate the evidence the way the prosecution have told it. The blood on the door of the rav is going in a motion that completely disputes the prosecutions story.

To be honest david it’s pointless trying to discuss this with you as you haven’t watched series 2 so really your opinion is based on trial evidence only which is worthless in this debate.

One other thing worth mentioning is the prison justice system in America is a business worth billions of pounds. It pays to keep people locked up. Corruption is rife. You might be of the opinion that the evidence speaks for itself but if you know a little about the American justice system you would understand that’s it is by no means too far fetched to have this planted.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 28, 2018, 09:55:PM
That’s complete bollocks. The target audience are well read on this case. Zellner is a renound lawyer who has freed/exonerated 20 men and women. Some on fabricated evidence. I think her experience and theory is well worth listening to, at least then you could give a reasoned response.  There is absolutely no evidence of rape, and never will be. her bones were found in 3/4 different locoations and still only 30% of them have been  found. Quite a lot were found on manitowoc land miles from the salvage yard. Phone pings put Teresa miles from the yard . It’s impossible to burn a body in an open pit in 4 hours. The dogs traced her to the manitowoc land. Etc etc etc


Wrong.


"Remember the later evidence, as to the
amount of time that's necessary to destroy, or to
cremate a body. This is going to come later,
from some experts in the testimony, or at least
when we talk about that later. But at or about
1600 degrees, which actually was the defense
expert, Mr. Fairgrieve, when talking about BTUs
 and 300,000 BTUs per average tire.
That's the amount of heat that's thrown
off by a tire. Plenty of fuel, plenty of solid
fuel to burn, or incinerate, or cremate a human
body, that that would take between an hour and a
half and two and a half hours, at that 1600
degree level. If it starts at, the very latest,
7:30 or 7:45, and it's still going at 11:00,
that's plenty of time."


There is no evidence of a rape because the rape victim was incinerated by those who wanted to cover it up.

Brendan told us about the rape. The police at the time were not after a rape confession nor did they even consider a rape part of the investigation until Brendan himself brought it up. Its was not fed nor coerced.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 10:09:PM
That’s complete bollocks. The target audience are well read on this case. Zellner is a renound lawyer who has freed/exonerated 20 men and women. Some on fabricated evidence. I think her experience and theory is well worth listening to, at least then you could give a reasoned response.  There is absolutely no evidence of rape, and never will be. her bones were found in 3/4 different locoations and still only 30% of them have been  found. Quite a lot were found on manitowoc land miles from the salvage yard. Phone pings put Teresa miles from the yard . It’s impossible to burn a body in an open pit in 4 hours. The dogs traced her to the manitowoc land. Etc etc etc

Zellner is testing the evidence, this is what both the prosecution and defence do . And she has challenged anyone in the world to replicate the evidence the way the prosecution have told it. The blood on the door of the rav is going in a motion that completely disputes the prosecutions story.

To be honest david it’s pointless trying to discuss this with you as you haven’t watched series 2 so really your opinion is based on trial evidence only which is worthless in this debate.

One other thing worth mentioning is the prison justice system in America is a business worth billions of pounds. It pays to keep people locked up. Corruption is rife. You might be of the opinion that the evidence speaks for itself but if you know a little about the American justice system you would understand that’s it is by no means too far fetched to have this planted.

4 diffrent locations rather strange.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 28, 2018, 11:20:PM
and his vlood is ingnition but not on the key have i gt that right.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 12:11:AM
and his vlood is ingnition but not on the key have i gt that right.

Near the ignition but not on the key.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 12:13:AM
But Brendan didn't tell them about the hood - Fassbender introduced it. I found that within a  few seconds of reading his transcript. I'm sure I'll find many more.

They had access to Avery's property, how hard do you imagine it is to plant his DNA under the hood? They had no reason to mention it and yet it was THEY who introduced it and then low and behold - DNA is found.

What? No reply David?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on October 29, 2018, 12:06:PM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/making-a-murderer-part-2-attorney-kathleen-zellner-on-the-murder-theory-that-could-free-steven-avery
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 12:30:PM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/making-a-murderer-part-2-attorney-kathleen-zellner-on-the-murder-theory-that-could-free-steven-avery

Thanks for that - great article.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 29, 2018, 01:03:PM
What? No reply David?


Like I already explained. Brendan was either being honest or they took the 2003 Saliva swab from the Sheriffs office to plant Avery's DNA there.  ::)

Then you have all the other bits of info to explain.

Brendan Dassey tells the investigators that Steven shot TH with his .22 in the garage. Investigators later find a .22 bullet from Stevens rifle with her DNA on it in the garage.


Brendan Dassey tells investigators that Steven had moved the burned bones from the burn barrell to the burn pit. Later at Stevens trial the experts confirm that some of the bones had been moved to the burn pit.


Brendan Dassey tells investigators that he cleaned up the the spot where TH was shot with bleach. Investigators later find bleach stains on the clothes he was wearing that night.


You also have the Brendan describing her being shot to the left of the head. The forensic anthropologist later confirmed this is what happened.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 29, 2018, 01:16:PM
and his vlood is ingnition but not on the key have i gt that right.

And his blood is also in his car. The same type of blood stains also. Avery admits driving this car around the same time and does not claim this blood was planted!


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 01:34:PM

Like I already explained. Brendan was either being honest or they took the 2003 Saliva swab from the Sheriffs office to plant Avery's DNA there.  ::)

Then you have all the other bits of info to explain.

Brendan Dassey tells the investigators that Steven shot TH with his .22 in the garage. Investigators later find a .22 bullet from Stevens rifle with her DNA on it in the garage.


Brendan Dassey tells investigators that Steven had moved the burned bones from the burn barrell to the burn pit. Later at Stevens trial the experts confirm that some of the bones had been moved to the burn pit.


Brendan Dassey tells investigators that he cleaned up the the spot where TH was shot with bleach. Investigators later find bleach stains on the clothes he was wearing that night.


You also have the Brendan describing her being shot to the left of the head. The forensic anthropologist later confirmed this is what happened.

How was HE being honest when the subject of the hood didn't come from him (which you previously claimed)? They didn't need a saliva sample - his DNA would have been all over his unwashed clothes etc. The prosecutor called the DAN 'sweat' DNA - there is no such thing

The hood was one example - I haven't finished yet!

These two might be guilty as sin or even just Avery BUT there is something wrong with the evidence - especially the interrogation of Dassey. There are also other suspects, interesting that Kellner also thinks Bobby Dassey is top of the list!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 29, 2018, 01:40:PM
And his blood is also in his car. The same type of blood stains also. Avery admits driving this car around the same time and does not claim this blood was planted!

so he moves her car he has a cut finger now h does he start the ignition erm wit the key so there should be blood on the key.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 29, 2018, 02:09:PM
so he moves her car he has a cut finger now h does he start the ignition erm wit the key so there should be blood on the key.


What do you mean so? Look at the blood in Stevens Pontiac. He admits the blood in there if from his cut.


Now look at the blood in Teresa's Toyota. Same type of blood stains and similar quantities. This is Steven Averys blood.


This proves beyond any reasonable doubt that Steven Avery has driven both vehicles around the same time.


You saying there should be more blood in more places does not work. Its a false premise that you are making up that he would have a stream of blood pouring from his finger at all times. We know from Stevens Pontiac that this is not the case.

I dont mean to be rude but the arguments for this guy is getting seriously stupid now. Use your common sense!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 29, 2018, 02:53:PM
Having spoken to someone who has watched the 2nd series. It apparently makes no mention of the blood in Steven Avery's Pontiac.

This show is so unethical it makes my blood boil.  >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

"MR. KRATZ: Just briefly, Judge. Those Items were, in fact as soon as both of them were inspected, one of them, the blue pontiac was processed, and the items therein tested by the Wisconsin State crime Laboratory, and a DNA profile was developed from within, the fact that Steven Avery's blood is near the console of that vehicle, as well as in Ms Halbach's vehicle, the State intends to include in evidence in this case. Especially, if the defense intends to pursue their "planting of Mr. Avery's blood, evidence."
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 02:55:PM

What do you mean so? Look at the blood in Stevens Pontiac. He admits the blood in there if from his cut.


Now look at the blood in Teresa's Toyota. Same type of blood stains and similar quantities. This is Steven Averys blood.


This proves beyond any reasonable doubt that Steven Avery has driven both vehicles around the same time.


You saying there should be more blood in more places does not work. Its a false premise that you are making up that he would have a stream of blood pouring from his finger at all times. We know from Stevens Pontiac that this is not the case.

I dont mean to be rude but the arguments for this guy is getting seriously stupid now. Use your common sense!

Yes, please do look at the blood in SA Pontiac, it's on the gear stick, where you would expect to find it.

You do mean to be rude and your comment is a pathetic attempt at reverse psychology. However, you're the one having trouble answering WHY the police would introduce the hood of the RAV4 to Brendan - they did the same with the gun .....
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 02:57:PM
Having spoken to someone who has watched the 2nd series. It apparently makes no mention of the blood in Steven Avery's Pontiac.

This show is so unethical it makes my blood boil.  >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

"MR. KRATZ: Just briefly, Judge. Those Items were, in fact as soon as both of them were inspected, one of them, the blue pontiac was processed, and the items therein tested by the Wisconsin State crime Laboratory, and a DNA profile was developed from within, the fact that Steven Avery's blood is near the console of that vehicle, as well as in Ms Halbach's vehicle, the State intends to include in evidence in this case. Especially, if the defense intends to pursue their "planting of Mr. Avery's blood, evidence."

Of course his blood will be in his own car and the comment above is misleading. It is trying to stated that blood was found in a similar area to that found in the RAV4 - that is NOT the case, it was found on the GEAR STICK!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 03:37:PM
This is how reliable BD's accounts were - we know Avery had the cut prior to the disappearence of Teresa however .....

WIEGERT Did you notice any marks on Steven at all?
BRENDAN On his arm.
WIEGERT Where on his arm?
BRENDAN Like right here.
WIEGERT Do you remember which arm?
BRENDAN His left.
WIEGERT His left arm? OK. I’m sorry. I’m gonna keep tellin’ you to speak up a How did he get that mark?
BRENDAN Well, he said that he got it from workin’ out by the yard, that he cut OK.
WIEGERT Did he tell you anything else about that mark?
BRENDAN No.
WIEGERT Did he tell you that at any time that he had been injured when he had killed Teresa?
BRENDAN N-no. That he got a scratch, I think.
WIEGERT Where was that scratch?
BRENDAN Like on his finger
WIEGERT OK. How did he say he got that scratch?
BRENDAN That from a fingernail or somethin’.
WIEGERT: Did he tell you that?
BRENDAN: Yeah.
WIEGERT: So tell me again exactly what he told you.
BRENDAN: That he got it from someone scratched, someone scratchin’ um.
WIEGERT: Did he tell you who? Scratched him?
BRENDAN: Teresa.
WIEGERT: How did that come about? I mean did he say was there a struggle or something? Or what did he say?
BRENDAN: Yeah, there was a struggle.

WIEGERT: Tell me about that. What did he tell you?
BRENDAN: When he was trying to tie her up, she tried to get out and scratched ‘em tryin* to get away from ‘em and she couldn’t so he tied her up and stabbed her.
WIEGERT: Did he say anything about that? Did he say if she was yelling or screaming or anything? Did he say
BRENDAN: No.
WIEGERT: So, he actually showed you the finger?
BRENDAN: Yeah.
WIEGERT: And which finger was it?
BRENDAN: The pointer finger.
WIEGERT: Did you see anything on that finger?
BRENDAN: Yeah, a scratch.

It's also easy to see how BD is open to suggestion, something picked up on during his psychological examination.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 29, 2018, 04:01:PM
http://uk.businessinsider.com/making-a-murderer-who-killed-teresa-halbach-theories-2015-12?fbclid=IwAR2XnOj1XzGJsvwha-rSJnisetQBjyfcar9-m5P_gpNF3eEJoez1txpSwGA

the bit about deleted tezt is intresting.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 04:05:PM
Of course his blood will be in his own car and the comment above is misleading. It is trying to stated that blood was found in a similar area to that found in the RAV4 - that is NOT the case, it was found on the GEAR STICK!

Most blood found on the console area near to the gear stick - where you would expect to find it.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 29, 2018, 04:50:PM
Yes, please do look at the blood in SA Pontiac, it's on the gear stick, where you would expect to find it.


There was blood in four places in SAs pontiac. The rear seat, The top of the console, The gear stick and by the gear numbers.

You do mean to be rude and your comment is a pathetic attempt at reverse psychology.

Put your projector away. We had enough of it yesterday.


However, you're the one having trouble answering WHY the police would introduce the hood of the RAV4 to Brendan - they did the same with the gun .....

Brendan brought up the calibre of murder weapon and the exact murder weapon. Not the police. Police saying "did he use a gun" does not feed Brendan enough incriminating information that he ends up giving them.

The authorities did not get the results of the Hood Latch DNA until two months after they had this conversation with Brendan. BUT what they probably did know was the fact the battery cables were pulled out from battery. Hence the killer must have opened the hood. Which is probably why they brought it up. Which would explain why Brendan then confirms his uncle did lift the hood since his uncle is the killer and the DNA later confirms Brendan was being truthfull.


I have already admitted the 1st series fooled me. I accept that. So I am not going to hold it against you if you do the same.  :)


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 29, 2018, 05:25:PM
https://eu.postcrescent.com/story/news/2018/10/29/ken-kratz-making-murderer-part-2-filled-bias-personal-attacks/1760031002/ (https://eu.postcrescent.com/story/news/2018/10/29/ken-kratz-making-murderer-part-2-filled-bias-personal-attacks/1760031002/)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 29, 2018, 06:32:PM
https://whbl.com/news/articles/2016/sep/03/more-legal-briefs-filed-in-avery-case/?fbclid=IwAR3FQT5u7uxF2oDZJOZB6zFC-ympwY_0xRWMZBVi-BSwvnJegIDn6Nwpxpo#.W9dRlVcKTZ0.facebook
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 08:04:PM

There was blood in four places in SAs pontiac. The rear seat, The top of the console, The gear stick and by the gear numbers.

