For Those Who Do Think Avery was Framed & Evidence Planted - Discuss

[missy1974]

"If the prosecutor believes that Stephen Avery killed Teresa Halbach in his trailer or his garage, and then piled her body in to the RAV4 to drive her 20 feet to the bonfire, Mr. Kratz has been overmedicating himself."

This did actually make me LOL when I read it ;-)

Like I said, he does have some small facts wrong.... but I think it's because the documentary maybe doesn't make it clear (it's been 2 1/2 months since I have seen it and I just can't remember it all now LOL)

 

[Jaiddie]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/03/14/making-a-murderer-creator_n_9434824.html

The film-makers answer questions in Australia about MaM:

about if the doc was made because they believed SA was innocent:


"While neither Ricciardi or Demos admit they believe Avery to be innocent or guilty, they insisted what they set out to tell was a far more important story -- the story of the accused.

"It happens to so many people but you always only see the narrative of 'getting the bad guy',” Ricciardi said.
“But really what our justice system is about is everybody having equal access to a fair trial. We knew right away that Steven Avery’s story would have a global reach,” Ricciardi said.
They said what they were documenting was not so much about what Avery did or didn’t do, but what the state of Wisconsin did or didn’t do in their efforts to convict both Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey."

 

[Jaiddie]

This from the link in my previous post:

"They believed following the gag order placed on both the defense and prosecution, Mike Halbach became somewhat of a spokesperson for the prosecution after the family was fed details of their case against Avery. Given he was the only person speaking to media this did not bode well for the defense."

It never occurred to me about the gag order that was put into place after Kratz's 3/2 press conference...that makes perfect sense why there was so much film of MH's media clips. That was the only way the prosecution could get info they wanted out to the public, since they were barred from speaking about it themselves. Feed desired information to the grieving family and they are able to kill 2 birds with one stone. 1) Cement the family's belief in SA guilt, and 2) able to get the information to the public despite the gag order. Bit ingenious, actually...I will say this. For all of my opinion that Kratz is a slimy, dirty, little man, I have to give him credit that, even so, he seems to be scarily brilliant when it comes to strategic devious tactics.

This is all JMHO, of course.

 

[Jaiddie]

Was feeding my obsession and reading info over on Reddit (as usual, lol) and came across more info I was not aware of that I found odd. It seems that, sometime during the investigation, Fassbender took little Katie Halbach (Teresa's little sister) to a store to pick out a pair of Daisy Fuentes jeans of the same style and size that Teresa would have worn.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...Trial-Transcript-Day-10-2007Feb23.pdf#page=36

"7 Q. When you looked through her stuff, Katie, did you

8 find her Daisy Fuentes jeans?
9 A. We did not.
10 Q. Sometime during this investigation, were you
11 asked to join, or accompany, a police officer, I
12 think it was Officer Fassbender, in trying to
13 find that pair of jeans, or trying to find a pair
14 that was just like those jeans?
15 A. I did."

Then, later:

"6 A. I went with Mr. Fassbender to Kohl's one day and

7 he asked me to pick out a pair of Daisy Fuentes
8 jeans that I thought Teresa would have worn.
9 Q. The same style, the same brand; is that right?
10 A. Yes."

I wonder exactly WHEN those jeans were purchased and if that was before or after the rivet with the bones were found?


​

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Was feeding my obsession and reading info over on Reddit (as usual, lol) and came across more info I was not aware of that I found odd. It seems that, sometime during the investigation, Fassbender took little Katie Halbach (Teresa's little sister) to a store to pick out a pair of Daisy Fuentes jeans of the same style and size that Teresa would have worn.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...Trial-Transcript-Day-10-2007Feb23.pdf#page=36

"7 Q. When you looked through her stuff, Katie, did you

8 find her Daisy Fuentes jeans?
9 A. We did not.
10 Q. Sometime during this investigation, were you
11 asked to join, or accompany, a police officer, I
12 think it was Officer Fassbender, in trying to
13 find that pair of jeans, or trying to find a pair
14 that was just like those jeans?
15 A. I did."

Then, later:

"6 A. I went with Mr. Fassbender to Kohl's one day and

7 he asked me to pick out a pair of Daisy Fuentes
8 jeans that I thought Teresa would have worn.
9 Q. The same style, the same brand; is that right?
10 A. Yes."

I wonder exactly WHEN those jeans were purchased and if that was before or after the rivet with the bones were found?


​

I'm guessing those jeans were used during the trial, no?

