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

[RANCH]

It could be that the information wasn't released to anyone outside of LE. This statement makes me believe that is the case. Kratz said investigators have a significant amount of evidence in the case, though authorities released few details about the investigation Monday.

But what I'm more interested in is this statement. Some search warrants were issued for properties not connected to the Avery family, he said.
Like who and why haven't we heard anything more about these other search warrants? Where did they take place and who was involved?

Why wouldn't LE tell family members about blood stains immediately? This is the proof of a coverup and planting for sure.

The other search warrants were just a diversion to make it look like LE was actually doing a murder investigation.

 

[missy1974]

It could be that the information wasn't released to anyone outside of LE. This statement makes me believe that is the case. Kratz said investigators have a significant amount of evidence in the case, though authorities released few details about the investigation Monday.

But what I'm more interested in is this statement. Some search warrants were issued for properties not connected to the Avery family, he said.
Like who and why haven't we heard anything more about these other search warrants? Where did they take place and who was involved?

I just don't think they wouldn't have informed the family immediately or at least within a day or so (this was 3 days after finding the RAV4 and we know they went into the vehicle the next day). At the time this article was written, MH still sounded hopeful, it's odd IMO, considering that not only was there blood in the front of the RAV4 (and they wouldn't have known who's it was at the time, would they?), and there was also blood in the back and spatter on the rear cargo door. Although it wasn't conclusive evidence... it was a huge clue. Not to mention that Brutus hit on the RAV4 too.

As for the search warrants... I think Kratz was blowing smoke. Here is the search warrant file, you can see a list in the first few pages (remember the article was written on the 8th).... the only one I see that is not connected to the Avery's is for Cingular, and it wasn't even served (and it was many days later, on the 17th). Unless he meant the the warrants for DNA, which is technically not property LOL I'm not sure, but I would have thought it would be part of the file though. In all the documents I have read so far, they didn't even get a warrant for Zipperer's, although, the Zipperer's eventually, somewhat, kinda sorta, reluctantly talked to the officers.... after knocking for 15 minutes and talking to JZ through a window.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Search-Warrant-File.pdf

ETA: I guess I shouldn't say it was odd that he was hopeful (I think a family member should always be hopeful until they have concrete proof)... I find it more odd that he said there was no sign of harmful acts, when clearly the blood in the RAV4 said otherwise, especially the spatter and blood in the rear. IMO

 

[BigCityAccountant]

I just don't think they wouldn't have informed the family immediately or at least within a day or so (this was 3 days after finding the RAV4 and we know they went into the vehicle the next day). At the time this article was written, MH still sounded hopeful, it's odd IMO, considering that not only was there blood in the front of the RAV4 (and they wouldn't have known who's it was at the time, would they?), and there was also blood in the back and spatter on the rear cargo door. Although it wasn't conclusive evidence... it was a huge clue. Not to mention that Brutus hit on the RAV4 too.

As for the search warrants... I think Kratz was blowing smoke. Here is the search warrant file, you can see a list in the first few pages (remember the article was written on the 8th).... the only one I see that is not connected to the Avery's is for Cingular, and it wasn't even served (and it was many days later, on the 17th). Unless he meant the the warrants for DNA, which is technically not property LOL I'm not sure, but I would have thought it would be part of the file though. In all the documents I have read so far, they didn't even get a warrant for Zipperer's, although, the Zipperer's eventually, somewhat, kinda sorta, reluctantly talked to the officers.... after knocking for 15 minutes and talking to JZ through a window.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Search-Warrant-File.pdf

ETA: I guess I shouldn't say it was odd that he was hopeful (I think a family member should always be hopeful until they have concrete proof)... I find it more odd that he said there was no sign of harmful acts, when clearly the blood in the RAV4 said otherwise, especially the spatter and blood in the rear. IMO

Ok, this is one of those things we agree to disagree on. I don't think LE told the family blood was found in the car--I think they were waiting to find a body--to break the news all at once. JMO

I do agree--he should have remained hopefully--after all they "technically" hadn't found her yet. When did the lab reports come back confirming the bones? You always have these things at your fingertips!

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Why wouldn't LE tell family members about blood stains immediately? This is the proof of a coverup and planting for sure.