Put your projector away. We had enough of it yesterday. PATHETIC!


Brendan brought up the calibre of murder weapon and the exact murder weapon. Not the police. Police saying "did he use a gun" does not feed Brendan enough incriminating information that he ends up giving them.

The authorities did not get the results of the Hood Latch DNA until two months after they had this conversation with Brendan. BUT what they probably did know was the fact the battery cables were pulled out from battery. Hence the killer must have opened the hood. Which is probably why they brought it up. Which would explain why Brendan then confirms his uncle did lift the hood since his uncle is the killer and the DNA later confirms Brendan was being truthfull.


I have already admitted the 1st series fooled me. I accept that. So I am not going to hold it against you if you do the same.  :)

Yes, all around the console next to the gear stick - which shows (unlike what you suggested) blood drips and doesn't stay on top if that's where the cut is!  ::)

Brendan would have known that Steven has a 22 they were a hunting family for gods sake! However he didn't mention her being shot until the police did. They tried to coax him by asking what happened to her head - he says all sorts until THEY finally TELL HIM she was shot!

You're easily fooled David because you rely on what others have said and you soak up their ideas. I suspect Scipio has some influence over your current position. You don't have to have an opinion on guilt or innocence to see that evidence is flawed.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 09:58:PM
So, the police tell Brendan that Teresa was shot. Then steer him into saying she was shot in the garage and  NOT outside as he initially states. The whole thing is just unbelievable - that they were allowed to get away with these interviews and present them to ANY court is a joke!

Even crazier, the day after the interview below, the prosecution made s statement to say that 'after; receiving information they were going to research the Avery residence - they told him what they wanted to hear - that's when they SAY they found the bullet ......... but that's another story!


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 10:36:PM
The following affidavit is self explanatory

AFFIDAVIT OF LUCIEN C. HAAG
Now comes your affiant, Lucien C. "Luke" Haag, and under oath hereby states as follows:

I. I am of legal majority and can truthfully and competently testify to the matters
contained herein based upon my personal knowledge. The factual statements herein are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. I am of sound mind and I am not
taking any medication nor have I ingested any alcohol that would impair my memory of the facts
stated in this affidavit.

2. I am an independent forensic consultant with my own company, Forensic Science
Services, Inc., in Carefree, Arizona. I have consulted as an expert and testified as an expert
witness on the subject of firearms identification, firearms-related evidence, and the
reconstructive aspects of shooting incidents in numerous cases across the United States and in
other countries. l have also authored and presented more than 200 scientific papers, most of
which address various exterior and terminal ballistic properties and the effects and behavior of
projectiles. A current copy of my curriculum vitae is attached to this declaration as Exhibit A.
EXHIBIT
ll I 92

3. I published an article in the AFTE Journal (Volume 44, Number 2, Spring 2012)
regarding the forensic value of bone particles recovered from bullets. A copy of that article is
attached to this declaration as Exhibit B.

4. I was retained by Kathleen T. Zellner & Associates, P.C., to assist with the postconviction
investigation in the above-captioned case.

5. I was asked to review information and provide consultation and expert opinions
regarding the ballistics evidence in that case.

6. Kathleen T. Zellner & Associates, P.C., provided me with documents relevant to
the case, including transcripts of testimony, computer generated images, and photographs.

7. Based on the information I have reviewed, and past testing which I have carried
out, it is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty in the field of forensic ballistics, that the
damaged bullet recovered from Steven Avery's garage and purported to yield a full DNA profile
of Teresa Halbach ("Ms. Halbach") (Wisconsin State Crime Lab Item FL) shows no evidence of
having been shot through Ms. Halbach's skull. The bullet, which was identified as a .22 long
rifle bullet, was comprised of such soft metal that there would be detectable bone fragments
embedded in the damaged bullet if it had been fired through Ms. Halbach' s skull. Because no
bone fragments have been identified in the damaged bullet, Item FL, over the course of its
examination - including DNA and firearms/toolmarks analysis - at the Wisconsin State Crime
Lab, it is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty if the field of ballistics, that Item FL
was not fired through Ms. Halbach's skull.

8. I carried out tests to illustrate that bone fragments would become embedded in .22
long rifle bullets when fired through bone. I fired two (2) copper-plated, lead, CCI Minimag®
.22 long rifle bullets through approximately 2mm thick flat bone and into a soft tissue simulant
from which it was recovered. I fired two (2) additional copper-plated, lead, CCI Minimag® .22
long rifle bullets through one layer of approximately 2mm thick flat bone, then through 5 inches
of soft tissue simulant, and through a final section of approximately 2mm thick flat bone, and
finally into a soft tissue simulant as a means of recovering the bullet. Bone particles, embedded
in the soft lead, were readily visible under a stereo-microscope for both the bullets fired through
one thickness of bone and two thicknesses of bone. A copy of the experimental design of this
demonstration, along with diagrams and photos, is attached to this declaration as Exhibit C.
This demonstration supports my opinion that, to a reasonable degree of certainty in the field of
forensic ballistics, item FL was not fired through Ms. Halbach's skull because there were no
bone particles embedded in it when it was examined by Wisconsin State Crime Lab analysts.

9. William Newhouse ("Mr. Newhouse"), a Wisconsin State Crime Lab firearms
examiner, analyzed the damaged bullet, item FL, using a microscope. According to Mr.
Newhouse's bullet worksheet, attached to this declaration as Exhibit D, Mr. Newhouse
identified no trace evidence on the damaged bullet. If there were bone fragments embedded in
the damaged bullet, I would expect a reasonably competent firearms examiner to have identified
them during their microscopical examination. Based upon my review of Mr. Newhouse's trial
testimony, it is my opinion that Mr. Newhouse is a reasonably competent firearms examiner who
would likely have identified bone fragments embedded in the damaged bullet had they been
present. Because Mr. Newhouse did not note or describe any bone or bone-like particles
embedded in item FL during his microscopical examination of this damaged bullet, it is my
opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty in the field of forensic ballistics, that item FL was
not fired through Ms. Halbach's skull.

10. A definitive resolution and statement regarding the absence of bone particles in
the item FL damaged bullet would require a detailed examination for such particles under a
suitable optical microscope, or an examination by a qualified operator of a scanning electron
microscope (SEM) equipped with an energy dispersive x-ray analyzer (EDS) who is experienced
in the recognition and identification of bone particles in bullets. It is my understanding that Dr.
Christopher Palenik, PhD, ofMicrotrace, LLC, has conducted an examination of the damaged
bullet. I have been informed by Ms. Zellner that no bone was detected on the bullet, which
confirms my opinions stated above. I also examined the photographs taken by Dr. Palenik of the
damaged bullet and have confirmed that no bone fragments were visible in these photographs.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 29, 2018, 10:48:PM

AFFIDAVIT OF CHRISTOPHER PALENIK, PhD - who tested not only those bullets fired by Hagg but the actual FL bullet from the Avery case.


I. Scientific Findings - Bullet #FL
Background and Approach

8. The purpose of this examination was to determine if evidence of bone could be detected
on the surface of bullet #FL.

9. The following analytical approach was utilized:
a. Perform the first in depth photo-documentation and microscopical examination of
the #FL bullet. This was conducted by a combination of stereomicroscopy and
digital video microscopy, the latter of which was used to produce a map of the
bullet surface and the debris adhering to it. The microscopes used were
manufactured in 2016.
b. Characterization of the bullet by scaiming electron microscopy and energy
dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDS). Using the digital images of the bullet
surface as a guide, specific areas were examined in detail and analyzed to
determine their elemental composition. The inorganic portion of bone is
composed almost entirely of calcium, phosphorous and oxygen, all of which are
detectable by this approach. The SEM/EDS equipment used was produced in
2016.

Exemplar Bullet Examination - Proof of Concept

10. In preparation for this examination, four exemplar bullets, fired through bone by L. Haag,
were examined at our laboratory.
a. The exemplar bullets were initially examined and photo-documented by a
combination of stereomicroscopy and digital video microscopy to assess the
overall condition of the bullet. This initial examination showed the presence of
white, translucent particles, consistent with the appearance of bone, on the surface
of or embedded in each of the four exemplai· bullets.
b. After the initial examination and documentation, the bullets were individually
packaged and submitted to Independent Forensics for DNA extraction, to simulate
the process to which the #FL bullet had been subjected. Independent Forensics
Laboratory Supervisor Liz Kopitke placed each of the damaged bullets in separate
test tubes and submerged them in buffer fluid. Ms. Kopitke then shook the test
tubes in her hand.
c. The post-extraction exemplar bullets were again examined and photo-documented
by a combination of stereomicroscopy and digital video microscopy. This
examination showed that white, translucent particles, morphologically consistent
3
with bone, remained on and embedded in each of the four exemplar bullets. That
is, the DNA extraction conducted by Independent Forensics, which was meant to
simulate the the extraction process #FL was subjected to, did not cause the white,
translucent particles consistent with bone to fall or become dislodged from the
exemplar bullet
d. SEM/EDS analysis of debris on two of the exemplar bul_lets showed, as expected,
the co-occurrence of calcium, phosphorous and oxygen in areas identified by
digital video microscopy as containing white, translucent particles that appeared
to be fragments of bone.

11. This study of exemplar bullets demonstrates the following:
a. Particles consistent with bone were detected on each of the four exemplar bullets
that were studied.
b. This approach using a combination of stereomicroscopy, digital video microscopy
and scanning electron microscopy was shown to be suitable for the in situ
documentation and identification of bone on a bullet. If indications of bone were
detected by these methods, further analytical approaches could be applied to more
specifically confirm its presence.
c. Particles consistent with bone were detected on the exemplar bullets after they
were subjected to a DNA extraction process meant to simulate the DNA
extraction performed on #FL.
Bullet #FL Analysis

12. On 23 May 2017, a bullet (M05-2467 #FL) was hand canied to Microtrace by Special
Agent Jeff Wisch of the Wisconsin Depai.tment of Justice.

13. The bullet remained in the custody of SA Wisch during the analysis performed at
Microtrace.

14. The bullet was opened, photo-documented, and examined using a combination of
stereomicroscopy and digital video microscopy.
15. This examination revealed that the bullet surface was covered in debris exhibiting the
following characteristics:
a. A waxy substance covers a significant portion (-40%) of the leading surface of
the bullet. This material may be related to the waxes used by a firearms analysts
to orient and hold bullets during their analysis. Fmther analysis of the waxy
material could clarify this point.
b. Numerous, fine red flakes are on or embedded in the waxy substance.
c. Numerous fibers are observed adhering to the waxy substance. Most of these are
colorless; however, red and black fiber fragments were also noted. Other white
fibers not associated with the waxy surface were observed in association with the
bullet. These fibers could be more specifically identified after isolation and
fmther analysis.
d. Numerous wood fragments are present in, on and/or under the waxy substance.
Further analysis could elucidate their specific relationship to the waxy substance.
Other wood fragments appear to be directly adhering to or embedded in the lead
of the bullet. This later observation suggests that at least some of the wood was
deposited when the energized bullet encountered a wooden object. Some of the
fragments observed are individual particles of wood. One particle appears to be
an agglomeration of woody fragments, possibly originating from a manufactured
wood product such as chip or particle board. Isolation and analysis of these
particles would be required if their specific identity ( e.g. species, type of wood
product) is of interest.
e. A rounded red droplet (-.073 nml) adjacent to a smaller red droplet (-0.005
mm2) is present on one side of the bullet. The identity of this dried liquid is
presently unknown. Based upon its color and the fact that the bullet was
previously extracted for DNA, it seems unlikely that this is blood. The color,
texture, and shape of the deposit suggests that the material may be paint.
Regardless of it identity, the texture of the bullet in the area where the droplets are
observed strongly suggests that the droplet was deposited after the bullet was fired
and came to rest. This material could be identified if subjected to fmther analysis.
f. No particles consistent with bone were detected by an examination using
stereomicroscopy or digital video microscopy.

16. Note that the criteria for classification each material described above is based upon in situ
observations and are not necessarily inclusive of all particle types that may be present. A
more thorough examination would require the physical isolation of the debris for a more
detailed analysis.

17. The sample was examined without any further preparation in a JEOL 71 00FT field
emission scanning electron microscope with a 50 mm2 Oxford SDD EDS detector.
a. The base of the bullet was fixed upon a piece of conductive, double sided, carbon
    tape.
b. An image of the bullet was obtained at 20 kV. The sample was examined by a
   combination of backscatter and secondary electron imaging at magnifications
   ranging from -50x to 2000x.
c. Elemental maps were collected from various areas on the leading surface of the
   bullet that showed surfaces with exposed lead (i.e., away from the waxy deposit).
   The elemental maps were examined for areas with elevated levels of calcium and
   phosphorous. Each area analyzed was rotated toward the EDS detector to
   increase the number ofx-rays detected.
d. No areas with elevated levels of calcium and phosphorous were detected,
   indicating the absence of detectable bone.
e. A few silicon-rich areas were noted, which may suggest the presence of silicate
   compounds (e.g., minerals).
f. No particles consistent with bone were detected by SEM/EDS analysis.

18. Following the analysis, the bullet was repackaged, sealed and retained by SA Wisch.
Conclusions

19. Based upon the our analyses, there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet passed
through bone. In fact, the particulate evidence that is present strongly suggests an
alternate hypothesis, which is that the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden
object, possibly a manufactured wood product. Furthermore, the presence ofred droplets
deposited on the bullet suggest that the bullet had picked up additional contamination
from its environment at some point after coming to rest (i.e., droplets of potential red
paint or a red liquid).


20. Based upon these findings, it is our understanding that an investigator was sent by the
Zellner Law Office to the Avery garage to review the area for possible sources of the
particulate types described above. It is our understanding that the following possible
sources were identified:
a.    Particle board in the garage with apparent bullet holes.
b.    Red painted surfaces including a ladder in the garage and a red painted ceiling.