It wouldn't matter anyway, because someone could have gone to Kohl's on any day and purchased a pair of jeans, it didn't have to be at the moment that Katie went with Fassbender.

 

[Jaiddie]

[video=youtube;fYWW5nYvxeE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=fYWW5nYvxeE&app=desktop[/video]

Current interview with Richard Mahler, the excused juror, telling his some of his experiences during deliberations and his perceptions during the trial.

 

[pcrum12]

No one can answer that Jaiddie. It's the First and Most outrageous thing that happened! I'm in total agreement with you.

 

[missy1974]

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/n.../15/whats-point-steven-avery-tweets/81636768/

“DOJ attorneys try cases in the courtroom, not on social media,” said Anne E. Schwartz, director of communications for the Department of Justice.


andddddddd Ryan Ferguson commented on this article....

Ryan Ferguson ·
Columbia, Missouri
While it is true that tweets will have no sway on the judges in this, or hopefully any case, many are missing the point of tweets. Since the beginning of time the police and prosecutors have been using traditional media to convict people in the court of public opinion. This public opinion is incredibly under rated. In this new age of social media, intelligent attorneys have adapted and accepted that the fight for a person's innocence goes well beyond the courtroom. These attorneys are fighting a system that has systematically circumvented the laws and constitutional rights of people just like you and I. If an attorney does not use every resource avaliable in every venue to fight against these corrupt perverters of Justice then they, in my opinion, are not truly fighting for justice. They instead are stuck in the past and neglecting to see the big picture. Kathleen's progressiveness and success clearly proves this. Keep up the good fight Kathleen and continue to prove those afraid to evolve wrong!

 

[Jaiddie]

<modsnip unapproved post>

I agree that the documentary ended up being slanted, but I kinda think that it ended up in being edited that way because the film-makers were actually THERE to witness this outrageous investigation and trials. I think they started out, just as they say, with the intention of making a documentary about if the justice system had improved in the years between Avery's wrongful conviction, and this one. They, essentially, had there hands tied when the family (which I completely understand) and the prosecution refused to participate. That, unfortunately, left us with that pro-defense documentary...but even with the bias it was able the shine a light on many things that were wrong in those cases. I have to admit, once the transcripts became available, I was completely shocked at how MUCH was wrong. For all it's bias, MaM did not come close to showing the scope of just how wrong this all was. That is why I am surprised at the prosecution coming out screaming about all that was left out of the doc, because the most damning stuff left out was on the defense side, IMO.

Also, I do not expect ever to get an understandable answer to my question either, LOL. I just like to throw it out there when I feel like someone is calling my intelligence and sanity into question for thinking that this possibly was a set-up. If it looks like a duck, and quakes like a duck....

 

[shadowraiths]

All, there is absolutely nothing wrong with people exploring different theories. If you do not agree with a theory that someone presents, that is fine.

However, to characterize posters, or for that matter, other forums whose members hold theories that differ from yours as 'conspiracy theorists', 'nuts', etcetera, stifles open dialogue.

Importantly, it is not okay. Please stop. Thanks.

 

[dexter75]

Appreciate this, very much =)

All, there is absolutely nothing wrong with people exploring different theories. If you do not agree with a theory that someone presents, that is fine.

However, to characterize posters, or for that matter, other forums whose members hold theories that differ from yours as 'conspiracy theorists', 'nuts', etcetera, stifles open dialogue.

Importantly, it is not okay. Please stop. Thanks.

 

[shadowraiths]

Present day example of corruption, collusion and coverups occurring in Suffolk County, LI.

&#8203;The Strange Rise and Violent Fall of Long Island's Dirtiest Police Chief

Immobilized but conscious of the fact that Burke was the owner of the bag with the alleged *advertiser censored* stash, Loeb called the chief a name. Newspapers typically soften the word to "pervert," and the feds say Loeb was mistaken, but in Loeb's telling of the story, as documented in a video interview recorded for Newsday, he called Burke a "pedophile."

According to Loeb, when the chief heard that word, he exploded with rage, driving his thick fingers into the young man's face.

In subsequent weeks, Burke pressured his colleagues to cover up the abuse. One cop later told the US attorney's office that if it were discovered by Burke that he had spoken to the FBI during the investigation, he would be a "dead man."

[...]

