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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have been thinking about something and have seen it posted elsewhere as well. Kratz issued a murder affidavit for rape, kidnapping, forceful imprisonment or whatever, etc... for Nov 5, he was logged into the search on the Avery property on Nov 5, but yet he wasn't made Special Prosecutor until Nov 15. At that early of the stage, what is the need for a special prosecutor and how is it determined that early on about a conflict of interest, if it is just a missing person's case? I mean, at that point all they have is the car. And how can any official documents from Nov 5 that are signed by Kratz be legal or admissible if he was not OFFICIALLY made the Special Prosecutor until Nov. 15?
 
It's a bit confusing Jaiddie because Calumet county was involved first... that is where TH was reported missing... they asked Manitowoc to assist with talking to Steve and Zipperer. When they found the RAV4 on Saturday morning, they reactivated that incident number and then they had a "meeting" at the salvage yard and decided that Calumet would take over the investigation so there would not be an appearance of a conflict of interest. So my guess is, this is why Kratz signed those search warrants..... I'm still unsure of why he was at the Salvage yard on the 5th though, it seems odd, considering they had a vehicle and that's it, one that they claimed was locked and they didn't open until ... well, I don't know when LOL
 
[video=youtube;q5kql2il2Vk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q5kql2il2Vk&app=desktop[/video]

An interview with the man that went and met with SA a few days ago and did a periscope live feed of his visit afterwards.

WIBX: You just recently met with Steven. We're hearing he may be getting a new trial. What's the scoop?
BUSSE: ...We're not even looking for a new trial. We're actually looking for an exoneration.
WIBX: Wow.
BUSSE: Zellner's VERY confident, and Steven is also very confident that, um, its not gonna take that much time. And we're talking months here.
WIBX: And what grounds would he be exonerated?
BUSSE: Phone records, DNA, um, just... there's alibi's there that weren't proven the first time that Zellner is taking to the next level and gone the extra mile to prove.
WIBX: I saw the new attorney say that that theres DNA evidence that did not exist before, and its available now.
BUSSE: Yes.
WIBX: ...and that is going to set this guy free. i mean, would that be unbelievable that this could happen to a person twice. i mean thats incredible.
BUSSE: To us, it's really unbelievable, um, but it has to do with the money, and it has to do with, uh, becoming the laughing stock of the Wisconsin justice system. Manitowoc couldn't afford to do that, and now they really hurt themselves because if they thought that a $36M dollar lawsuit was huge...
WIBX: Oh yeah...
BUSSE: ...a $100M dollar lawsuit's gonna be a lot worse on their plate this time.
WIBX: He can put this town out of business.
BUSSE: Easily.
 
I have been on Webseluths for a few years and love the way it is moderated. I think I have never offended anyone or the rules. However, I am on a thread at the moment which has been hijacked by someone who believes SA is innocent. I want to know more.

Could I ask that people trawl through this and let me know what they think (Good or Bad?)

Thank You in advance.... (And I look forward to Justice for all those who have been wronged. x)

https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=70129
 
What I've never understood is the emphasis conspiracy theorists have placed on the 1995 phone call answered by Sergeant Andy Colborn (who in 1995 was working as a corrections officer for the Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Office) from a detective in Brown County who said he had someone in custody who was claiming he "had committed an assault in Manitowoc County and someone else was in jail for it."

Colborn Report:
http://www.wisinfo.biz/appleton/pdf/index.php?x=261

Colborn Deposition Video:
http://www.postcrescent.com/story/n...ry-lawsuit-video-sgt-andrew-colborn/81578240/

It's important to note that in the report and deposition the crime the person was taking credit for is an assault. It's never suggested or claimed that it was a sexual assault or rape; it's only ever called an assault.

Why is this significant?

There were over 20 individuals convicted of assault in Manitowoc County between 1985 - 1995.

If there was only one person convicted of assault in that time period, this would be very significant. If the inmate the call was about had claimed to have committed a sexual assault, it would have been very significant.

The conspiracy folks claim that Colburn should have known that the caller was referring to Avery as the wrongfully convicted inmate, yet facts prove there were over 20 possibilities since the caller never called it a sexual assault.

bringing this over from the GUILTY thread, since it seems that I cannot post in there.