21. Each of the above listed materials observed on the bullet could be identified specifically,
if their actual identity, is of importance to the investigation. This may provide ftn1her
constraints or refinement of the hypotheses I have advanced. To facilitate this, specimens
would need to be isolated from the bullet and analyzed individually. Isolation and
analyses could be conducted using only a small portion of the material available. The
potential sources for the particulate matter that were recently collected from the A very
garage could be directly compared to materials on the bullet.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 29, 2018, 11:38:PM

19. Based upon the our analyses, there is no evidence to indicate that the bullet passed
through bone. In fact, the particulate evidence that is present strongly suggests an
alternate hypothesis, which is that the trajectory of the fired bullet took it into a wooden
object, possibly a manufactured wood product. Furthermore, the presence ofred droplets
deposited on the bullet suggest that the bullet had picked up additional contamination
from its environment at some point after coming to rest (i.e., droplets of potential red
paint or a red liquid).



It was never argued at Avery's trial that this bullet passed through bone. However we do know she was shot to the left of the head because the forensic anthropologist found bullet traces in parts of her skull consistent with gunshot damage.

Brendan tells the investigators that she was shot multiple times. They find "10 or 11" shell casings at the scene. 

"A Exhibit 225. Again, another .22 long rifle shell
casing found on the, uh, floor in the garage. Tent
number 15.
Q Okay. And, finally, Exhibit 226?
A Be tent number 16, another .22 long rifle shell
casing found on the, uh, floor in the garage.
Q Now, Deputy Kucharski, um, I think we've seen --
is it six photos of shell casings?
A Yes. Six photos.
Q How many .22 long rifle shell casings did you
find that morning?
A Um, 10 or 11 we found.

"

And so, We have 10 or 11 shell casings found. But only one bullet with no traces of bone on. From these facts we can infer that this particular bullet did not come into contact with bone. It passed through a fleshy area of the victim hence exited out her body and into the ground were it was later found. Were as the other bullets remained inside the victims body and melted beyond recognition while in the burn Barrel.

In 2017 Steven Avery decided to claim that people would just fire the .22 into his garage floor for no apparent reason. So this man non only has people shooting into his garage floor but also stealing fresh blood out of his sink? Common sense tells me this is man making things up to try and make his latest defence theory work.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 29, 2018, 11:56:PM
Why did Making a Murderer not mention the blood in Steven Avery's Pontiac? Because it proves guilt.

Why did Making a Murderer not mention the EDTA in the first series? Because it proves guilt.

Why did Making a Murderer only show snippets of Brendan's confession? Because it proves guilt.

Why did Making a Murderer not mention the blood spatter expert from Stevens trial? Because it proves guilt.

Why did Making a Murderer do some crackpot pseudoscientific "Brain Fingerprinting" instead of a polygraph? Because Avery would fail a polygraph.

Why does Making a Murderer resort to personal attacks against Kratz. They have no valid arguments.

Is Making a Murderer the most unethical and manipulative documentary of all time? Probably.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 12:08:AM
7. Based on the information I have reviewed, and past testing which I have carried
out, it is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty in the field of forensic ballistics, that the
damaged bullet recovered from Steven Avery's garage and purported to yield a full DNA profile
of Teresa Halbach ("Ms. Halbach") (Wisconsin State Crime Lab Item FL) shows no evidence of
having been shot through Ms. Halbach's skull. The bullet, which was identified as a .22 long
rifle bullet, was comprised of such soft metal that there would be detectable bone fragments
embedded in the damaged bullet if it had been fired through Ms. Halbach' s skull. Because no
bone fragments have been identified in the damaged bullet, Item FL, over the course of its
examination - including DNA and firearms/toolmarks analysis - at the Wisconsin State Crime
Lab, it is my opinion, to a reasonable degree of certainty if the field of ballistics, that Item FL
was not fired through Ms. Halbach's skull.

Again it was never claimed that this particular bullet found is the one that passed through her skull!


All these experts Zellner has hired have been fed a false premise. Its also become apparent to me that Stuart James was never informed about the blood in Stevens Pontiac!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 12:50:AM
It was never argued at Avery's trial that this bullet passed through bone. However we do know she was shot to the left of the head because the forensic anthropologist found bullet traces in parts of her skull consistent with gunshot damage.

Brendan tells the investigators that she was shot multiple times. They find "10 or 11" shell casings at the scene. 

"A Exhibit 225. Again, another .22 long rifle shell
casing found on the, uh, floor in the garage. Tent
number 15.
Q Okay. And, finally, Exhibit 226?
A Be tent number 16, another .22 long rifle shell
casing found on the, uh, floor in the garage.
Q Now, Deputy Kucharski, um, I think we've seen --
is it six photos of shell casings?
A Yes. Six photos.
Q How many .22 long rifle shell casings did you
find that morning?
A Um, 10 or 11 we found.

"

And so, We have 10 or 11 shell casings found. But only one bullet with no traces of bone on. From these facts we can infer that this particular bullet did not come into contact with bone. It passed through a fleshy area of the victim hence exited out her body and into the ground were it was later found. Were as the other bullets remained inside the victims body and melted beyond recognition while in the burn Barrel.

In 2017 Steven Avery decided to claim that people would just fire the .22 into his garage floor for no apparent reason. So this man non only has people shooting into his garage floor but also stealing fresh blood out of his sink? Common sense tells me this is man making things up to try and make his latest defence theory work.

You're talking nonsense - they found wood splinters in the bullet tip, certainly not consistent with having been shot through soft tissue

d. Numerous wood fragments are present in, on and/or under the waxy substance.
Further analysis could elucidate their specific relationship to the waxy substance.
Other wood fragments appear to be directly adhering to or embedded in the lead
of the bullet. This later observation suggests that at least some of the wood was
deposited when the energized bullet encountered a wooden object. Some of the
fragments observed are individual particles of wood. One particle appears to be
an agglomeration of woody fragments, possibly originating from a manufactured
wood product such as chip or particle board. Isolation and analysis of these
particles would be required if their specific identity ( e.g. species, type of wood
product) is of interest.

20. Based upon these findings, it is our understanding that an investigator was sent by the
Zellner Law Office to the Avery garage to review the area for possible sources of the
particulate types described above. It is our understanding that the following possible
sources were identified:
a.    Particle board in the garage with apparent bullet holes.
b.    Red painted surfaces including a ladder in the garage and a red painted ceiling.

Brendan didn't even mention that she was shot until he was told, then he said she was shot twice, the number of shots changed when it was clear the investigators weren't happy with his answer. Brendan tells the investigators that there are usually casings all over the place so it's consistent with randomly firing to 22.

You talk about Julie being coached on extremely flimsy guesswork but when it's right under your nose, you try it play it down  ::).
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 12:53:AM
Again it was never claimed that this particular bullet found is the one that passed through her skull!


All these experts Zellner has hired have been fed a false premise. Its also become apparent to me that Stuart James was never informed about the blood in Stevens Pontiac!

There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop! It's a random bullet, with traces of wood splinters linked to Teresa by some VERY dodgy interrogation tactics!

It was part of the trial - of course he would have been informed!  ::) You know about it don't you? It's HIGHLY unlikely that YOU would know and he wouldn't. The blood in the Pontiac is in a place you would expect to find it!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 12:58:AM
There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop! It's a random bullet, with traces of wood splinters linked to Teresa by some VERY dodgy interrogation tactics!

It was part of the trial - of course he would have been informed!  ::) You know about it don't you? It's HIGHLY unlikely that YOU would know and he wouldn't. The blood in the Pontiac is in a place you would expect to find it!

Oh and some DNA, just as Avery's DNA was found under the hood - the hood that was also fed to Dassey.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on October 30, 2018, 06:26:AM
It was also interesting that the hood latch swatch had not a single particle of dirt orgrease a completely sterile swab ! How odd when your swabbing a car that none of that is found.

It’s useless trying to debate with David on this as he has dismissed watching series 2 so is constantly quoting from the trial etc
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 11:30:AM
It was also interesting that the hood latch swatch had not a single particle of dirt orgrease a completely sterile swab ! How odd when your swabbing a car that none of that is found.

It’s useless trying to debate with David on this as he has dismissed watching series 2 so is constantly quoting from the trial etc

I think he's watched it but it's pointless trying to debate with David on anything - he just ignores things he can't answer or acts like they don't exist.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 02:19:PM
Oh and some DNA, just as Avery's DNA was found under the hood - the hood that was also fed to Dassey.


So you arguing the people at the lab took Avery's 2003 buccal swab from the Sheriffs office and planted it on the hood latch to match Dassey's statement.


While the "real killer" took Avery's fresh blood from his sink and planted it in the Rav4.


This is a double frame up where by the real killer plants evidence against Avery and the police/lab staff then plant even more evidence on top of that.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 02:39:PM

So you arguing the people at the lab took Avery's 2003 buccal swab from the Sheriffs office and planted it on the hood latch to match Dassey's statement.


While the "real killer" took Avery's fresh blood from his sink and planted it in the Rav4.


This is a double frame up where by the real killer plants evidence against Avery and the police/lab staff then plant even more evidence on top of that.

Am I? Where did I say that? I haven't actually said I believe Avery is innocent - you've assumed that - I SAID there is something wrong with the evidence, especially the interrogation of Brendan Dassey.

Just so you know, I don't buy the sink theory - where did the blood come from? Who knows but that is also an issue for the Bamber case because it certainly didn't come from Sheila's underwear!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 03:09:PM
There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop!

Teresa's DNA was recovered from the bullet you xxx xxx xxx!

Through a more detailed search of the garage, two bullet fragments were found in Avery's garage. One of those bullet fragments, after going through Teresa Halbach, included Teresa's DNA. And so as a matter, through Mr. Gahn and through his experts, you will learn that Teresa helped you too, that she left behind some evidence for you to consider in this case. Teresa left behind her DNA for you to consider on one of the bullets that's found in the defendant, Mr. Avery's, garage.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 30, 2018, 03:22:PM
the blood could of been planted because the state had smples of it from his appeal for the rape conviction

the box contain the samples had been had unsealed by somebody for know explained reason.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 03:26:PM
the blood could of been planted because the state had smples of it from his appeal for the rape conviction

the box contain the samples had been had unsealed by somebody for know explained reason.

That's already been disproven. The samples the state had was full of EDTA to preserve the blood. There was no EDTA in the blood found in the Rav4.

"And this planting, this vial planting
defense, even from a common sense standpoint, is
absolutely ludicrous.
But what we were able to do, what you
heard, is scientifically exclude that vial of
blood. You heard from Dr. LeBeau, who testified
that this blood is loaded with EDTA and this
blood, and this blood, and this blood, have no
detectable levels of EDTA. And so instead of
calling all of the people with keys and with
codes, and people in the Clerk's Office, and who
might have seen Lieutenant Lenk or Colborn, or
all those kinds of things, instead of doing it
that way, we only had to call one witness, who
scientifically could tell you that there is
absolutely no way that that vial of blood was
used to plant.
In fact, that very question was asked of
Dr. LeBeau, the head of the toxicology section,
or the unit at the FBI. And he said, by a
reasonable degree of scientific certainty, this
vial of blood is excluded, that means it's not
it, it's excluded as the source of those three
bloodstains."

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 03:51:PM
Teresa's DNA was recovered from the bullet you xxx xxx xxx!

Through a more detailed search of the garage, two bullet fragments were found in Avery's garage. One of those bullet fragments, after going through Teresa Halbach, included Teresa's DNA. And so as a matter, through Mr. Gahn and through his experts, you will learn that Teresa helped you too, that she left behind some evidence for you to consider in this case. Teresa left behind her DNA for you to consider on one of the bullets that's found in the defendant, Mr. Avery's, garage.

Ha, ha!!!!  Xxx xxx xxxxxx you xxxx xxxxxx xxxxxx!

DNA can be transferred - xxxxx! Remember June's DNA was found in the Bamber silencer! That particular bullet had wood fragments buried in the lead!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 30, 2018, 04:15:PM
the fact 10 , 11 shell casing were found in the garage is hardly unusual given the property had lots of shell casings , they were regularly firing off guns there ,

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 30, 2018, 04:16:PM
the blood could of been planted because the state had smples of it from his appeal for the rape conviction

the box contain the samples had been had unsealed by somebody for know explained reason.

I think that's more likely than someone going into SA trailer and getting it from his sink.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 04:17:PM
If DNA can be transferred accidentally, it can be transferred deliberately!

https://phys.org/news/2015-10-easy-dna-contaminate-crime-scene.html
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on October 30, 2018, 04:18:PM
Has anyone listened to Dan O'Donnell's pod cast , Rebutting a Murderer? he's done one re MAM1 and 2, what interested me was the fact that in BD's confession he says that they put TH body in the back of her car and drove round to the pond on the neighbouring property but they couldn't dump the body there because it was dry,,,, this would account for the dogs following that lead onto the neighbouring property and also I wonder if there is any way of confirming whether in fact that pond was dry at the time?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 04:21:PM
Just the other day it was being implied that the blood in the Rav4 was planted because the absence of Avery's blood on the Rav4 steering wheel.

no matter how you play it down, if you cut your finger the blood flows from it it's doesn't just stay in the area of the cut so there would be blood at least on the steering wheel and the keys.

 ::)

But thanks to Steven Avery himself driving his Pontiac with the same cut. Steven has given us a ready made exhibit of him driving a car around the same time with the exact same cut. And Lo and Behold no blood was on the steering wheel just like when he drove his victims Rav4.  ;D

This is a prime example of how the show fools people by leaving important evidence out. 

PS: Steven Avery was also kind enough to leave his pontiacs interior in an utterly filthy condition so there can be no arguments about him cleaning his blood up either. Well done Steven Avery!

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 04:22:PM
I think that's more likely than someone going into SA trailer and getting it from his sink.

