Bones

[dexter75]

Was there anyone other than Jodi,( SA's girlfriend at the time ) an expert perhaps, who stated in an actual transcript/report that there was indeed a SHIN bone with FLESH on it?

Was this photographed?

I ask, because through all of my reading, I am only seeing Jodi's MAM transcript where she says ;
the police came to me two days before I got out of jail and told me about the bones and some flesh.. ( not exact words and if anyone wants to know what I mean I'll grab it )

My point is, this shin bone with flesh found in the burn pit. Did it exist?

And wasn't Jodi supposed to get out on the day TH was killed?? Hmm

Anyone know WHY she wasn't released??

 

[missy1974]

Exhibit 312. BY - numerous small pieces of apparent charred material. BZ - two pieces of apparent charred material CA- three pieces of apparent charred material.

I do not see anything about flesh.

Only BZ came back with a partial profile. BY was not suitable for DNA typing. CA was insufficient for DNA.

I don't know if other remains were tested, this is all I can find.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-312.pdf

According to Jodi in her NG interview, she said she was supposed to go to a class that day, then they decided they weren't going to let her go... no one knows why they changed their minds, including Jodi, she said he still doesn't know why. (might be a good time to mention that SA made numerous calls to the Dept's that were probably holding those meetings)

 

[missy1974]

I think this is something that should be pointed out here in the bones thread:

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...bit-160-Email-Between-Fassbender-And-Ertl.pdf

Fassbender emails Ertl:

John,
When you processed the vehicle that was found to contain the license plates of Halbach's RAV 4 did you take any photos of the inside of said vehicle? The DA has photos of the outside and surrounding area. According to records you turned over the license plates to Calumet County. If you know did you package them prior to turning them over?
Also, just confirming that you did not take any photos at the burn pit behind the garage where Halbach's bones were found. Why were not photos taken?


Ertl replies:

Tom,
I checked the contact prints of the photos we took at the scene and you are correct; there are none of the inside of the license plate vehicle and none of the burn pit. The reasoning is the same in both instances. We typically do not take photos to document a scene if the scene has been knowingly altered. In regards to the license plates, the fireman had reportedly unrolled at least one of the plates and they had been moved from their original positions. In regards to the burn pit, our involvement began with a request to use our sifting equipment. The scene had obviously been altered at that point.
Had we been working any of these scenes from start to finish, there would likely have been a more thorough photo record; however, under the circumstances, we were merely able to provide technical assistance, rather than complete scene processing.

It was KNOWINGLY ALTERED? Before they even started sifting.... *smh*

 

[missy1974]

LOL I have it open dexter!

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c.../Trial-Exhibit-343-Kratz-Email-to-Culhane.pdf

He does mention "tissue", but according to the lab report, it doesn't say tissue.

He also talks about public perception and just going with it... with it being determined to be TH. There was no conclusive evidence. There was a 7 point match, which IMO was good enough anyway, in my very little knowledge and from reading from experts.

 

[dexter75]

Because, some feel to think about it both ways, is to try and achieve a sort of " high "

To sum it up; Because SA had an appt, was the last to see her, talk to her and everything was found where it was found...HE did it.

It's an open and shut case.

NOW,

what if this was someone YOU loved??? ( Not directed at you per se )

Good for you, for thinking about this =)
Even if you are wearing foil, like many of us!
Or so I've read.

It's definitely weird that the bones were in the debris which was not even in the pit. Like many other things in this once you think about it for awhile you can see it both ways. It was planted like that or someone removed it from the pit so they could go through it and removed bone fragments.

I thought the screw driver appeared to have been used to dig through the fire, and the wire from the burned tires. Again it could also have been deliberately placed there to make it appear it was being used to poke around in the wire.

My first thought on the leaves was those sure look like someone gathered them up and put them where they are shown in the photo. It makes sense the wire and the burned bench seat would collect blowing leaves, but it also seems like there would be more leaves around the pit too if the window blew them there.

That bullet from the garage that was tested without having someone from the defense present made me so mad. Then you find out the person testing it was also training lab workers and that's probably why it was contaminated. It made no sense at all. It was hard to read that and not come away thinking ok, this was deliberate.

I agree with you on the dog and taking so long to even examine that area. That was another thing that made me want to scream when I read it.

I don't know how anyone could come away from this not thinking there's something very fishy about how a lot of this was handled. Whether or not they believe Steven Avery did this or didn't do it. Like you said they deviated from protocol on so many things to make things fit their theory on what really happened.