If this was the case, I have a hard time believing that Colborn was pulled in for a deposition, and not only that, he was "concerned" he could be named as a party in the lawsuit (per his testimony). Also... just because he wrote "assault", it means nothing to me, he seemed to think it had a connection to Avery, so much so that he wrote a report the day after SA was released in 2003. In the 5 minute clip that we see..... they also refer to SA being in custody at the time for an "assault".
 
I have been on Webseluths for a few years and love the way it is moderated. I think I have never offended anyone or the rules. However, I am on a thread at the moment which has been hijacked by someone who believes SA is innocent. I want to know more.

Could I ask that people trawl through this and let me know what they think (Good or Bad?)

Thank You in advance.... (And I look forward to Justice for all those who have been wronged. x)

https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=70129

A lot of what is in his appeals has been discussed here at some point. The search warrants, the Denny rule, etc. I am not sure how much you have read or researched, but thought I would give you a link if you were interested :)

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/
they have most of the photo's, the trial transcripts, the pre and post trial motions, exhibits, and more. Literally 1000's of pages.
 
bringing this over from the GUILTY thread, since it seems that I cannot post in there.

If this was the case, I have a hard time believing that Colborn was pulled in for a deposition, and not only that, he was "concerned" he could be named as a party in the lawsuit (per his testimony). Also... just because he wrote "assault", it means nothing to me, he seemed to think it had a connection to Avery, so much so that he wrote a report the day after SA was released in 2003. In the 5 minute clip that we see..... they also refer to SA being in custody at the time for an "assault".
Would you agree that it's odd that in everything testified to and submitted into evidence both Colbourn and Avery's attorney only refers to the phone call being about an assault and never referred to as rape or sexual assault?

Frankly, I was shocked by this.

Do I think Colbourn is the dumbest person on the planet for writing the report eight years later? Absolutely.

The only plausible explanation for him writing the report is that when the DNA matched Gregory Allen and Avery was exonerated, dumb Colbourn must have realized that of the over 20 people convicted for assault in Manitowoc between 1985-1995, that call he took in 1995 must have been about Avery and not one of the 20+ other assault convicts.

If Avery's lawyer or Colbourn had ever referred to it as a sexual assault or rape in their interaction or Colbourn had categorized it as such then it really would have narrowed the possibilities to 2.

But, there's nothing in deposition evidence or testimony where Colbourn or Avery's lawyer suggests the phone call was about a sexual assault.

Assault and sexual assault/rape are not interchangeable; a rapist has to register as a sex offender whereas a batterer isn't given that label while in or out of custody.
 
I have been on Webseluths for a few years and love the way it is moderated. I think I have never offended anyone or the rules. However, I am on a thread at the moment which has been hijacked by someone who believes SA is innocent. I want to know more.

Could I ask that people trawl through this and let me know what they think (Good or Bad?)



Thank You in advance.... (And I look forward to Justice for all those who have been wronged. x)

https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf?content=pdf&seqNo=70129
YOu mean ME? laughs Cause i Posted one article that I believe was more suited fro the guilty group, since it was about the officers who got recognized as being great officers? Laughs.
 
Would you agree that it's odd that in everything testified to and submitted into evidence both Colbourn and Avery's attorney only refers to the phone call being about an assault and never referred to as rape or sexual assault?

Frankly, I was shocked by this.

Do I think Colbourn is the dumbest person on the planet for writing the report eight years later? Absolutely.

The only plausible explanation for him writing the report is that when the DNA matched Gregory Allen and Avery was exonerated, dumb Colbourn must have realized that of the over 20 people convicted for assault in Manitowoc between 1985-1995, that call he took in 1995 must have been about Avery and not one of the 20+ other assault convicts.

If Avery's lawyer or Colbourn had ever referred to it as a sexual assault or rape in their interaction or Colbourn had categorized it as such then it really would have narrowed the possibilities to 2.

But, there's nothing in deposition evidence or testimony where Colbourn or Avery's lawyer suggests the phone call was about a sexual assault.

Assault and sexual assault/rape are not interchangeable; a rapist has to register as a sex offender whereas a batterer isn't given that label while in or out of custody.

Colborn wrote his statement 8 years after the fact... and yes, it says assault. I honestly don't know if it is a true and accurate recollection of this phone call because of the timing and because of Colborn's lack of adding 'facts' to his statements.... for example his statement he wrote in June 2006 for the events that happened in November 2005 was not complete.