It involves allegations of illegal wiretapping, cover-ups, sex addiction, drunk-driving cops, and blackmail. It involves a super PAC funded by the Suffolk Police Benevolent Association that critics say uses mandatory donations to cement a wall between cops and the people they are paid to protect. And it involves Tom Spota, the longtime Republican-turned-Democrat District Attorney of Suffolk County, who fathered Burke's rise to power through a close friendship that began after they met during the high-profile trial of a bizarre murder case.​

BBM (sound familiar)

Notably, this obscene activity has been ongoing for three decades, and some seem to think this man, along with a few others, are involved in, at the very least, the coverup of the Long Island Serial Killer (Gilgo Beach), and at worst, had a hand in the murders.

You can read more about the aforementioned case in the private LISK forum

That said, the primary reason I am posting this is to draw attention to the fact that LEOs can and do lie, plant evidence, and in some instances, even kill.

Now, while I am of the opinion this type of illegal activity is the exception and not the rule... To my mind, to ignore some of the glaring mishandling of the investigation into Ms. Halbach's murder, does an injustice to both her family and the larger public for which these men and women are sworn to protect and serve.

eta ~ additional excerpt

 

[Jaiddie]

http://gmancasefile.com/moore-to-the-story.html

"Moore to the Story: An FBI Agent's Take on MaM: Episode 7 Part 1 of 2"

My favorite LE spokesperson with his, per usual, excellent analysis of the documentary. His take so far:

1. "Based on what I know at this point, I cannot help but come to the conclusion that the Toyota key was planted in that room by Lenk, Colburn or Remiker, and my belief is that Lenk is the most likely candidate.
2. That evidence was planted does not automatically make Steven Avery guilty of murder, nor does clear him of murder. As I have said many times, the police in different jurisdictions have "helped" the conviction of guilty men as well as innocent men. Just because the police are willing to plant evidence doesn't make the suspect innocent. It might make convicting him (legally) problematic, however.
3. The claim that Manitowoc County Sheriff's Office was an uninvolved, uninterested party in this investigation is a sham."

 

[dexter75]

What in the world would be Fassbender's purpose? For buying those jeans? Hmmm..

We that believe evidence was planted,

Were they actually shown at trial? NM

Was feeding my obsession and reading info over on Reddit (as usual, lol) and came across more info I was not aware of that I found odd. It seems that, sometime during the investigation, Fassbender took little Katie Halbach (Teresa's little sister) to a store to pick out a pair of Daisy Fuentes jeans of the same style and size that Teresa would have worn.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...Trial-Transcript-Day-10-2007Feb23.pdf#page=36

"7 Q. When you looked through her stuff, Katie, did you

8 find her Daisy Fuentes jeans?
9 A. We did not.
10 Q. Sometime during this investigation, were you
11 asked to join, or accompany, a police officer, I
12 think it was Officer Fassbender, in trying to
13 find that pair of jeans, or trying to find a pair
14 that was just like those jeans?
15 A. I did."

Then, later:

"6 A. I went with Mr. Fassbender to Kohl's one day and

7 he asked me to pick out a pair of Daisy Fuentes
8 jeans that I thought Teresa would have worn.
9 Q. The same style, the same brand; is that right?
10 A. Yes."

I wonder exactly WHEN those jeans were purchased and if that was before or after the rivet with the bones were found?


​

 

[Jaiddie]

What in the world would be Fassbender's purpose? For buying those jeans? Hmmm..

We that believe evidence was planted,

Were they actually shown at trial? NM

I am not sure when they were bought, as the transcripts don't give that information I don't believe. They did use jeans at the trial, I think, but with all the shadiness going on in that investigation, it seems a date and receipt would go along way to assuage any doubts about what those jeans were purchased for, IMO. This case is making me question EVERYTHING, smh.

 

[Sarah]

Sorry guys, but I think this whole jeans thing is a bit of a wild goose chase tbh.

Possible legitimate reasons for buying them :

> Before the discovery of the cremains while TH was still a missing person - with the intent of using them in a reconstruction appeal. "TH was last seen wearing a pair of jeans similar to these"
> After the discovery, to establish the exact number of rivets and to match them to the findings.
> After the discovery, with the intent to use them for lab testing. How well do they burn with/without an accelerant, what do the recovered rivets indicate about burn time/temperature etc etc? (although, as far as we know this never actually happened)
> A longer time after the discovery in order to use them in court. (I don't actually recall reading that bit, but Jaiddie thinks they were used)

Even if we were to accept that the rivets were planted in the burn pit (and since this is the framing/planting thread, let's go with that assumption), it still doesn't really make sense to me.