The sample did contain EDTA so it couldn't have come from that. I agree that the blood is a problem but just because we don't know how it was transferred (other than from Avery himself), doesn't mean it wasn't.  For those who don't buy the Bamber silencer aspect, we're left with explaining how Sheila's blood ended up inside the silencer.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 04:25:PM
Just the other day it was being implied that the blood in the Rav4 was planted because the absence of Avery's blood on the Rav4 steering wheel.

 ::)

But thanks the Steven Avery himself driving his Pontiac with the same cut. Steven has given us a ready made exhibit of him driving a car around the same time with the exact same cut. And Lo and Behold no blood was on the steering wheel just like when he drove his victims Rav4.  ;D

This is a prime example of how the show fools people by leaving important evidence out. 

PS: Steven Avery was also kind enough to leave his pontiacs interior in an utterly filthy condition so there can be no arguments about him cleaning his blood up either. Well done Steven Avery!

Was there blood on the RAV4 gear stick? Was there blood next to the ignition on the Pontiac? Was Teresa's DNA on her OWN keys?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 05:00:PM
Ha, ha!!!!  Xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxxx xxx xxx xxxxxx

DNA can be transferred - IDIOT! Remember June's DNA was found in the Bamber silencer! That particular bullet had wood fragments buried in the lead!


That silencer was never handled in the scientifically rigorous fashion that this bullet was. A lot has changed from 1985 to 2005. Furthermore Junes DNA was discovered via the Low Copy Number (LCN) profiling technique. They don't use this technology in the United States. Not an apt comparison.

The only sources of DNA that the lab had to transfer was Teresa's bones and her blood from the Rav4. Absence of bones on the bullet would rule out the bones being the source IMO. So that leaves the rav4 blood that was collected and processed four month before with a seperate chain of custody. No room for accidental transfer in this senario.

As for a conspiracy. Ironically the state scientists involved here are the same people that exhonerated Avery from the rape case just two years before. So if they are so corrupt and want to frame him to prevent him getting a compensation payout, why on earth did they honestly exonerate him in the first place?  ???
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 05:16:PM
I think that's more likely than someone going into SA trailer and getting it from his sink.

Exactly. And this "more likely" scenario has already been proved to be impossible. ;D

This why the show is grasping a straws with the ludicrous sink theory.

 

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=9730.0;attach=54269)

(http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=9730.0;attach=54271)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 07:22:PM

That silencer was never handled in the scientifically rigorous fashion that this bullet was. A lot has changed from 1985 to 2005. Furthermore Junes DNA was discovered via the Low Copy Number (LCN) profiling technique. They don't use this technology in the United States. Not an apt comparison.

The only sources of DNA that the lab had to transfer was Teresa's bones and her blood from the Rav4. Absence of bones on the bullet would rule out the bones being the source IMO. So that leaves the rav4 blood that was collected and processed four month before with a seperate chain of custody. No room for accidental transfer in this senario.

As for a conspiracy. Ironically the state scientists involved here are the same people that exhonerated Avery from the rape case just two years before. So if they are so corrupt and want to frame him to prevent him getting a compensation payout, why on earth did they honestly exonerate him in the first place?  ???

We don't know how the bullet was handled - where did the wood splinters come from?

They have to have another source of DNA to match to the blood and bone fragments - ever heard of touch DNA?

Who said the scientists were part of any conspiracy?

This thread was never supposed to be about guilt or innocence but once again, in you come with your over blown sense of self, miss the whole point and ruin a perfectly good debate.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on October 30, 2018, 07:37:PM
http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/search/label/Blood%20DNA%20Fabricated
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on October 30, 2018, 07:54:PM
The most common way for forensic evidence to be planted is by re-labeling the forensic swabs." - Dr. Karl Reich, PhD
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 30, 2018, 08:35:PM
well if thedefence request to have the retested dna is granted we will know.

because if it wasn't planted the result we be exactly the same.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 09:17:PM
The most common way for forensic evidence to be planted is by re-labeling the forensic swabs." - Dr. Karl Reich, PhD

The testing for DNA on the bullet was flawed because the testers DNA contaminated the experiment.

http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/2016/02/some-clarity-to-some-of-evidence-in.html
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on October 30, 2018, 10:02:PM
The testing for DNA on the bullet was flawed because the testers DNA contaminated the experiment.

http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/2016/02/some-clarity-to-some-of-evidence-in.html
Very interesting , some very good posts on that blog .
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 10:26:PM
The test on the bullet can never be repeated because all of the DNA was used. Found out where the Teresa's DNA was matched from - it was from a PAP test (cervical smear test).
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 10:29:PM
The testing for DNA on the bullet was flawed because the testers DNA contaminated the experiment.

http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/2016/02/some-clarity-to-some-of-evidence-in.html


No it wasn't. That person got their DNA on a negative control sample. It does not change the FACT that Teresa's DNA was the only DNA found on the bullet. This was covered at Avery's trial.

"In this particular case, there was a
trace amount of -- a trace amount of DNA showed
up in the quantitation portion where I had to
quantitate and find out how much DNA I had.
There was a trace amount of DNA in the negative
control. I took the profile to completion and I
developed the profile on it. And the profile in
the negative control turned out to be consistent
with my own DNA type.
Q. What did that mean?
A. That means that during the extraction procedure I
inadvertently introduced my own DNA into the
negative control.
Q. Did that have any impact on your interpretation
of your results?
A. It did not have any impact as far as the profile
from the evidence sample. It's just the fact
that I introduced my own DNA into the
manipulation control.
Q. Were there any other profiles developed on the
bullet besides Teresa Halbach?
A. No.
Q. Was Teresa Halbach's profile the only profile
that you found on that bullet?
A. Yes.
Q. Were there any mixtures?
A. No.
Q. And your profile was found where?
A. In the negative control, which should have had
just reagents in it. It should not have had any
DNA at all in it.
"


I am guessing the 2nd series never mentions the bullet DNA either since only this morning you were under the impression that "There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop!"  ::)

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 30, 2018, 10:32:PM
The test on the bullet can never be repeated because all of the DNA was used. Found out where the Teresa's DNA was matched from - it was from a PAP test (cervical smear test).

They only planted enough DNA for one test?  ::)

Here is what the defence argued.

"He's suggesting that the Pap
smear, or the DNA from Teresa Halbach, somehow
got out of the sealed envelope that it was in,
the standard, somehow maybe walked across her
desk, somehow it jumped into the vial, or onto
the bullet. And that's the kind of thing that
Mr. Buting wants you to believe. That's
disingenuous, doesn't happen that way.
Mr. Gahn knew that was an important
point and he took time, meticulous time with Ms
Culhane, to explain that process for you. It's
Teresa Halbach's DNA on that bullet because,
unfortunately, it went through her body. Not
because the DNA from her Pap smear or from other
standard that was within the Crime Lab somehow
transmitted itself or made its way onto that
bullet.
"

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 11:50:PM
They only planted enough DNA for one test?  ::)

Here is what the defence argued.

"He's suggesting that the Pap
smear, or the DNA from Teresa Halbach, somehow
got out of the sealed envelope that it was in,
the standard, somehow maybe walked across her
desk, somehow it jumped into the vial, or onto
the bullet. And that's the kind of thing that
Mr. Buting wants you to believe. That's
disingenuous, doesn't happen that way.
Mr. Gahn knew that was an important
point and he took time, meticulous time with Ms
Culhane, to explain that process for you. It's
Teresa Halbach's DNA on that bullet because,
unfortunately, it went through her body. Not
because the DNA from her Pap smear or from other
standard that was within the Crime Lab somehow
transmitted itself or made its way onto that
bullet.
"

Uh huh - what the defense didn't know (and neither did you) was that the bullet also had wooden splinters embedded.

I guess the above appeals to you because it's a childish attempt are sarcasm. I love sarcasm but some people should just leave it alone.  ::)
 

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 30, 2018, 11:59:PM

No it wasn't. That person got their DNA on a negative control sample. It does not change the FACT that Teresa's DNA was the only DNA found on the bullet. This was covered at Avery's trial.

"In this particular case, there was a
trace amount of -- a trace amount of DNA showed
up in the quantitation portion where I had to
quantitate and find out how much DNA I had.
There was a trace amount of DNA in the negative
control. I took the profile to completion and I
developed the profile on it. And the profile in
the negative control turned out to be consistent
with my own DNA type.
Q. What did that mean?
A. That means that during the extraction procedure I
inadvertently introduced my own DNA into the
negative control.
Q. Did that have any impact on your interpretation
of your results?
A. It did not have any impact as far as the profile
from the evidence sample. It's just the fact
that I introduced my own DNA into the
manipulation control.
Q. Were there any other profiles developed on the
bullet besides Teresa Halbach?
A. No.
Q. Was Teresa Halbach's profile the only profile
that you found on that bullet?
A. Yes.
Q. Were there any mixtures?
A. No.
Q. And your profile was found where?
A. In the negative control, which should have had
just reagents in it. It should not have had any
DNA at all in it.
"


I am guessing the 2nd series never mentions the bullet DNA either since only this morning you were under the impression that "There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop!"  ::)

There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop! It's a random bullet, with traces of wood splinters linked to Teresa by some VERY dodgy interrogation tactics!

It was part of the trial - of course he would have been informed!  ::) You know about it don't you? It's HIGHLY unlikely that YOU would know and he wouldn't. The blood in the Pontiac is in a place you would expect to find it!

Oh and some DNA, just as Avery's DNA was found under the hood - the hood that was also fed to Dassey.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9730.msg448209.html#msg448209



Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 31, 2018, 12:01:AM

No it wasn't. That person got their DNA on a negative control sample. It does not change the FACT that Teresa's DNA was the only DNA found on the bullet. This was covered at Avery's trial.

"In this particular case, there was a
trace amount of -- a trace amount of DNA showed
up in the quantitation portion where I had to
quantitate and find out how much DNA I had.
There was a trace amount of DNA in the negative
control. I took the profile to completion and I
developed the profile on it. And the profile in
the negative control turned out to be consistent
with my own DNA type.
Q. What did that mean?
A. That means that during the extraction procedure I
inadvertently introduced my own DNA into the
negative control.
Q. Did that have any impact on your interpretation
of your results?
A. It did not have any impact as far as the profile
from the evidence sample. It's just the fact
that I introduced my own DNA into the
manipulation control.
Q. Were there any other profiles developed on the
bullet besides Teresa Halbach?
A. No.
Q. Was Teresa Halbach's profile the only profile
that you found on that bullet?
A. Yes.
Q. Were there any mixtures?
A. No.
Q. And your profile was found where?
A. In the negative control, which should have had
just reagents in it. It should not have had any
DNA at all in it.
"


I am guessing the 2nd series never mentions the bullet DNA either since only this morning you were under the impression that "There is no evidence that the bullet went though any part of Teresa - full stop!"  ::)

"When these tests are developed, there are controls put into place that ensure the test was run correctly. These controls are usually of a positive and negative variety: the positive control will have a known substance or quantity that will produce a result that falls within a specific range and the negative control will produce no result (a zero, nothing detected, etc.). In order to be able to produce results that can be labeled “scientifically valid,” the test must contain controls. If something comes up in the negative control, it is an invalid test. If the positive control produces a result that is abnormal or out of range, it is an invalid test. An invalid test means, in effect, that there are NO ACTUAL TEST RESULTS. In regards to whatever sample you were testing, in that specific test, there are no results. This prevents reporting of tainted, skewed, and erroneous results."

http://georgezipperer.blogspot.com/2016/02/some-clarity-to-some-of-evidence-in.html
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 31, 2018, 01:23:AM
The evidence against Steven Avery seems overwhelming.


The victims bones and ashes are found both in his burn barrel and hidden behind his garage also.

An accomplice to the crime describes Steven Avery taking the bones out the burn barrel breaking them with a shovel then hiding them behind his garage. This was before any forensic anthropologist would testify that this is indeed what happened.

An accomplice to the crime describes Steven Avery shooting her to the left of her head. This was before any forensic anthropologist would testify that this is indeed what happened.

The self confessed accomplice has his jeans covered in bleach. Large amounts of bleach residue was found in Steven Avery's garage.

Also in the same garage a fired bullet was later discovered containin  the same DNA as the victims bones behind Steven Avery's garage.

The bullet with the victims DNA on was proven to have been fired from the rife that is hung up on the wall in Steven Avery's bedroom.

Hidden behind a bookshelf in Steven Averys bedroom was the car keys to the victims car.

The victims car is located on Steven Avery's property right next to his old red Jeep.

Steven Avery while driving his Pontiac got bloodstains on the front console due to a cut on his right finger.

Similar Bloodstains were also found inside the victims car. The DNA is traced back to the same person who spilled his blood in his Pontiac around the same time, - Steven Avery.

The victims car was found to have had the power cables pulled from the car battery. Hence someone involved in the victims death must have opened the car hood at some stage. DNA analysis on the hood latch comes back as a match to non other than..... Steven Avery.

The victims phone records show the last person Teresa spoke to was Steven Avery. Auto-trader staff say that Steven would always call them asking for Teresa and that he would greet her wearing nothing but towel. Yet during the 5 day search for this missing person he makes no effort to try and call her.

While Steven does not bother calling this missing person he has an affection for. Witnesses report his accomplice Brendan Dassey suddently being depressed and crying to himself.

The victim met up with Steven Avery as usual to take photos of a vehicle he wanted to sell in Auto Trader. Yet the vehicle never ended up on the front display like all his other cars with Auto Trader ads did. Bits of the victims camera was later recovered from Steven Averys burn barrel.

So if it somehow isn't Steven Avery then who killed Tereasa? And how did this mountain of smoking gun evidence against Steven Avery come to be?

The only other people on the premisis that could possibly have the opportunity to kill Teresa Halbach are - Chuck Avery, Earl Avery and Bobby Dassey. The defence now want us to believe that either of these three burned Teresa's remains in Stevens Barrel without him noticing. Crushed the bones then planted them behind his garage without him realising. Then just as Steven now happens to remember spilling fresh blood in his sink, either of these three sneek in and extract the wet blood from his sink, then rush it back to the victims car in no later than 15 minutes from when he first spilled the blood in the sink (as it would dry up). Then plant Stevens blood inside so it replicates the blood inside his pontiac. While doing this they also take his toothbrush and scrub it on the hood latch of the victims car and finally plant the victims car key in his bedroom. All without Steven noticing.