You say that they are not interchangeable, and normally I would agree, yet they refer to SA being in custody for "assault".

I guess some people put a lot of weight into that phone call... including Colborn himself. I put more weight into Colborn's concern that he could become a party to the lawsuit (because of the call), than the phone call itself (unless it was more specific than Colborn reported).

I would like to see the full deposition tapes, not just bits and pieces. And I would like to know if anyone requested information from Green Bay prison about this "call", after seeing some incident reports from the jails, I would be surprised if a report didn't exist, that would narrow it down. IMO


ETA: I saw your post in the other thread .... do you have a link to Colborn's deposition? I have only watched the 5 minute clip, I don't think I have ever seen a full transcript of his deposition, would like to read it.
 
http://www.gmancasefile.com/moore-to-the-story.html

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

I especially liked this part:

"The evidence room was secured by metal key locks. Fine. ...As we have seen already, Manitowoc County deputies and investigators seem to have little trouble finding a key when they need one." LOL :giggle:
 
Colborn wrote his statement 8 years after the fact... and yes, it says assault. I honestly don't know if it is a true and accurate recollection of this phone call because of the timing and because of Colborn's lack of adding 'facts' to his statements.... for example his statement he wrote in June 2006 for the events that happened in November 2005 was not complete.

You say that they are not interchangeable, and normally I would agree, yet they refer to SA being in custody for "assault".

I guess some people put a lot of weight into that phone call... including Colborn himself. I put more weight into Colborn's concern that he could become a party to the lawsuit (because of the call), than the phone call itself (unless it was more specific than Colborn reported).

I would like to see the full deposition tapes, not just bits and pieces. And I would like to know if anyone requested information from Green Bay prison about this "call", after seeing some incident reports from the jails, I would be surprised if a report didn't exist, that would narrow it down. IMO


ETA: I saw your post in the other thread .... do you have a link to Colborn's deposition? I have only watched the 5 minute clip, I don't think I have ever seen a full transcript of his deposition, would like to read it.

Like I wrote, I think Colbourn is one of the dumbest people on the planet for even writing the report eight years later. If he had wrote the report in 1995 it may have resulted in an investigation of over 20 people who has been convicted of assault in Manitowoc between 1985-1995. There's no merit in the suggestion that Colbourn writing the report in 2003 shows he's ethical, the ethical thing would have been to write it in 1995; however what it does suggest is that Colbourn is an idiot, fool.

What really stood out to me is the fact that Avery's attorney did not ever categorize it as a "sexual assault" or "rape" in any of his questions to Colbourn. I was really surprised that he never attempted to imply or insinuate that the call was about a "sexual assault." This leads me to believe either Avery's attorney is incompetent or he knew that there was no evidence that the caller referred it as anything but an assault.

There's a pretty huge difference between the terms "assault" and "sexual assault" / "rape" especially as viewed by law enforcement.

Who refers to Avery as being in jail for "assault"?
 
HastingsChi.... I would think, but not sure... but because Colborn referred to it as "assault" they couldn't just add "sexual" in there to imply it was more than what he wrote, if that makes sense?

I can't remember if it was in Colborn's 5 min clip or another one.... but one of the depositions on the post crescent site.... I will listen again later and let you know :) I'm watching my other obsession at the moment.... hockey LOL IIRC they even say the "Beernsten assault" and don't even refer to it as rape/sexual assault. Like I said, I tend to agree with you.... but if they are also referring to the rape as just "assault" ... I'm not sure what that says about 'them'.

Ultimately, Colborn was concerned enough that it was about Avery/Allen that he brought it up, wrote a report, and was concerned he could be a party to the lawsuit (it actually gives me the impression that there was more to the call than what was written in the report now that I have been looking at it again IMO)
 
HastingsChi.... I would think, but not sure... but because Colborn referred to it as "assault" they couldn't just add "sexual" in there to imply it was more than what he wrote, if that makes sense?

I can't remember if it was in Colborn's 5 min clip or another one.... but one of the depositions on the post crescent site.... I will listen again later and let you know :) I'm watching my other obsession at the moment.... hockey LOL IIRC they even say the "Beernsten assault" and don't even refer to it as rape/sexual assault. Like I said, I tend to agree with you.... but if they are also referring to the rape as just "assault" ... I'm not sure what that says about 'them'.