If that was Fassbender's purpose, why buy them with TH's sister in tow? Why not go back surreptitiously to purchase a pair of jeans or even send Mrs Fassbender so as not to leave an obvious trail?
And why would anyone need to buy jeans in order to plant them? Presumably if whoever was doing the framing had her body, they also had the actual jeans that she was wearing that day (or what remained of them if the body was already burned) so no need to buy an alternative pair.

 

[Justiceseeker35]

What in the world would be Fassbender's purpose? For buying those jeans? Hmmm..

We that believe evidence was planted,

Were they actually shown at trial? NM

The only reason I can think of is to provide yet more "proof" those bones belonged to TH. See evidence of her jeans she had on in with the cremains.

 

[Jaiddie]

I don't want it thought that I am putting much stock in the jeans thing. It is just a fact I discovered that I had previously been unaware of. That Fassbender took TH sister to pick out a pair of Daisy Fuentes jeans, though he wouldn't have had to have her present to actually purchase the pair (in the case of if they were for planting). I did not mean to give too much speculation to that except that I wondered when those were purchased. There probably is not a sinister reason for that happening, but the way everything else went down in that investigation has made me quite cynical about this case. Again, if Manitowoc and Calamet County LE had run that investigation properly in the first place, people would not be giving it the scrutiny that is being done now, IMO.

 

[Justiceseeker35]

<modsnip unapproved post>

I agree that the documentary ended up being slanted, but I kinda think that it ended up in being edited that way because the film-makers were actually THERE to witness this outrageous investigation and trials. I think they started out, just as they say, with the intention of making a documentary about if the justice system had improved in the years between Avery's wrongful conviction, and this one. They, essentially, had there hands tied when the family (which I completely understand) and the prosecution refused to participate. That, unfortunately, left us with that pro-defense documentary...but even with the bias it was able the shine a light on many things that were wrong in those cases. I have to admit, once the transcripts became available, I was completely shocked at how MUCH was wrong. For all it's bias, MaM did not come close to showing the scope of just how wrong this all was. That is why I am surprised at the prosecution coming out screaming about all that was left out of the doc, because the most damning stuff left out was on the defense side, IMO.

Also, I do not expect ever to get an understandable answer to my question either, LOL. I just like to throw it out there when I feel like someone is calling my intelligence and sanity into question for thinking that this possibly was a set-up. If it looks like a duck, and quakes like a duck....

Very well said. I think I keep coming back to this story because I can't shake that not one piece of major evidence found is lacking suspicious circumstances in its finding. It seems to me that evidence is only "found" when the pressure is on the MTSO, the Lead Investigator or the "very special" Prosecutor. The Key, the Bones(the death certificate), the Car (the Warrant), the Confession, the Press Conference and the Bullet are all found either "just in time" by LE who shouldn't be there or as some sort of retaliation for SA and family getting the means to fight back at the system. Nothing here is just "evidence". Without following proper procedure, no proper reporting, logging or evidence documentation, it all feels like props. I'm 100% on this being a frame job.

 

[Jaiddie]

http://riehlworldview.com/2005/11/steven_avery_ch.html

This shows the mindset of the community in regards to the case back in 2005 & 2006, and while most of the comments are what to be expected (hang him and burn him, etc...) I found this one interesting from Court Relative:

"This tragic case is about police corruption and murderous cover-up. If I were a Judge there, I would have those officers hind quarters in front of my bench and not Mr. Avery. The Wisconsin Innocense Project proved Mr. Avery&#8217;s innocense on a previous case using new and advanced DNA testing which the officers were not able devise a plan for and now Manitowoc is attempting to cover its ungodly acts by adding the blood of an innocent girl with the persecution and destruction of an innocent man.
The Manitowoc Sheriffs Department is known as a northern style &#8220;good ole boy&#8221; network that would rival the KKK counties in the south, complete with a lot of false arrests and arrogant, poorly trained and disciplined deputies. Children are also placed on death row at age 17. Shareef Cousin, 16 at the time of the crime and just 17 at the time of conviction, became the country&#8217;s youngest death row inmate in 1996. Eventually granted a retrial, he was released from death row in 1999 after the state dropped charges. There is overwhelming evidence that he was subjected to the cruelty of the death penalty for a crime he did not commit.
Finally, I personlly knew a Manitowoc deputy who threatened me to sign a contract that would give him all my assets or I would be met with unequal litigation, police corruption and bodily harm and death. This department and its deputies and all law enforcement agencies and courts that give comfort and aid to this department should be disbarred and sentenced to prision."