Having later heard from his accomplice saying that Steve shot Teresa in the garage with his .22. The police then plant a bullet from that gun in the garage. The lab staff that exonerated Steven Avery from the rape case just two years prior to this, then plant the victims DNA on the bullet. The icing on the cake in a double frame up to prevent him getting his lawsuit payout, which begs the question as to why they honestly exonerated him in the first place.

This is the most half-baked crime theory I have ever heard.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on October 31, 2018, 02:49:PM
The evidence against Steven Avery seems overwhelming.


The victims bones and ashes are found both in his burn barrel and hidden behind his garage also.

An accomplice to the crime describes Steven Avery taking the bones out the burn barrel breaking them with a shovel then hiding them behind his garage. This was before any forensic anthropologist would testify that this is indeed what happened.

An accomplice to the crime describes Steven Avery shooting her to the left of her head. This was before any forensic anthropologist would testify that this is indeed what happened.

The self confessed accomplice has his jeans covered in bleach. Large amounts of bleach residue was found in Steven Avery's garage.

Also in the same garage a fired bullet was later discovered containin  the same DNA as the victims bones behind Steven Avery's garage.

The bullet with the victims DNA on was proven to have been fired from the rife that is hung up on the wall in Steven Avery's bedroom.

Hidden behind a bookshelf in Steven Averys bedroom was the car keys to the victims car.

The victims car is located on Steven Avery's property right next to his old red Jeep.

Steven Avery while driving his Pontiac got bloodstains on the front console due to a cut on his right finger.

Similar Bloodstains were also found inside the victims car. The DNA is traced back to the same person who spilled his blood in his Pontiac around the same time, - Steven Avery.

The victims car was found to have had the power cables pulled from the car battery. Hence someone involved in the victims death must have opened the car hood at some stage. DNA analysis on the hood latch comes back as a match to non other than..... Steven Avery.

The victims phone records show the last person Teresa spoke to was Steven Avery. Auto-trader staff say that Steven would always call them asking for Teresa and that he would greet her wearing nothing but towel. Yet during the 5 day search for this missing person he makes no effort to try and call her.

While Steven does not bother calling this missing person he has an affection for. Witnesses report his accomplice Brendan Dassey suddently being depressed and crying to himself.

The victim met up with Steven Avery as usual to take photos of a vehicle he wanted to sell in Auto Trader. Yet the vehicle never ended up on the front display like all his other cars with Auto Trader ads did. Bits of the victims camera was later recovered from Steven Averys burn barrel.

So if it somehow isn't Steven Avery then who killed Tereasa? And how did this mountain of smoking gun evidence against Steven Avery come to be?

The only other people on the premisis that could possibly have the opportunity to kill Teresa Halbach are - Chuck Avery, Earl Avery and Bobby Dassey. The defence now want us to believe that either of these three burned Teresa's remains in Stevens Barrel without him noticing. Crushed the bones then planted them behind his garage without him realising. Then just as Steven now happens to remember spilling fresh blood in his sink, either of these three sneek in and extract the wet blood from his sink, then rush it back to the victims car in no later than 15 minutes from when he first spilled the blood in the sink (as it would dry up). Then plant Stevens blood inside so it replicates the blood inside his pontiac. While doing this they also take his toothbrush and scrub it on the hood latch of the victims car and finally plant the victims car key in his bedroom. All without Steven noticing.

Having later heard from his accomplice saying that Steve shot Teresa in the garage with his .22. The police then plant a bullet from that gun in the garage. The lab staff that exonerated Steven Avery from the rape case just two years prior to this, then plant the victims DNA on the bullet. The icing on the cake in a double frame up to prevent him getting his lawsuit payout, which begs the question as to why they honestly exonerated him in the first place.

This is the most half-baked crime theory I have ever heard.

I haven't read the above other than your last comment but the most half baked theory on a murder case that I have ever heard (and unlike you, I don't read pretend to be an expert on them all) - is yours on the Bamber case!

Finished with this thread now because there is little point in trying to discuss the ACTUAL topic because it has been hijacked by you and your obsessive need to play the expert.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 31, 2018, 04:44:PM
Steven Avery now claims that his then girlfriend Jodi would randomly shoot the murder weapon into his garage floor.

Slight problems here for Steve.

1) Jodi was in prison at the time of Teresa's murder. (This is why he got the urge to rape Teresa)

2) 10 shell casings were found on his garage floor. So were are the 10 bullet holes and the other 9 bullets on the garage floor?

3) Why is there only one fired bullet with the victims DNA on?


The answer to this is simple. He shot the victim 10 times. The bullet that would later be recovered did not come into contact with the victims bones and passed through her flesh. Resulting in that bullet exiting out the victim to later be recovered for forensic analysis. The other 9 bullets that Jodi is supposed to have shot into floor remained in the body of the murder victims body and melted beyond reconition in Steven Averys burn barrel.


So there you go. His lies are rather easy to work out and he is just shooting himself in the foot here.
People fail to realise how stupid this man this. Many who think this man is innocent cannot fathom a killer leaving the a murder victims bones and the car on their property for all to see.

Facts you need to know about Steven Avery

- He was in the special needs class at school. Has an IQ near 70
- Has commited multiple burglaries.
- Molested his underage Neice
- Been reported many times for domestic violence
- Illegally possessed weapons.
- Deliberatly set a cat on fire.
- He chased someone in his car then threatend them at gun point.
- Would go running out naked on his lawn, masturbating infront of women passing by.


Does this sound like someone stupid enough to go and commit rape and murder while he was soon due several million dollars in compensation from the legal system? Absolutely.

The man is an impulsive, thuggish, self serving and sexually deviant imbecile. He comes across as genuine in his protestations of innocence because all he has to do is act out what he genuinely once done for 18 years prior.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on October 31, 2018, 05:12:PM
david can you explian the remains beingfound in 4 diffrent locations.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on October 31, 2018, 05:46:PM
david can you explian the remains beingfound in 4 diffrent locations.


They were found in 2 locations. Burn Barrell and Burn Pit behind the garage.


Brendan already explained that Steven took the obvious bones out the burn barrel, broke them up with a shovel then hid them behind the Garage
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on October 31, 2018, 07:00:PM

They were found in 2 locations. Burn Barrell and Burn Pit behind the garage.


Brendan already explained that Steven took the obvious bones out the burn barrel, broke them up with a shovel then hid them behind the Garage

Umm wrong again David watch season 2 and find out where the bones were found. What happened to the other 70 to 90% of them?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 01, 2018, 02:15:AM
Umm wrong again David watch season 2 and find out where the bones were found.

Watch season two if you want to be brainwashed. If they are saying Teresa's bones were found at the quarry they are misleading the audience once again.

Ken Kratz closing arguments

"These bones in the quarry,
I'm going to take about 20 seconds to talk about,
because the best anybody can say is that they are
possible human. What does possible human mean?
Well, it means we don't know what it is.
All right.
The best anthropologists in the world
don't know what these bones are. Dr. Eisenberg
didn't know what they were. Dr. Fairgrieve
didn't know what they were, he agreed with that.
And you heard a stipulation being read
to you by a person by the name of Les McCurdy.
Stipulation just means an agreement between the
parties, that these bones, we felt it important
enough, were sent out to the FBI. And Les
McCurdy from the FBI determined that these bones
were so degraded, that they were in such a shape
that even through testing, what's called
mitochondrial DNA testing, whether they are human
or not, could not, even by the FBI, be
determined.
So the bones in the quarry are really
not evidence in this case."



What happened to the other 70 to 90% of them?

Again this was covered at his trial.


Q Great. Um, and what -- what we know, then, is
that there are -- there are pieces missing?
A We know there are pieces that are missing. That's
correct.
Q Not recovered?
A Or not there to recover after the burning episode.
Q Exactly. I mean --
A Correct.
Q -- the reasons for not being recovered may be
just complete reduction to ash or something
unrecognizable by fire --
A Correct.



Here I am spoon feeding people facts. While the makers of bullshit show get an Emmy Award for misleading everyone into thinking this lowlife is innocent  >:(
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 01, 2018, 12:36:PM
Watch season two if you want to be brainwashed. If they are saying Teresa's bones were found at the quarry they are misleading the audience once again.

Ken Kratz closing arguments

"These bones in the quarry,
I'm going to take about 20 seconds to talk about,
because the best anybody can say is that they are
possible human. What does possible human mean?
Well, it means we don't know what it is.
All right.
The best anthropologists in the world
don't know what these bones are. Dr. Eisenberg
didn't know what they were. Dr. Fairgrieve
didn't know what they were, he agreed with that.
And you heard a stipulation being read
to you by a person by the name of Les McCurdy.
Stipulation just means an agreement between the
parties, that these bones, we felt it important
enough, were sent out to the FBI. And Les
McCurdy from the FBI determined that these bones
were so degraded, that they were in such a shape
that even through testing, what's called
mitochondrial DNA testing, whether they are human
or not, could not, even by the FBI, be
determined.
So the bones in the quarry are really
not evidence in this case."



Again this was covered at his trial.


Q Great. Um, and what -- what we know, then, is
that there are -- there are pieces missing?
A We know there are pieces that are missing. That's
correct.
Q Not recovered?
A Or not there to recover after the burning episode.
Q Exactly. I mean --
A Correct.
Q -- the reasons for not being recovered may be
just complete reduction to ash or something
unrecognizable by fire --
A Correct.



Here I am spoon feeding people facts. While the makers of bullshit show get an Emmy Award for misleading everyone into thinking this lowlife is innocent  >:(

Who is arguing that he's innocent? You turned it into a question of guilt or innocence because you can't help sticking you awe in! You don't understand the basic concept of the thread!  But now you might realise how I feel about Bamber!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 01, 2018, 04:37:PM
Who is arguing that he's innocent?


Everyone on this topic apart from me. Has been leaning towards or implying (rather than explicitly) that he is.

You turned it into a question of guilt or innocence because you can't help sticking you awe in! You don't understand the basic concept of the thread!

There is no question.

The man is guilty. And I find the show a complete insult to the victim and the victims family. Even Teresa's brother has accused of being "the real killer". Not to mention all the other people having thier names dragged through the dirt.

But now you might realise how I feel about Bamber!

There is nothing similar about the two what so ever.  Their backgrounds, personalities and the nature of thier convictions could not be more further apart.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 01, 2018, 07:50:PM
I really don't think anyone here gives a rats arse what you think.

No one has been arguing for Avery's innocence ....... or guilt for that matter - just YOU! And don't come it with the moral crusade routine. If you have issue with a programme you have never seen, then take it up with the makers and leave those who wish to discuss what the series brought up to do so without you shaking your rattle every five minutes.

Seems to me that your intention was to disrupt the thread because you're a childish, pathetic nowt!

As for Bamber and Avery;

What's background got to do with it? If guilty, they both psychopaths and they're both convicted of cold blooded murder - one wanted sex, the other cash and neither has the bollocks to admit their guilt. Not too different at all
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 01, 2018, 09:43:PM
I really don't think anyone here gives a rats arse what you think.

No one has been arguing for Avery's innocence ....... or guilt for that matter - just YOU! And don't come it with the moral crusade routine. If you have issue with a programme you have never seen, then take it up with the makers and leave those who wish to discuss what the series brought up to do so without you shaking your rattle every five minutes.

Seems to me that your intention was to disrupt the thread because you're a childish, pathetic nowt!

As for Bamber and Avery;

What's background got to do with it? If guilty, they both psychopaths and they're both convicted of cold blooded murder - one wanted sex, the other cash and neither has the bollocks to admit their guilt. Not too different at all


My intention is to explain the facts to the viewers of this show. If it was not for what I have posted here there would be a lot about this case you would not yet have known of. But now that you do know would you at least agree the show is misleading and unethical?

You have to ask yourself why such a lenghly series misses so much important info out. Its not like they didnt have time to include it. Documentaries are supposed to inform. This was made purely to entertain people under a pretence of an innocent man railroaded.

Its not the only documentary series I am critical of. The Curse of Oak Island is another series that does a similar thing.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 01, 2018, 10:25:PM

My intention is to explain the facts to the viewers of this show. If it was not for what I have posted here there would be a lot about this case you would not yet have known of. But now that you do know would you at least agree the show is misleading and unethical?

You have to ask yourself why such a lenghly series misses so much important info out. Its not like they didnt have time to include it. Documentaries are supposed to inform. This was made purely to entertain people under a pretence of an innocent man railroaded.

Its not the only documentary series I am critical of. The Curse of Oak Island is another series that does a similar thing.

Seriously? Are you taking the piss? There is NOTHING you posted that I and others didn't know. In fact much of it was mentioned in the second series and there is a website with the full case files - which I am sure you already know. However, there is a LOT that has been posted that you don't know! I think I have repeated several time now that the thread isn't about guilt or innocence or even the first series. However, a discussion here affects nothing - Avery (like Bamber), won't be walking anywhere just because someone has an opinion about him. Your problem is that you believe you have influence and that you know more about everything - you don't.

For anyone interested in the Avery case this is a link to the trial transcripts etc.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/

This is a link to the appeals documents and all the the stuff that Zellner has recently filed.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/appealsdocuments/


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 02, 2018, 12:53:AM
Seriously? Are you taking the piss? There is NOTHING you posted that I and others didn't know.


Yes seriously. If you already knew what I have posted here you wouldn't have bothered watching the show in the first place.

Did you know about Brendans admission to Kayla Avery? No.
Did you know about Brendan describing the bones being moved? No.
Did you know about Steven Avery's blood in his own vehicle from his cut finger? No.
Did you know about the victims DNA on the bullet in Steven Avery's Garage? No.



If you want me to take the piss -

How about you write to Steven Avery and ask him if he knew how much money was in Teresa's purse?

Steven Avery DOC# 122987
Waupun Correctional Institution
P.O. Box 351
Waupun WI
53963-0351


If you hear nothing back. Then you will be satisfied the man is indeed guilty as charged.