 

[dexter75]

Evidence, right :thinking:

LOL I have it open dexter!

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c.../Trial-Exhibit-343-Kratz-Email-to-Culhane.pdf

He does mention "tissue", but according to the lab report, it doesn't say tissue.

He also talks about public perception and just going with it... with it being determined to be TH. There was no conclusive evidence. There was a 7 point match, which IMO was good enough anyway, in my very little knowledge and from reading from experts.

 

[dexter75]

That's the same report, I think that doesn't even list Branden, right? As being on the property?

LOL I have it open dexter!

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c.../Trial-Exhibit-343-Kratz-Email-to-Culhane.pdf

He does mention "tissue", but according to the lab report, it doesn't say tissue.

He also talks about public perception and just going with it... with it being determined to be TH. There was no conclusive evidence. There was a 7 point match, which IMO was good enough anyway, in my very little knowledge and from reading from experts.

 

[missy1974]

Yep... Brendan should have been in school. So somewhere between this email and the end of February, Kratz/investigators decided to go after Brendan. IMO it's because he was SA's alibi for the night.

 

[dexter75]

ABSOLUTELY,

And any intelligent, rational, person REALIZES this.

It makes NO sense, at all.

KZ will piece it together, if she hasn't already.

Tick- tock

That is the part that doesn't make sense. Fine... he burns her in the pit.... goes through the burned remains, picks out some to take to the burn barrel, and then some to the quarry??? This is the same guy that the prosecution claims was sooooo smart to clean up DNA in the garage/trailer/SUV, yet he picks through the bones to move a few here and few there.

The part that nags at me is... Blaine in his very first statement said that he was burning garbage in the barrels, thought it might have been November 3rd, the Thursday, the same day TH was reported missing. If this is true.... the bones in that burn barrel would have to be put in there after November 3rd, by SA or whoever, because the anthropologist testified that all the bones (from all 3 locations) had the same burning/charring consistency (which means to me they were burned at the same time and were moved, whether you believe he moved a few out of the burn pit, or someone moved the majority to the burn pit). If the bones were there when he was burning garbage on November 3rd, I would think that they would have been burned further, or destroyed further (not sure of the right wording LOL) What I didn't find in the testimony was.... were those bones in the barrel at the bottom? the top? were they mixed in? that is pretty important information, and I think that is why an expert should have been on scene IMO

 

[dexter75]

The bones, ugh

Reading back through pages, ( surprise surprise )

Forgive me first, as it's tough to distinguish bones/bonfire threads as to which should go where. Was going to post this there, as an add on but thought " no, it's not bonfire related" But it goes right with the fire, scene, etc. and then thought " crap, I don't wanna break any rules "

SO, moving on,

The teeth? All that was recovered were fragments & part of a root/root structure.

In reading how charred they were, can a bonfire char TEETH this way? A crown?

I question the fire/heat/charred teeth

Along with the Coroner ( team assembled and all ) told by "Top dogs" we don't need you, or whatever was specifically said to her to NOT investigate & be walled off from the scene, makes me wonder..

Is the reason because the bones couldn't have been burned in a typical fire, tires or not?
The crime scene, just wasn't a crime scene?

 

[dexter75]

I just posted on the steel belts, not very damaged, IMO

I've been looking at the pictures that are available (burn pit and yard) along with testimony the bones were "intertwined" with the metal. First, whether a body is burned under tires or above them, the bones will not simply disintegrate and melt through the steel tire belts. Assuming the body was above the tires as gravity would dictate it would need to be in order for the broken bones to then fall down through, and get caught in the belts, as it's being broken up the belts themselves should show signs of damage. They wouldn't be perfectly cylindrical. They would be bent and/or shows signs of being hit with something. You can't use enough force to smash bones without mangling those wires as well.

Second, all the pictures of Avery's yard look raked (or absent of any blowing leaves). The pictures of the burn pit and area with the burned seat and at least one steel tire belt all include leaves. The odd thing is that the leaves are both under and, in some cases, over steel belts and the burned seat. The leaves couldn't have been under these items during the burning otherwise they would have been burned as well. Overtop could work as Avery could have dumped leaves over it later but that doesn't explain how they got under the burned items. I mentioned the lack of leaves in Avery's yard only to point out it's not likely leaves blew into the burn pit during the search. But nothing attributes for the fact these metal items were over leaves.