The other search warrants were just a diversion to make it look like LE was actually doing a murder investigation.

Ok---I'm so confused---I thought you thought SA was guilty? Are you using sarcasm?? For me, I still think he is guilty--but I'm open minded.

I think KZ has her hands full with defending SA in a state where a lot of people hate people from IL. I'd be willing to put money on it that this is going to be one heck of a showdown. Don't expect KZ to be the only one with info up her sleeve.

I am interested in it because it wasn't mentioned anywhere else in everything I read.

 

[missy1974]

Ok, this is one of those things we agree to disagree on. I don't think LE told the family blood was found in the car--I think they were waiting to find a body--to break the news all at once. JMO

I do agree--he should have remained hopefully--after all they "technically" hadn't found her yet. When did the lab reports come back confirming the bones? You always have these things at your fingertips!

December 5th, Item BZ

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-14-and-15.pdf

 

[RANCH]

Ok---I'm so confused---I thought you thought SA was guilty? Are you using sarcasm?? For me, I still think he is guilty--but I'm open minded.

I think KZ has her hands full with defending SA in a state where a lot of people hate people from IL. I'd be willing to put money on it that this is going to be one heck of a showdown. Don't expect KZ to be the only one with info up her sleeve.

I am interested in it because it wasn't mentioned anywhere else in everything I read.

I'm sorry. I thought that the sarcasm would be obvious. I consider myself to be open minded also.

I would like to know more about those search warrants.

 

[dexter75]

Agree with you once again Missy

I will also add, it was mentioned by Justiceseeker that the teens allegations sound similar to Jodi's.

Keep in mind,( in my opinion ) LE went after Jodi & coerced her to turn away from SA. She could have very easily been fed similar accounts of the teens case, read about it, etc. To me, this would explain why much of Jodi & the teenager's version of events, seemingly mesh well with one another..

The DA didn't charge him, according to this filing by the defense... http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...mo-Opposing-Uncharged-Misconduct-Evidence.pdf



I do think the original complaint came from the mother, but the teen was interviewed later, by Wendy Baldwin in January 2006. I have a link to the report http://imgur.com/a/o1GwA but I am a bit concerned that there are pages missing (look at the page numbers). I have read some other things about this which I think 'taints' my view on it all.... so I will leave it at that ;-) I would like to see the whole report, with others statements about this.

I do think that after everything I have learned about SA.... he is probably a douchebag to the one's that are close to him. He seems to come off as an easy going guy to acquaintances, but to the one's that are close to him, he is probably an a$$.

Because he may or may not have done other things, does not mean that he did indeed kill TH. I do think that LE could easily 'justify' to themselves why 'helping' the evidence find SA's property was doing the right thing and putting him where he belongs if they had knowledge of any accusations, and lets face it... there were some LE that absolutely still believed he committed the assault on PB.

 

[dexter75]

Not proof, just makes a person go " WTH? " as stated..

Like so many other obvious inconsistencies in this case.

Why wouldn't LE tell family members about blood stains immediately? This is the proof of a coverup and planting for sure.

The other search warrants were just a diversion to make it look like LE was actually doing a murder investigation.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

December 5th, Item BZ

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Steven-Avery-Trial-Exhibit-14-and-15.pdf

Yea--thanks! You always have that stuff handy! That is what I thought. I'm willing to bet they were not letting out any info until they had that confirmation. When did Mr. Blowhard have that press conference--not until 2006, right?

 

[missy1974]

Yea--thanks! You always have that stuff handy! That is what I thought. I'm willing to bet they were not letting out any info until they had that confirmation. When did Mr. Blowhard have that press conference--not until 2006, right?

but.... they had a funeral for her before that. Shortly after the charred remains were found, and before December 5th.

November 18th/19th
http://www.wietingfuneralhome.com/obituaries/teresa-m-halbach/


I did find a site that has copies of some articles from the early days of the investigation, of course, a lot of them are not available online now, not even on the way back machine I remember reading these before, so I'm pretty sure it's okay for me to post the link.