 ::)

 ;D ;D ;D ;D
 

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 02, 2018, 01:01:AM
Steven Avery used this conspiracy as his defence from day one because he knew he was caught.


https://streamable.com/eubc3 (https://streamable.com/eubc3)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 02, 2018, 03:11:AM

Yes seriously. If you already knew what I have posted here you wouldn't have bothered watching the show in the first place.

Did you know about Brendans admission to Kayla Avery? No.
Did you know about Brendan describing the bones being moved? No.
Did you know about Steven Avery's blood in his own vehicle from his cut finger? No.
Did you know about the victims DNA on the bullet in Steven Avery's Garage? No.



If you want me to take the piss -

How about you write to Steven Avery and ask him if he knew how much money was in Teresa's purse?

Steven Avery DOC# 122987
Waupun Correctional Institution
P.O. Box 351
Waupun WI
53963-0351


If you hear nothing back. Then you will be satisfied the man is indeed guilty as charged.


 ::)

 ;D ;D ;D ;D

You seem like one of those individuals who is obsessed with serial killers - an odd ball. Every time someone posts something about a killer - you're in like Flynn playing the expert.

Yes, I did know about Kayla, I also know she retracted her statement and said she made it up - did you? I also knew about the blood in the vehicle and the DNA - didn't know about the bones being moved so you have that one me - whoopdee f'ing doo!  The Avery stuff is all over the internet - case documents and a forum called 'Redit' to name just two sources. Did you imagine that you were the only one who could access these things?  ;D ;D ;D ;D, 

I'll tell you something I didn't know, the address of where Avery is but it's just like you to track him down! No point in asking Avery about money in Teresa's purse, he didn't kill for money - you hero Bamber did! Asked him about those buckets yet?  ;) ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 02, 2018, 03:16:AM
Steven Avery used this conspiracy as his defence from day one because he knew he was caught.


https://streamable.com/eubc3 (https://streamable.com/eubc3)

Bamber used a fake phone call as an alibi and the excuse that he was outside with the police when the family died. It didn't work for either of them. How's the book coming along?  ::)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 02, 2018, 06:47:AM

Yes seriously. If you already knew what I have posted here you wouldn't have bothered watching the show in the first place.

Did you know about Brendans admission to Kayla Avery? No.
Did you know about Brendan describing the bones being moved? No.
Did you know about Steven Avery's blood in his own vehicle from his cut finger? No.
Did you know about the victims DNA on the bullet in Steven Avery's Garage? No.



If you want me to take the piss -

How about you write to Steven Avery and ask him if he knew how much money was in Teresa's purse?

Steven Avery DOC# 122987
Waupun Correctional Institution
P.O. Box 351
Waupun WI
53963-0351


If you hear nothing back. Then you will be satisfied the man is indeed guilty as charged.


 ::)
 
 ;D ;D ;D ;D
David you must be deluded if you think we didn’t know these things. Kayla is one of his fiercest supporters. All those things you list really are old news. Try catching up on the factual evidence.

One interesting point is the phone pings. Stevens stays at the yard. Bobby and Teresa’s are pinged miless away after her visit

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 02, 2018, 06:49:AM
Watch season two if you want to be brainwashed. If they are saying Teresa's bones were found at the quarry they are misleading the audience once again.

Ken Kratz closing arguments

"These bones in the quarry,
I'm going to take about 20 seconds to talk about,
because the best anybody can say is that they are
possible human. What does possible human mean?
Well, it means we don't know what it is.
All right.
The best anthropologists in the world
don't know what these bones are. Dr. Eisenberg
didn't know what they were. Dr. Fairgrieve
didn't know what they were, he agreed with that.
And you heard a stipulation being read
to you by a person by the name of Les McCurdy.
Stipulation just means an agreement between the
parties, that these bones, we felt it important
enough, were sent out to the FBI. And Les
McCurdy from the FBI determined that these bones
were so degraded, that they were in such a shape
that even through testing, what's called
mitochondrial DNA testing, whether they are human
or not, could not, even by the FBI, be
determined.
So the bones in the quarry are really
not evidence in this case."



Again this was covered at his trial.


Q Great. Um, and what -- what we know, then, is
that there are -- there are pieces missing?
A We know there are pieces that are missing. That's
correct.
Q Not recovered?
A Or not there to recover after the burning episode.
Q Exactly. I mean --
A Correct.
Q -- the reasons for not being recovered may be
just complete reduction to ash or something
unrecognizable by fire --
A Correct.



Here I am spoon feeding people facts. While the makers of bullshit show get an Emmy Award for misleading everyone into thinking this lowlife is innocent  >:(

All refuted by world leading experts. Read the latest documents
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 02, 2018, 06:56:AM
You need to look at both sides. Everything you are saying is based on what the prosecution said and used  at trial. Everything you have said has been refuted or proven wrong. Read the update facts. If your opinion is that the document series is one sided forget seeing it but read the new documents.

If you want to be someone then knows all the facts and can debate them you must do this , otherwise your input is useless.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 02, 2018, 11:43:AM

Yes seriously. If you already knew what I have posted here you wouldn't have bothered watching the show in the first place.

Did you know about Brendans admission to Kayla Avery? No.
Did you know about Brendan describing the bones being moved? No.
Did you know about Steven Avery's blood in his own vehicle from his cut finger? No.
Did you know about the victims DNA on the bullet in Steven Avery's Garage? No.



If you want me to take the piss -

How about you write to Steven Avery and ask him if he knew how much money was in Teresa's purse?

Steven Avery DOC# 122987
Waupun Correctional Institution
P.O. Box 351
Waupun WI
53963-0351


If you hear nothing back. Then you will be satisfied the man is indeed guilty as charged.


 ::)

 ;D ;D ;D ;D

omg! you've written to him haven't you!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 02, 2018, 11:46:AM
Can anyone tell me how many ponds were on the avery property and how many were on the neighbour's land?

The reason I am asking is because in his confession BD said they loaded TH body into her car and drove to a "pond" with the intention of dumping her ( plus car?) in the pond however when they got there the pond was dry ..........any information on this ? because if the pond was dry this is corroboration as far as his confession goes.  Also it may account for why the dogs went on to the neighbours land if they did indeed drive around there to the pond ? has anyone got a link to the map where the dogs went? did they go to a pond?

thanks
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 02, 2018, 11:50:AM
Another thing that bothers me is BD phone call to his mum from prison, the one where he says steven did it , he wasn't being coerced then, and it has the ring of truth about it , his mum responds by he made you do it? and did you do it ? he responds " some of it" ,
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 02, 2018, 04:36:PM
Can anyone tell me how many ponds were on the avery property and how many were on the neighbour's land?

The reason I am asking is because in his confession BD said they loaded TH body into her car and drove to a "pond" with the intention of dumping her ( plus car?) in the pond however when they got there the pond was dry ..........any information on this ? because if the pond was dry this is corroboration as far as his confession goes.  Also it may account for why the dogs went on to the neighbours land if they did indeed drive around there to the pond ? has anyone got a link to the map where the dogs went? did they go to a pond?

thanks


Teresa's Rav4 was found hidden opposite the furthest end of the pond embankment.  I have put arrows on a modern google maps image. Yellow arrow = Rav4. Blue Arrow = Pond.


If I understand Brendan correctly. They decided the pond was too shallow. I cant tell you how dried up it was at that time. :-\
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 02, 2018, 04:39:PM
omg! you've written to him haven't you!


Pen Pals 4 life we are!  ;D
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 02, 2018, 04:42:PM
Another thing that bothers me is BD phone call to his mum from prison, the one where he says steven did it , he wasn't being coerced then, and it has the ring of truth about it , his mum responds by he made you do it? and did you do it ? he responds " some of it" ,


Exactly!  :)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 02, 2018, 04:47:PM
You need to look at both sides. Everything you are saying is based on what the prosecution said and used  at trial. Everything you have said has been refuted or proven wrong. Read the update facts. If your opinion is that the document series is one sided forget seeing it but read the new documents.

If you want to be someone then knows all the facts and can debate them you must do this , otherwise your input is useless.


I have read them. And none of it would have brought the jury to a different verdict.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 02, 2018, 06:00:PM

Pen Pals 4 life we are!  ;D

 ;D
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 02, 2018, 06:01:PM

Teresa's Rav4 was found hidden opposite the furthest end of the pond embankment.  I have put arrows on a modern google maps image. Yellow arrow = Rav4. Blue Arrow = Pond.


If I understand Brendan correctly. They decided the pond was too shallow. I cant tell you how dried up it was at that time. :-\

Thanks David, I will try to find out if it was in fact "dried " up .
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 02, 2018, 07:41:PM
Thanks David, I will try to find out if it was in fact "dried " up .

Here is a aerial  picture of the pond it's pretty dried up but not sure in comparison to what? This doesn't look like it would ever be deep enough and if it's prone to drying up, why would it ever be a choice in the first place?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 02, 2018, 08:52:PM
This is absolutely unbelievable.

Remember Brendan telling investigators that Jodi called Steven twice from prison while they were cleaning up the crime scene? It just so happens the prison were monitoring those exact calls.

Guess what. Steve tells Jodi the very night Teresa goes missing that Brendan was over to help him do some cleaning.  ::)

The very day after he talks about returning a carpet cleaning machine to walmart  ;D ;D ;D ;D

For the faithfull of Avery's innocence what a coincidence this all must be!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on November 02, 2018, 10:05:PM
https://twitter.com/Nex20/status/1049818733076713472
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 03, 2018, 04:08:PM
Here is a aerial  picture of the pond it's pretty dried up but not sure in comparison to what? This doesn't look like it would ever be deep enough and if it's prone to drying up, why would it ever be a choice in the first place?

ok so i guess that BD as referring to this pond ? could they have driven onto the neighbour's land to go to his pond? however you're right this photo does seem to suggest it wouldnt have been been a viable place to dump the car , so corroboration for his statement.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 03, 2018, 05:03:PM
ok so i guess that BD as referring to this pond ? could they have driven onto the neighbour's land to go to his pond? however you're right this photo does seem to suggest it wouldnt have been been a viable place to dump the car , so corroboration for his statement.

In a way but  I think Avery would have known it wasn't a viable place to leave a body and certainly not the RAV 4.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 03, 2018, 05:29:PM
ok so i guess that BD as referring to this pond ? could they have driven onto the neighbour's land to go to his pond? however you're right this photo does seem to suggest it wouldnt have been been a viable place to dump the car , so corroboration for his statement.


So the corroboration for Brendan's statement is mounting


- The Pond
- Bones being moved
- The bleach and paint thinner in the garage
- The bleach on his jeans
- Murder weapon was averys .22
- Kayla Avery
- Shot to the left of the head
- Avery opening the hood of the car
- Two phone calls to Jodi
- Coversations of the two phones calls Avery tells Jodi that he has Brendan over helping him "clean up"


If I understand correctly Brendan at his murder trial claimed he was at home alone all night playing playstation 2. This can be proven false by the phone records.

Brendan is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.



Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 03, 2018, 06:20:PM

Teresa's Rav4 was found hidden opposite the furthest end of the pond embankment.  I have put arrows on a modern google maps image. Yellow arrow = Rav4. Blue Arrow = Pond.


If I understand Brendan correctly. They decided the pond was too shallow. I cant tell you how dried up it was at that time. :-\

Perhaps you should watch the police flyover video which should answer your question.

You have obvious used a current google map of the yard which doesn’t show the yard as it was then .
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 03, 2018, 06:24:PM

So the corroboration for Brendan's statement is mounting


- The Pond
- Bones being moved
- The bleach and paint thinner in the garage
- The bleach on his jeans
- Murder weapon was averys .22
- Kayla Avery
- Shot to the left of the head
- Avery opening the hood of the car
- Two phone calls to Jodi
- Coversations of the two phones calls Avery tells Jodi that he has Brendan over helping him "clean up"


If I understand correctly Brendan at his murder trial claimed he was at home alone all night playing playstation 2. This can be proven false by the phone records.

Brendan is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Brendan dasseys confession was coerced. You want to sound competent in your opinions but you are so out of date it’s laughable.

I used to think you had a real good reasoning to this sort of thing now I just think you are deluded.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 03, 2018, 07:52:PM
Brendan dasseys confession was coerced. You want to sound competent in your opinions but you are so out of date it’s laughable.

I used to think you had a real good reasoning to this sort of thing now I just think you are deluded.


Everything in that list I made is stuff the police didnt and couldnt have given him in the first place. It would be a hell of coincidence if it was coerced.


Why did Brendan tell his mum that Steve was guilty and that he done some of it also? Was she coercing him also?


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 03, 2018, 08:38:PM

Everything in that list I made is stuff the police didnt and couldnt have given him in the first place. It would be a hell of coincidence if it was coerced.


Why did Brendan tell his mum that Steve was guilty and that he done some of it also? Was she coercing him also?

- The Pond - is there evidence to prove that it was ever an intention to use the pond?
- Bones being moved - Which statement is this in?
- The bleach and paint thinner in the garage - You would expect to find these items in a garage.
- The bleach on his jeans - I have bleach on some of my jeans, didn't kill anyone though.
- Murder weapon was averys .22 - It fired the bullet.
- Kayla Avery - Retracted her statement
- Shot to the left of the head - Which statement is this in?
- Avery opening the hood of the car - He was fed that info from the police
- Two phone calls to Jodi - And?
- Coversations of the two phones calls Avery tells Jodi that he has Brendan over helping him "clean up" - He doesn't say that Brendan helped him clean up, he said in one call that HE cleaned up and in a later one that Brendan had helped him, not what he helped him with.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 03, 2018, 09:26:PM
"So we asked Kayla what she meant by
Brendan acting up lately. At that point Kayla
told us that Brendan would just stare into space
and start crying, basically, uncontrollably. She
also told us that Brendan had -- had lost
approximately, what she estimated to be, about 40
pounds."