 

[missy1974]

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...osure-of-Potentially-Exculpatory-Evidence.pdf

I can't wait for the experts to comment on this.... I can see why some people seriously question if the remains are even TH's. Reddit has a lot of smart people... they will break it down and explain it LOL

 

[Sleuther87]

You guys do realize no bone fragments at the quarry were confirmed to be human, and almost all of the bone fragments at the quarry were confirmed to be animal bones, right?

 

[missy1974]

They were suspected to be human pelvic bone fragments. Not confirmed. But in Eisenberg's opinion... and I think Fairgrieve agreed with her, they had the characteristics human pelvic bones.

IMO the likelyhood that suspected human pelvic bones were found in the quarry... and other human bones found in a burn pit and a burn barrel, none of which were pelvic bones, is just way too coincidental. Not to mention that Eisenberg said all the bones from all 3 sites were consistent in their appearance and charring, etc.

 

[MysticJynx]

You guys do realize no bone fragments at the quarry were confirmed to be human, and almost all of the bone fragments at the quarry were confirmed to be animal bones, right?

I believe you mean the animal bones that were found at the neighbors gravel pit. Those were all bones of animal.

 

[Soulmagent]

The bones, ugh

Reading back through pages, ( surprise surprise )

Forgive me first, as it's tough to distinguish bones/bonfire threads as to which should go where. Was going to post this there, as an add on but thought " no, it's not bonfire related" But it goes right with the fire, scene, etc. and then thought " crap, I don't wanna break any rules "

SO, moving on,

The teeth? All that was recovered were fragments & part of a root/root structure.

In reading how charred they were, can a bonfire char TEETH this way? A crown?

I question the fire/heat/charred teeth

Along with the Coroner ( team assembled and all ) told by "Top dogs" we don't need you, or whatever was specifically said to her to NOT investigate & be walled off from the scene, makes me wonder..

Is the reason because the bones couldn't have been burned in a typical fire, tires or not?
The crime scene, just wasn't a crime scene?

I believe this is correct.

 

[missy1974]

I hope this ok to post over here.... I was just catching up on the Bosma case. Because it's a Canadian case, no camera's allowed in the courtroom, but they are allowed to tweet during the testimony. Today (actually yesterday lol), Dr. Rogers, a forensic anthropologist testified. It's fairly brief because it's tweets, but it is clear to me the differences in that case and this case. For anyone that is okay with how the burnpit or the bones were handled/investigated.... please take the time to look, it's only about 6 forum pages long. The defense didn't even ask her any questions.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?300950-Bosma-Murder-Trial-02-18-16-Day-11/page3


The last tweets on her testimony before being excused:

Shannon Martin ‏@ShannonMartinTV 54s54 seconds ago Hamilton, Ontario
Rogers voice cracks, "I thought it was important for the family's peace of mind that they had all the remains back" #Bosma

Lisa Hepfner ‏@HefCHCHNews 45s45 seconds ago
The doctor seemed to get emotional there. She got a new vacuum & made sure no remains left behind. She was thinking of family peace of mind

molly hayes ‏@mollyhayes 24s24 seconds ago
"I thought it was important for family's peace of mind that they had all of the remains" Rogers says. Voice wavers, she apologizes. #Bosma

 

[hoshizora]

I have a question about the bones/bonfire.

Does anyone know if there was any evidence of an accelerant used in the bonfire besides the tyres and scrap, such as petrol and if any kind of substance was found on the bones and/or recovered items of clothing?

If there were some on the bones, then it could potentially rule out some places as being the burn site.

I was gonna ask if anyone knows if SA had bonfires much, but there is a bonfire thread so I might go there. (As someone said it is a little hard to distinguish between them)

The fact that the experts testified saying they thought the remains had been moved speaks volumes and I do not believe she was burned in SA's fire pit but rather placed there afterwards. It doesn't make sense for SA to kill her at his house, burn her elsewhere then bring back some of the remains to put in the firepit.

I think it would be possible for a ME who is trained to determine how remains have been burnt (such as how hot, how long, evidence of an accelerant). I think slowly burned remains would be different to fastly burned remains but that's just my non-medical armchair opinion. :lol:

 

[missy1974]

hoshizora ~ if you go to the transcripts, Day 13/14, Dr. Eisenberg testifies. I think you will find it on day 14, but Eisenberg said that there was a fuel smell, I think from the container that had the bones from the burn barrel.... that container also contained non-human bones. She was asked by the defense if she smelled 'rubber' on any of the remains and I believe she said no.

And yes... the bones/bonfire info is crossed over a lot LOL

 

[hoshizora]

Thanks for that missy. I really should read the trial transcripts. It will probably answer a lot of my questions