Ultimately, Colborn was concerned enough that it was about Avery/Allen that he brought it up, wrote a report, and was concerned he could be a party to the lawsuit (it actually gives me the impression that there was more to the call than what was written in the report now that I have been looking at it again IMO)

I'm not aware of anything that would prohibit Avery's attorneys from framing a question like:
"When you received this call about an inmate serving time for a sexual assault the caller's prisoner claims to have committed, why did you wait eight years to mention it to anyone?"

Unless Avery's attorney knew the officer would correct him and say the caller said assault, not sexual assault.

But honestly, I'd ask the question anyway knowing that Colbourn isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

Here's why I harp on this: If Avery's attorney is able to get Colbourn to admit the caller used the term "sexual assault" or get the caller to affirm that he called it a "sexual assault", it validates Avery's lawsuit because there were 2 people (Avery being one of them) convicted of sexual assault in Manitowoc County between 1985-1995. Whereas over 20 people convicted of assault over the same period. When there's two possibilities and you do nothing, that looks really, really bad.

Yet Avery's attorney never attempted to challenge Colbourn about the crime the call was about. Mind boggling.

Hockey, huh? Personally I split my NHL allegiance between the Hartford Whalers, Minnesota North Stars and Quebec Nordiques...
 
I get what you are saying HastingsChi. I have not read or watched any of the full depositions, so I can't comment on what exactly they asked and didn't ask for sure. I wish the site that got the footage of the depositions would just put the full tapes up rather than what they thought was interesting lol I still haven't watched them again but will try to do that tonight sometime :)

psst... I'm a Minnesota Wild fan.... for now haha
 
I get what you are saying HastingsChi. I have not read or watched any of the full depositions, so I can't comment on what exactly they asked and didn't ask for sure. I wish the site that got the footage of the depositions would just put the full tapes up rather than what they thought was interesting lol I still haven't watched them again but will try to do that tonight sometime :)

psst... I'm a Minnesota Wild fan.... for now haha
So you root against the Minnesota North Stars? ;-)
 
Thank you Jaiddie!

For everyone who thought " Nah, NO way could so many departments be so corrupt. NOT the FBI too. No way "

Here is a man who worked for the FBI TELLING us that YES, the FBI has done some shady stuff in the past.
He even goes on to tell how EASY it would have been for the evidence ( what there was of it ) to have been tampered with, in the " evidence room " and who he thinks did it.

It is ALL in the link Jaiddie posted
http://www.gmancasefile.com/moore-to-the-story.html

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

I especially liked this part:

"The evidence room was secured by metal key locks. Fine. ...As we have seen already, Manitowoc County deputies and investigators seem to have little trouble finding a key when they need one." LOL :giggle:
 
Wow. Ridiculous.
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’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 “good ole boy” 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’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."
 
3202d77f.gif

What Happens Next in ‘Making a Murderer’?
An interview with Carrie Sperling, co-director of the WI Innocence Project

Observer: The last few months had to be pretty crazy for you. Tell me about your experience.

Carrie Sperling: It has been interesting. We knew the show (Making a Murderer) was coming out. No one at the clinic had seen it, so we didn’t really know what was coming. But the clinic was prepared once again to have a vigorous response to questions about Steven Avery’s exoneration, his first case, and our role in it all.

What we didn’t expect was that the overwhelming response to the documentary would be, “Oh my god, this innocent man was convicted twice, wrongly. Why haven’t you been able to get him out for the second conviction?”

[...]

To me, the most exciting thing about “Making a Murderer” was witnessing a new crowdsourcing movement for court cases emerge in real-time. Do you think we’re changing the way the court system operates?

Carrie Sperling: I think it is really interesting. I was on a website recently, and saw all these people doing their own investigation of the case, and coming up with all sorts of ideas. Some of these ideas may be useful to Brendan Dassey’s attorneys and Steven Avery’s attorneys in post conviction.

And I thought to myself, “Wow, everything has changed. Should we be tossing our investigations out to the public, saying, ‘Here, please investigate this. See what you come up with.’” It’s a really interesting concept.

EYESR_zps1dff9e53.gif

link

NB: also posted in media thread
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
169
Guests online
3,717
Total visitors
3,886

Forum statistics

Threads
603,122
Messages
18,152,524
Members
231,654
Latest member
Melissa D.
Back
Top