People should be rallying against Steven Avery for ruining this kids life by dragging him into this terrible situation. But instead they all support Avery and expect Brendan to keep up this façade.


Brendan's uncle made him a murderer.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 03, 2018, 09:42:PM
"So we asked Kayla what she meant by
Brendan acting up lately. At that point Kayla
told us that Brendan would just stare into space
and start crying, basically, uncontrollably. She
also told us that Brendan had -- had lost
approximately, what she estimated to be, about 40
pounds."



People should be rallying against Steven Avery for ruining this kids life by dragging him into this terrible situation. But instead they all support Avery and expect Brendan to keep up this façade.


Brendan's uncle made him a murderer.

I don't think Brendan should be in prison -  that's the point.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 04, 2018, 07:58:AM
Did bobby and Scott lie on the stand? Bobby brother has signed an affidavit confirming that bobby said it couldn’t have been Steven because I saw her leave.

Thousands upon thousands of porn including decapitaded bodies mutilated bodies drowned bodies and child porn on bobby dasssey computer. He denied computer was in his room but police photos confirm it was in his room. Denied looking at these images but forensic and investigators have confirmed only Bobby would have been home. Many of the pictures have uncanny resemblance to Teresa halbach

Brendan was coerced no question. Watch it

Kayla has recounted

Blood spatter doesn’t match prosecution theory as per world renound blood spatter experts

Josh radant has confirmed police tried to make him say fire was bigger than it was

Cannot burn a body in an open fire pit like prosecution theory, would have taken 100 plus gallons to keep fuelling fire etc etc as per world renound expert who has the most expertise in burning bodies in the world, but hey you want to believe Wisconsin

Not a single photo of bones and pit in situ

Coroner was threatened with arrest if she attends. Had to resign 6 months later as she feared for her life

Where are the rest of the bones

There would have been a sludge/ gooleft behind in burn pit, none

The whole investigation centred on Steven with proper investigation into anyone else

It’s bollocks, innocent or guilty he deserves a new trial



Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 04, 2018, 12:42:PM
- The Pond - is there evidence to prove that it was ever an intention to use the pond?
- Bones being moved - Which statement is this in?
- The bleach and paint thinner in the garage - You would expect to find these items in a garage.
- The bleach on his jeans - I have bleach on some of my jeans, didn't kill anyone though.
- Murder weapon was averys .22 - It fired the bullet.
- Kayla Avery - Retracted her statement
- Shot to the left of the head - Which statement is this in?
- Avery opening the hood of the car - He was fed that info from the police
- Two phone calls to Jodi - And?
- Coversations of the two phones calls Avery tells Jodi that he has Brendan over helping him "clean up" - He doesn't say that Brendan helped him clean up, he said in one call that HE cleaned up and in a later one that Brendan had helped him, not what he helped him with.

The evidence regarding the pond comes from BD himself.
It fired "the bullet" ,.... it fired the bullet which was recovered from his garage which also had TH DNA on it.
I believe BD says it was the left side of the head. this supports the pathologist findings.
I agree he was fed that information regarding the hood/

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 04, 2018, 12:48:PM
Did bobby and Scott lie on the stand? Bobby brother has signed an affidavit confirming that bobby said it couldn’t have been Steven because I saw her leave.

Thousands upon thousands of porn including decapitaded bodies mutilated bodies drowned bodies and child porn on bobby dasssey computer. He denied computer was in his room but police photos confirm it was in his room. Denied looking at these images but forensic and investigators have confirmed only Bobby would have been home. Many of the pictures have uncanny resemblance to Teresa halbach

Brendan was coerced no question. Watch it

Kayla has recounted

Blood spatter doesn’t match prosecution theory as per world renound blood spatter experts

Josh radant has confirmed police tried to make him say fire was bigger than it was

Cannot burn a body in an open fire pit like prosecution theory, would have taken 100 plus gallons to keep fuelling fire etc etc as per world renound expert who has the most expertise in burning bodies in the world, but hey you want to believe Wisconsin

Not a single photo of bones and pit in situ

Coroner was threatened with arrest if she attends. Had to resign 6 months later as she feared for her life

Where are the rest of the bones

There would have been a sludge/ gooleft behind in burn pit, none

The whole investigation centred on Steven with proper investigation into anyone else

It’s bollocks, innocent or guilty he deserves a new trial

presumably the fire could have started in the burn pit and when they realised that the body was not going to be destroyed that way moved the body to the burn container/barrel which would have been able to burn the body effectively, this is where her camera and phone were found also.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 04, 2018, 12:59:PM
Perhaps you should watch the police flyover video which should answer your question.

You have obvious used a current google map of the yard which doesn’t show the yard as it was then .

I've just watched the police video , wow! could they have made it any more shaky ! it's all over the place amaturish , anyway from what I could see that pond did not seem to be dry! if that is the case then it doesn't in fact corroborate what BD said. however that video is so bad who really knows ?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 04, 2018, 03:33:PM
The evidence regarding the pond comes from BD himself.
It fired "the bullet" ,.... it fired the bullet which was recovered from his garage which also had TH DNA on it.
I believe BD says it was the left side of the head. this supports the pathologist findings.
I agree he was fed that information regarding the hood/

Yes, I know but so did a lot of other things that didn’t turn out to be based on fact. I imagine he mentioned the pond (which isn’t big enough or deep enough to hide the RAV4 or her body), because the RAV was found close to it. There is no evidence that it was ever a plan. She may have been shot with said bullet or DNA could have been transferred. BD was coaxed into saying she was shot in the first place but when asked which side, he initially said he didn’t know. I can’t find the entry for him saying the left but will keep looking. Also is that particular interview videod? Wouldn’t  trust those two officers as far as .......
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on November 04, 2018, 05:13:PM
https://imgur.com/GXzYV8V
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 04, 2018, 05:47:PM
https://imgur.com/GXzYV8V

Yes, it's in the trial transcript that they had no evidence that Bleach and paint thinners were used in a clan up - Just Brendan's claim and some marks on his Jeans. However, they were hunters and regularly cleaned out deer. Brendan could easily have gotten bleach on his jeans after helping Bobby (or someone else) clean up.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 04, 2018, 05:54:PM
The evidence regarding the pond comes from BD himself.
It fired "the bullet" ,.... it fired the bullet which was recovered from his garage which also had TH DNA on it.
I believe BD says it was the left side of the head. this supports the pathologist findings.
I agree he was fed that information regarding the hood/


He wasn't fed the info about the hood. Brendan already knew about it. How do we know this?

The investigators knew the killer had lifted up the hood because the power cables had been pulled from the battery in the car. Brendan was not going to bring up this minor detail without them reminding or prompting him. So Brendan then tells them his uncle lifted the hood.

Several month later DNA would confirm the killer who lifted the hood was Steven Avery. Just like Brendan said.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on November 04, 2018, 06:11:PM

He wasn't fed the info about the hood. Brendan already knew about it. How do we know this?

The investigators knew the killer had lifted up the hood because the power cables had been pulled from the battery in the car. Brendan was not going to bring up this minor detail without them reminding or prompting him. So Brendan then tells them his uncle lifted the hood.

Several month later DNA would confirm the killer who lifted the hood was Steven Avery. Just like Brendan said.


https://twitter.com/cadaverdogbrutu/status/1059064946493964289
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 04, 2018, 06:19:PM

He wasn't fed the info about the hood. Brendan already knew about it. How do we know this?

The investigators knew the killer had lifted up the hood because the power cables had been pulled from the battery in the car. Brendan was not going to bring up this minor detail without them reminding or prompting him. So Brendan then tells them his uncle lifted the hood.

Several month later DNA would confirm the killer who lifted the hood was Steven Avery. Just like Brendan said.

You keep talking about DNA as though it's a magic substance that can't be planted. He was fed the information about the hood - it's been posted here, denying it won't make it go away.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 04, 2018, 06:26:PM

I think you have developed an all consuming compulsion to disagree with me. Even if you knowingly have to disagree with yourself.



PS: Why do you have bleach on your clothes? Are you that dirty Ariel and Bold wont get the job done?




I don't think about you that much to adopt any kind of counter reasoning. I have my own mind, unlike you.

No, David, I clean things sometimes using bleach but you're such a moron you couldn't work that out. Grown ups clean things and yes! They use bleach!



Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on November 04, 2018, 06:40:PM
https://twitter.com/MakingAMurderer/status/1058388266724904960
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 04, 2018, 06:44:PM
This is from the March 1st interview - find another example from Brendan's interviews before this one? It is CLEARLY 'suggested' to him, that Avery went under the hood.

Try telling us that the second example isn't misleading when Fassbender asks Brendan how he knew about the hood in the May 13th interview - Brendan knew because because he was TOLD by HIM!

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 04, 2018, 06:59:PM
- Coversations of the two phones calls Avery tells Jodi that he has Brendan over helping him "clean up" - He doesn't say that Brendan helped him clean up, he said in one call that HE cleaned up and in a later one that Brendan had helped him, not what he helped him with.

Now think about this for a minute. Why was Steve not being specific to Jodi about what Brendan was helping him with?  ::)

I know the guy is a total dumbass but he is not going tell his girlfriend in a casual phone conversation that Brendan was helping him clear away the remains of a woman he just raped and murdered now is he?

Even still that phone log is damning enough. Also (correct me if I am wrong) I can find no mention of the police finding a "rug doctor" at his home. If that is the case then its almost certain he returned it to wal-mart. And all the forensic evidence it removed.  :-\

Watch this video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xt2zHTIrF7o (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xt2zHTIrF7o)

No wonder they found no trace of TH in his trailer if that is the kind of clean up gear he had  :-\
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 04, 2018, 09:36:PM
presumably the fire could have started in the burn pit and when they realised that the body was not going to be destroyed that way moved the body to the burn container/barrel which would have been able to burn the body effectively, this is where her camera and phone were found also.

In that case where is the goo from the fat and skin? Where are the rest of the bones
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 04, 2018, 09:39:PM

He wasn't fed the info about the hood. Brendan already knew about it. How do we know this?

The investigators knew the killer had lifted up the hood because the power cables had been pulled from the battery in the car. Brendan was not going to bring up this minor detail without them reminding or prompting him. So Brendan then tells them his uncle lifted the hood.

Several month later DNA would confirm the killer who lifted the hood was Steven Avery. Just like Brendan said.

Omg 😮
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 04, 2018, 09:42:PM
Yes, it's in the trial transcript that they had no evidence that Bleach and paint thinners were used in a clan up - Just Brendan's claim and some marks on his Jeans. However, they were hunters and regularly cleaned out deer. Brendan could easily have gotten bleach on his jeans after helping Bobby (or someone else) clean up.

They dug the garage floor up Caroline and still not a drop of blood found. Funny how bobbys / cassette garage wasn’t looked at. Was there something in there about him hanging a deer in there. Blood all over.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 04, 2018, 09:45:PM
In that case where is the goo from the fat and skin? Where are the rest of the bones

why didnt that expert on MAM2 address the issue that the body could have been moved to the burn barrel to finish burning? isn't that more likely? it would have conducted more heat , the enclosed space could have "cremated" the body? the rest of the bones turned to ashes? along with the goo? otherwise where else was the body burned?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 05, 2018, 06:52:AM
They dug the garage floor up Caroline and still not a drop of blood found. Funny how bobbys / cassette garage wasn’t looked at. Was there something in there about him hanging a deer in there. Blood all over.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: notsure on November 05, 2018, 02:01:PM
why didnt that expert on MAM2 address the issue that the body could have been moved to the burn barrel to finish burning? isn't that more likely? it would have conducted more heat , the enclosed space could have "cremated" the body? the rest of the bones turned to ashes? along with the goo? otherwise where else was the body burned?

Because he is following the prosecutions theory, that’s what this is all about challenging thier theories, it doesn’t work
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 05, 2018, 04:38:PM
They dug the garage floor up Caroline and still not a drop of blood found. Funny how bobbys / cassette garage wasn’t looked at. Was there something in there about him hanging a deer in there. Blood all over.

A dead body does not bleed that much. Since there is no blood circulation or blood pressure once the heart stops.  Saying that there is no blood under a concrete floor is an attempt to create a bogus anomaly to distract people from the overwhelming amount of evidence showing Steven Avery is the killer.

Anyway its about time you answered some questions now.

1) Why were there ten spent bullet shell casings on the garage floor but only two bullets? were did the other eight go? 

2) Why in the crime scene photos can you see both the paint thinner bottle and bleach bottle left out? (The paint thinner has almost run out also)

3) Why did Avery claim his girlfriend fired those shots into the garage floor. When she couldnt since she was in prison at the time?


Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 05, 2018, 06:18:PM
why didnt that expert on MAM2 address the issue that the body could have been moved to the burn barrel to finish burning? isn't that more likely? it would have conducted more heat , the enclosed space could have "cremated" the body? the rest of the bones turned to ashes? along with the goo? otherwise where else was the body burned?


The same reason why the blood spatter expert did not address the bloodstains in Avery's Pontiac.

The same reason why the blood spatter expert did not address the fact that while Steven Avery got inside her RAV4 it would have been dark and he wouldn't see exactly were the ignition is, hence he smeared his finger against the surface of the console while trying to get the key in.


The second series is no different from the first. Which is summed up perfectly below.


"Making A Murderer did not show you all the facts of the case, they did not show all the evidence, and they actually manufactured scenes and spliced together snippets from the courtroom testimony with edits that created a fictional narrative to manipulate the viewer into believing everyone was involved in a conspiracy to frame Steven Avery for this heinous murder"

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 05, 2018, 09:29:PM

The same reason why the blood spatter expert did not address the bloodstains in Avery's Pontiac.

The same reason why the blood spatter expert did not address the fact that while Steven Avery got inside her RAV4 it would have been dark and he wouldn't see exactly were the ignition is, hence he smeared his finger against the surface of the console while trying to get the key in.


The second series is no different from the first. Which is summed up perfectly below.