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/archive/index.php/t-155992.html

 

[Sarah]

I just don't think they wouldn't have informed the family immediately or at least within a day or so (this was 3 days after finding the RAV4 and we know they went into the vehicle the next day).

Ok, this is one of those things we agree to disagree on. I don't think LE told the family blood was found in the car--I think they were waiting to find a body--to break the news all at once. JMO

I can think of reasons for LE to keep the family fully informed and other reasons why they may have held back some details, so I'm undecided on this one.
Given that I believe LE were woefully inexperienced and under-skilled in dealing with a case of this complexity, even if I did have an opinion on what I think they 'should' have done there's no saying that they actually would have done it LOL

Regardless of what the family had been told though, it's quite possible that they were instructed to take the 'no evidence of serious harm' line in interviews with the press.

Either

a) To keep key details and speculation out of the media until things were confirmed

or

b) At this point, there was no conclusive proof that she was dead and she may have been being held somewhere against her will. That particular stance send out a message to whoever is holding her - "what you've done isn't so bad yet. You can let her go"

 

[missy1974]

You make a very good point Sarah..... what LE should or shouldn't have said or done, may not be the norm, considering the rest of the investigation LOL

 

[Jaiddie]

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/n...blood-evidence-improperly-protected/82887910/

'Cop: Blood Evidence Improperly Protected'

"A Sussex, U.K., police detective tells Mirror.co.uk that "that Manitowoc County law enforcement may not have done everything in their power to properly protect the evidence, leaving some important unanswered questions."

There is also mention of Kratz's upcoming public appearance with Judge Pirro. BCA, I noticed on the Kratz thread that you were thinking about attending to pose some questions, and if so this article has good news for those interested, in the form of a map that shows available seats still left. I literally, LOL'd when I saw it! I am absolutely positive that Kratz's narcissistic side (in other words, his whole being) is positively raging at this point, because Strang & Buting's appearances tend to sell out quite quickly, I believe, so this must be killing him, hehe.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/n...blood-evidence-improperly-protected/82887910/

'Cop: Blood Evidence Improperly Protected'

"A Sussex, U.K., police detective tells Mirror.co.uk that "that Manitowoc County law enforcement may not have done everything in their power to properly protect the evidence, leaving some important unanswered questions."

There is also mention of Kratz's upcoming public appearance with Judge Pirro. BCA, I noticed on the Kratz thread that you were thinking about attending to pose some questions, and if so this article has good news for those interested, in the form of a map that shows available seats still left. I literally, LOL'd when I saw it! I am absolutely positive that Kratz's narcissistic side (in other words, his whole being) is positively raging at this point, because Strang & Buting's appearances tend to sell out quite quickly, I believe, so this must be killing him, hehe.

I'm still debating--I don't know that I can stand being in the same room with him for any length of time.

 

[Jaiddie]

http://imgur.com/bQ9ZF4W

This is a document that shows that the juror (William A. Mohr) on the Avery trial, (the one who's wife worked at the clerk's office) was especially brought in to during the Avery case.

"Lynn Zigmunt, requested the Committee's approval to hire a temporary employee (Alice Mohr, retired Clerk of Courts employee) to assist in the Criminal Unit for a short period of time. It is anticipated that an employee from the Criminal Unit will be in Calumet County approximately 6-8 weeks assisting Judge Willis while the Avery trial is being conducted and will again be out of office during the Dassey trial...Alice Mohr is familiar with the Criminal Unit and be able to assist with time sensitive work while these trials are being conducted. If assistance is not brought in, the department would undoubtedly be paying overtime to other employees to complete the necessary work. Lynn anticipates Alice may work approximately 4 days per week during this time. A temporary employee could be utilized for up to six months without violating the union contract. A motion was made by Markwardt and seconded by Janowski to approve the request. Motion carried."

I am unsure if I am reading this correctly...isn't this, basically, saying that A Juror's retired wife was SPECIFICALLY re-hired during the trials of Avery and Dassey as a clerk in which the Juror was serving on one of the trials? How is that in any way condonable?

 

[BigCityAccountant]

http://imgur.com/bQ9ZF4W

This is a document that shows that the juror (William A. Mohr) on the Avery trial, (the one who's wife worked at the clerk's office) was especially brought in to during the Avery case.

"Lynn Zigmunt, requested the Committee's approval to hire a temporary employee (Alice Mohr, retired Clerk of Courts employee) to assist in the Criminal Unit for a short period of time. It is anticipated that an employee from the Criminal Unit will be in Calumet County approximately 6-8 weeks assisting Judge Willis while the Avery trial is being conducted and will again be out of office during the Dassey trial...Alice Mohr is familiar with the Criminal Unit and be able to assist with time sensitive work while these trials are being conducted. If assistance is not brought in, the department would undoubtedly be paying overtime to other employees to complete the necessary work. Lynn anticipates Alice may work approximately 4 days per week during this time. A temporary employee could be utilized for up to six months without violating the union contract. A motion was made by Markwardt and seconded by Janowski to approve the request. Motion carried."

I am unsure if I am reading this correctly...isn't this, basically, saying that A Juror's retired wife was SPECIFICALLY re-hired during the trials of Avery and Dassey as a clerk in which the Juror was serving on one of the trials? How is that in any way condonable?

Yes, your assessment of that seems to be right on track!

 

[ZOOL]

http://imgur.com/bQ9ZF4W

This is a document that shows that the juror (William A. Mohr) on the Avery trial, (the one who's wife worked at the clerk's office) was especially brought in to during the Avery case.

"Lynn Zigmunt, requested the Committee's approval to hire a temporary employee (Alice Mohr, retired Clerk of Courts employee) to assist in the Criminal Unit for a short period of time. It is anticipated that an employee from the Criminal Unit will be in Calumet County approximately 6-8 weeks assisting Judge Willis while the Avery trial is being conducted and will again be out of office during the Dassey trial...Alice Mohr is familiar with the Criminal Unit and be able to assist with time sensitive work while these trials are being conducted. If assistance is not brought in, the department would undoubtedly be paying overtime to other employees to complete the necessary work. Lynn anticipates Alice may work approximately 4 days per week during this time. A temporary employee could be utilized for up to six months without violating the union contract. A motion was made by Markwardt and seconded by Janowski to approve the request. Motion carried."

I am unsure if I am reading this correctly...isn't this, basically, saying that A Juror's retired wife was SPECIFICALLY re-hired during the trials of Avery and Dassey as a clerk in which the Juror was serving on one of the trials? How is that in any way condonable?

Jaddie ~ This is very interesting, and I am too juiced right now to really comment on what all this means; however it is similar to the situation in the O.J. Simpson Trial when it was discovered that Judge Lance Ito's wife was a sergeant with the LAPD, and that she had failed to notify the court of her conflict of interest. The primary concern of both prosecution and defense attorneys at that time was that that revelation was serious grounds for a mistrial. Judge Ito then deferred to another judge for a ruling.... All of this became even more interesting when the "Furman Tapes" became public knowledge because Furman slandered both Judge Ito and his wife with his vile racist opinions.

Perhaps all of this will lead to a second, bizarre, in-your-face-only-in-America-Prime-Time-Steven-Avery-Trial.

 

[missy1974]

http://imgur.com/bQ9ZF4W

I am unsure if I am reading this correctly...isn't this, basically, saying that A Juror's retired wife was SPECIFICALLY re-hired during the trials of Avery and Dassey as a clerk in which the Juror was serving on one of the trials? How is that in any way condonable?

RSBM

That is kinda coincidental? crazy? weird? LOL At the time this request was made it was October 2006, so jury selection hadn't happened yet.... but to know she was brought in for these specific trials, and then her husband is not only part of the jury pool, he gets on the jury?!?!

 

[zerbert]

I don't know, my weird-meter is way out of whack with this case. Is it weird that Det. Jim Lenk, Ex-Boyfriend #1, and an Ex-Boyfriend #2's ex-wife all ended up in the Phoenix area? For that matter, is anything NORMAL with this thing?

 

[BigCityAccountant]

I don't know, my weird-meter is way out of whack with this case. Is it weird that Det. Jim Lenk, Ex-Boyfriend #1, and an Ex-Boyfriend #2's ex-wife all ended up in the Phoenix area? For that matter, is anything NORMAL with this thing?

Um...NO!