"Making A Murderer did not show you all the facts of the case, they did not show all the evidence, and they actually manufactured scenes and spliced together snippets from the courtroom testimony with edits that created a fictional narrative to manipulate the viewer into believing everyone was involved in a conspiracy to frame Steven Avery for this heinous murder"

No lights inside the RAV4 then?  ::)

You haven't seen the second series.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 05, 2018, 11:30:PM
No lights inside the RAV4 then?  ::)


Yes, but if you read the instruction manual for that model. The interior light only comes on automatically when you open the back doors or the boot door. Suprisingly not for the front door that Avery would have entered from. (see attached) I say surprisingly because I would have expected that feature to include all doors if the car had it. But I am not surprised considering the bloodstain, it further explains the bloodstain if anything.

Surely the first thing thats going to cross his mind when he gets inside is put the key in the ignition.

Then you have to consider the possibilty that the last thing he done was remove the key from the ignition after he had pulled the power from the battery under the hood. There would definatley be no lights working then.

You haven't seen the second series.

Like the old saying goes: Fool me once shame on them. Fool me twice shame on me.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 06, 2018, 12:47:AM
Yes, but if you read the instruction manual for that model. The interior light only comes on automatically when you open the back doors or the boot door. Suprisingly not for the front door that Avery would have entered from. (see attached) I say surprisingly because I would have expected that feature to include all doors if the car had it. But I am not surprised considering the bloodstain, it further explains the bloodstain if anything.

Surely the first thing thats going to cross his mind when he gets inside is put the key in the ignition.

Then you have to consider the possibilty that the last thing he done was remove the key from the ignition after he had pulled the power from the battery under the hood. There would definatley be no lights working then.

Like the old saying goes: Fool me once shame on them. Fool me twice shame on me.

I think you have taken the manual literally, here is someone talking about the interior lights on their RAV 4 http://www.fixya.com/cars/t7249149-overhead_light_drivers_side - I doubt any car manufacturer would make a car that only allowed interior lights to come on when the back doors were opened and not the front.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 06, 2018, 01:30:AM
I think you have taken the manual literally, here is someone talking about the interior lights on their RAV 4 http://www.fixya.com/cars/t7249149-overhead_light_drivers_side - I doubt any car manufacturer would make a car that only allowed interior lights to come on when the back doors were opened and not the front.

The interior light can come on with the front doors open but not automatically. The people who get in the front can toggle the light switch on if they wish. People who open the rear doors or the boot wont be able to reach it so it makes sense from an economical point of view.

Even if we assume that this car had front door sensors for the light (which it didn't) There is no way to know if the switch was toggled to "off" or "door mode" if it was on off then no lights are coming on regardless of what door you open.

Further more you have the possibility of Avery reaching in to get the keys after he has pulled the battery.

You also have to consider why Avery left this car there with his blood inside it. Yes we know he is a moron but also maybe the light was toggled to "off" in the first place and never saw what he left inside. 

So that is three possible senarios of whereby Avery has his hand near the ignigtion while in darkness. And we know this happened because he left his blood there.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 06, 2018, 04:43:AM
The interior light can come on with the front doors open but not automatically. The people who get in the front can toggle the light switch on if they wish. People who open the rear doors or the boot wont be able to reach it so it makes sense from an economical point of view.

Even if we assume that this car had front door sensors for the light (which it didn't) There is no way to know if the switch was toggled to "off" or "door mode" if it was on off then no lights are coming on regardless of what door you open.

Further more you have the possibility of Avery reaching in to get the keys after he has pulled the battery.

You also have to consider why Avery left this car there with his blood inside it. Yes we know he is a moron but also maybe the light was toggled to "off" in the first place and never saw what he left inside. 

So that is three possible senarios of whereby Avery has his hand near the ignigtion while in darkness. And we know this happened because he left his blood there.

So you're trying to say that in the very area where a driver would need light, the designer decided not to provide it? I gave you a link to a forum where the issue of internal lighting was being discussed and it's clear the RAV4 did have this BASIC feature. It's easy to check out by asking Toyota.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 06, 2018, 01:13:PM
So you're trying to say that in the very area where a driver would need light, the designer decided not to provide it? I gave you a link to a forum where the issue of internal lighting was being discussed and it's clear the RAV4 did have this BASIC feature. It's easy to check out by asking Toyota.


No that is not what I am saying. The light is there, but it must be toggled. But for argument sake even if the lights are all on everywhere it does not overcome the fact that the battery cable was pulled. Then nothing would work. Avery could then have removed the key after he done his.

We know Avery's right finger came into contact with that area. Because the blood is there in the first place.

Any alternative now rests on his recent recollection of wet blood being stolen from his sink.  ::)
And as we already know from his girlfiend shooting his garage floor among other things he is not in the slightest a credible witness.

And even if one is EXTREMELY generous enough to give him the benefit of the doubt over this stolen blood from the sink. From the moment he gets the blood in the sink, it leaves someone a 15 minute time frame to plant the blood in the car. And this was before the car was even found. The blood stolen from the sink according to Avery happened on the 3rd of November. The car is out of sight.

Who is going to believe that? I sure dont.


 



Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 06, 2018, 02:04:PM

No that is not what I am saying. The light is there, but it must be toggled. But for argument sake even if the lights are all on everywhere it does not overcome the fact that the battery cable was pulled. Then nothing would work. Avery could then have removed the key after he done his.

We know Avery's right finger came into contact with that area. Because the blood is there in the first place.

Any alternative now rests on his recent recollection of wet blood being stolen from his sink.  ::)
And as we already know from his girlfiend shooting his garage floor among other things he is not in the slightest a credible witness.

And even if one is EXTREMELY generous enough to give him the benefit of the doubt over this stolen blood from the sink. From the moment he gets the blood in the sink, it leaves someone a 15 minute time frame to plant the blood in the car. And this was before the car was even found. The blood stolen from the sink according to Avery happened on the 3rd of November. The car is out of sight.

Who is going to believe that? I sure dont.

I don't believe his blood was stolen from the sink, but I also don't see how he would get one smear on the dashboard when removing the key and none on the key. It was a pretty big cut.

Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 06, 2018, 02:30:PM
I don't believe his blood was stolen from the sink, but I also don't see how he would get one smear on the dashboard when removing the key and none on the key. It was a pretty big cut.

We know from the blood in his Pontiac that this cut was not gushing blood. Also this cut goes right over a joint. The cut will alter depending on whether his finger is staight or bent.

As for the key how do you know he didn’t notice blood on the key when he got in then washed it off?

If you don’t believe the blood was stolen from the sink then what options are left other than he drove the car?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 06, 2018, 04:21:PM
We know from the blood in his Pontiac that this cut was not gushing blood. Also this cut goes right over a joint. The cut will alter depending on whether his finger is staight or bent.

As for the key how do you know he didn’t notice blood on the key when he got in then washed it off?

If you don’t believe the blood was stolen from the sink then what options are left other than he drove the car?

His blood was on the gear stick and on the console beneath so it must have dripped. I don't know that he didn't wash the blood off the key but I doubt he would go to the trouble of washing the key but then keep it in his trailer.

I can't say where the blood came from but then i can't be sure where it came from in the Bamber case either - but I still don't buy the silencer. I guess where there is a will, there is a way. I do think there is
strong possibility that Avery is guilty, but don't think that Brendan is as involved as is implied. It could be that Avery and Bobby were involved - Avery could never admit that so all Bobby has to do is keep denying it.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 07, 2018, 07:54:AM
His blood was on the gear stick and on the console beneath so it must have dripped. I don't know that he didn't wash the blood off the key but I doubt he would go to the trouble of washing the key but then keep it in his trailer.

I can't say where the blood came from but then i can't be sure where it came from in the Bamber case either - but I still don't buy the silencer. I guess where there is a will, there is a way. I do think there is
strong possibility that Avery is guilty, but don't think that Brendan is as involved as is implied. It could be that Avery and Bobby were involved - Avery could never admit that so all Bobby has to do is keep denying it.

Bamber is another case. I am judging this case on its own merits.

As for Bobby Dassey his testimony is corroborated by Tereas's last client before Avery. Its also supported by the timings of the phone calls between Avery and Teresa. Bobby also has two alibi witnesses Scott Tadych and more importantly Brendan Dassey who does not implicate him in the crime and also corroborates Tadych claim that Bobby Dassey went out hunting.

It seems the TV show has distorted Bobby Dassey to make him look like "the real killer".

The show also probably makes a big deal out of the photos of Teresa on Bobbys computer. However you can see these photos yourself in the case files. I have attached them. These photos are from online news articles when Teresa went missing.  I bet the show was trying to insinuate that he was stalking her or something.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 07, 2018, 03:04:PM
Bamber is another case. I am judging this case on its own merits.

As for Bobby Dassey his testimony is corroborated by Tereas's last client before Avery. Its also supported by the timings of the phone calls between Avery and Teresa. Bobby also has two alibi witnesses Scott Tadych and more importantly Brendan Dassey who does not implicate him in the crime and also corroborates Tadych claim that Bobby Dassey went out hunting.

It seems the TV show has distorted Bobby Dassey to make him look like "the real killer".

The show also probably makes a big deal out of the photos of Teresa on Bobbys computer. However you can see these photos yourself in the case files. I have attached them. These photos are from online news articles when Teresa went missing.  I bet the show was trying to insinuate that he was stalking her or something.

Whether this is another case or not, fact remains that there is an issue of blood in the Bamber case too but it doesn't stop people thinking the silencer was a frame.

Corroborated by the last client before Avery how?
Supported by the timings of the phone calls how?
Brendan isn't likely to point fingers at his own brother and police never suggested Bobby's involvement - had they done so, the suggestion would probably have been made.
Tadych is also a suspicious character.

No it the series didn't make much of Teresa's picture being on Bobby's computer - just the other perverted and sick images.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: IndigoJ on November 08, 2018, 08:54:PM

No that is not what I am saying. The light is there, but it must be toggled. But for argument sake even if the lights are all on everywhere it does not overcome the fact that the battery cable was pulled. Then nothing would work. Avery could then have removed the key after he done his.

We know Avery's right finger came into contact with that area. Because the blood is there in the first place.

Any alternative now rests on his recent recollection of wet blood being stolen from his sink.  ::)
And as we already know from his girlfiend shooting his garage floor among other things he is not in the slightest a credible witness.

And even if one is EXTREMELY generous enough to give him the benefit of the doubt over this stolen blood from the sink. From the moment he gets the blood in the sink, it leaves someone a 15 minute time frame to plant the blood in the car. And this was before the car was even found. The blood stolen from the sink according to Avery happened on the 3rd of November. The car is out of sight.

Who is going to believe that? I sure dont.

why did SA "hide " TH key in his bedroom? why not burn it in the burn barrel with her camera , phone etc? Was he intending to move the car again and then did not get the opportunity? thoughts please
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 08, 2018, 09:05:PM
why did SA "hide " TH key in his bedroom? why not burn it in the burn barrel with her camera , phone etc? Was he intending to move the car again and then did not get the opportunity? thoughts please


Either he was planning to move the car again but couldn't because of the resulting missing persons investigation having all eyes on the junkyard and he had just enough braincells to realise he would be spotted driving her car and so was waiting for an opportunity.

OR

He is just a dumbass and put no thought into the implications of keeping the key.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 08, 2018, 09:40:PM
why did SA "hide " TH key in his bedroom? why not burn it in the burn barrel with her camera , phone etc? Was he intending to move the car again and then did not get the opportunity? thoughts please

Given that it cops seven searches to find it, I doubt they found the key.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 08, 2018, 09:41:PM

Either he was planning to move the car again but couldn't because of the resulting missing persons investigation having all eyes on the junkyard and he had just enough braincells to realise he would be spotted driving her car and so was waiting for an opportunity.

OR

He is just a dumbass and put no thought into the implications of keeping the key.

Corroborated by the last client before Avery how?
Supported by the timings of the phone calls how?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: nugnug on November 09, 2018, 04:42:PM
https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/election-results-may-be-good-news-making-a-murderer-duo-1203023648/?fbclid=IwAR0Y5LrcQs45SAChKcAz2G_XC8JMf18UJ9XifgrFjqXQOkQZuHGkVIT8534#utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=social_bar&utm_content=bottom&utm_id=1203023648
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 09, 2018, 09:46:PM
Corroborated by the last client before Avery how?
Supported by the timings of the phone calls how?

Teresa Halback visited a client before Avery. He/She testified that Teresa Halbach would have arrived by their estimate at Averys around 3:00pm. (this client lived close to Avery). Bobby Dassey testified that he remembers her arriving around 2:45pm.  Read through the telephone records between Avery, Teresa and her last client. Work it out for yourself.


The real killer has cleared Bobby Dassey of any involvement anyway.  ;D

https://i2.wp.com/theinspiringdad.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/InGSICt.jpg (https://i2.wp.com/theinspiringdad.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/InGSICt.jpg)


 
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline on November 09, 2018, 11:46:PM
Teresa Halback visited a client before Avery. He/She testified that Teresa Halbach would have arrived by their estimate at Averys around 3:00pm. (this client lived close to Avery). Bobby Dassey testified that he remembers her arriving around 2:45pm.  Read through the telephone records between Avery, Teresa and her last client. Work it out for yourself.


The real killer has cleared Bobby Dassey of any involvement anyway.  ;D

https://i2.wp.com/theinspiringdad.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/InGSICt.jpg (https://i2.wp.com/theinspiringdad.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/InGSICt.jpg)

So she was still taking photographs 45 minutes to an hour later?

If BD was involved WITH Avery, he's hardly going to admit to it is he?
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Jon2 on November 10, 2018, 10:02:AM
https://productionsouth.wordpress.com/2018/11/09/michael-griesbach-called-out-by-beyond-avery-road-author/
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 on November 12, 2018, 12:54:AM
Here are some more of Steven Avery's letters from jail.


(http://i.imgur.com/dJ1n2SI.png)


(http://i.imgur.com/0Yxjn2j.png)


(http://i.imgur.com/6BxYRdE.png)
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 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!
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: David1819 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.
Title: Re: Making a Murderer (Netflix) Series Two
Post by: Caroline 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.