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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was posted somewhere on here BCA, but still a good article ;-)
 
BigCityAccountant said:
Not sure if this was posted or not, I don't recall reading it~~so I will post it just in case it has not been shared.

Zellner's Avery strategy risky, but payoff big


http://www.sheboyganpress.com/story...avery-strategy-risky-but-payoff-big/89669586/

Nigro said the Wisconsin authorities only had "circumstantial evidence" pointing to Avery as a prime suspect.

Regardless, Zellner won't have a cake walk in trying to win Avery's exoneration by unmasking a murderer at large, Nigro said.

"It's going to be challenging because I can't believe what's happened through the history of this case," Nigro said. "I think the starting point on a post-conviction appeal ... the defense is going to face an uphill battle. I would hope with the number of bizarre things that happened in this case, it certainly appears to be a miscarriage of justice here. I look at it and don't understand how Avery was convicted and also Brendan Dassey. That makes zero sense. Brendan Dassey's confession, that's just one of the biggest travesties of justice I've ever seen."
Click to expand...
BBM

I believe that circumstantial evidence can be more powerful than direct evidence. DNA and other scientific evidence is circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence includes eyewitness accounts that I feel can be mistaken.

It's interesting that defense attorneys often deride circumstantial evidence saying that "it's all the state has." Most cases are circumstantial cases because there are no eyewitness's or video of the crime to present to the jury. JMO
 
Circumstantial Evidence


Books, movies, and television often perpetuate the belief that circumstantial evidence may not be used to convict a criminal of a crime. But this view is incorrect. In many cases, circumstantial evidence is the only evidence linking an accused to a crime; direct evidence may simply not exist. As a result, the jury may have only circumstantial evidence to consider in determining whether to convict or acquit a person charged with a crime. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "circumstantial evidence is intrinsically no different from testimonial [direct] evidence"
Click to expand...

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/circumstantial+evidence
 
missy1974 said:
It was posted somewhere on here BCA, but still a good article ;-)
Click to expand...

What I found most interesting is Nigro has been around the block a time or two during his 30 year career and with all his experience, he thinks there is something not right in dodge.
 
BigCityAccountant said:
What I found most interesting is Nigro has been around the block a time or two during his 30 year career and with all his experience, he thinks there is something not right in dodge.
Click to expand...

What do think about this comment he made?

Nigro said the Wisconsin authorities only had "circumstantial evidence" pointing to Avery as a prime suspect.
Click to expand...

Do you think that he purposely misrepresented circumstantial evidence? I think he did. JMO
 
BigCityAccountant said:
Well....been up at the cottage for a few days...went out to Crivitz area to visit with friends....holy moses...it is sooo dark out there...walking to the car at 11:00 pm I could not see my hand 2 feet in front of me....thank goodness the garage light went on because I could not even see where the car was...LOL (I happen to be sharing this for a reason....as I was traveling in the area, I was thinking how dark it is up by the cottage. We often have a campfire going and I was thinking if I could determine who was standing or sitting by the fire from inside the house) hum I guess our campfire is about 75 feet from the inside of the house. Interesting, I could hardly make out who was sitting there and barely see who was standing there...I wonder how ST was able to see way way way over behind SA's garage....
Click to expand...
Poleeze
IMO
He couldn't.
Simple as that🙄

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
 
RANCH said:
What do think about this comment he made?



Do you think that he purposely misrepresented circumstantial evidence? I think he did. JMO
Click to expand...

Hi Ranch!! :seeya:

I'm not really sure to be honest. I've heard attorney's use that phrase as favorable to their clients, but you make a very good case for it being the only type of evidence in many cases.

Thanks for posting that, I certainly wasn't aware of it...but..then again..I'm an accountant...LOL
 
So I've been lurking on this particular thread for a while, great posts, provided great insight.

Whilst I can't say SA definitively 100% didn't do it, I most certainly can say there is no damning evidence to suggest he did do it, or at least evidence that I believe is genuine! And when people say refer to the transcripts that gets my goat. What exactly should I refer to? To evidence that I just cannot trust. That isn't evidence, it's simply convenient. The fact that a key appeared out of thin air days after searching the same tiny area just sounds far too convenient.
The fact that they literally didn't properly look into people close to her throughly blows my mind!
The Rav 4..it goes on!
The LE departmental officers conflict of interest..and this is the short version.

When 1+1 =3 I'm not convinced. In the meantime, I hope KZ gets
To 2 quickly!

JMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
vanay said:
So I've been lurking on this particular thread for a while, great posts, provided great insight.

Whilst I can't say SA definitively 100% didn't do it, I most certainly can say there is no damning evidence to suggest he did do it, or at least evidence that I believe is genuine! And when people say refer to the transcripts that gets my goat. What exactly should I refer to? To evidence that I just cannot trust. That isn't evidence, it's simply convenient. The fact that a key appeared out of thin air days after searching the same tiny area just sounds far too convenient.
The fact that they literally didn't properly look into people close to her throughly blows my mind!
The Rav 4..it goes on!
The LE departmental officers conflict of interest..and this is the short version.

When 1+1 =3 I'm not convinced. In the meantime, I hope KZ gets
To 2 quickly!

JMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Hi Vanay!! :welcome4:

I agree with you! Anyone that doesn't look at this case and scratch their head, isn't really looking at the case objectively.
 
vanay said:
So I've been lurking on this particular thread for a while, great posts, provided great insight.

Whilst I can't say SA definitively 100% didn't do it, I most certainly can say there is no damning evidence to suggest he did do it, or at least evidence that I believe is genuine! And when people say refer to the transcripts that gets my goat. What exactly should I refer to? To evidence that I just cannot trust. That isn't evidence, it's simply convenient. The fact that a key appeared out of thin air days after searching the same tiny area just sounds far too convenient.
The fact that they literally didn't properly look into people close to her throughly blows my mind!
The Rav 4..it goes on!
The LE departmental officers conflict of interest..and this is the short version.

When 1+1 =3 I'm not convinced. In the meantime, I hope KZ gets
To 2 quickly!

JMO




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

:wagon:

Welcome! I think a lot of us feel the way you do :) Even the the documents that we do have to read, the CASO and MTSO reports, lab reports, transcripts.... I'm never sure whether to believe what I am reading!!!

Thanks for posting and I hope you continue to post :)

:wave: to all my websleuths buddies.... I have been busy, and not much new to report here, but I always check in :) Hope everyone is well!
 
http://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-m...strang-and-jerry-buting-respond-steven-513074

good article with Buting and Strang answering some questions.

Buting's response to a question about SA's intelligence, reminded me of something I read a week or so ago.

Here is his response:
Buting: There was nothing in his past that convinced me he was a murderer and that he would be capable of that. If you couple that with the fact things were going well for him: he was about to receive a $400,000 check from the state [for his previous wrongful imprisonment], over and above the $36 million lawsuit against the county, which was going well, and he had a girlfriend who was about to be released from jail in a couple of weeks. He just never had a motive do something like this. That should give people pause.

BBM from the article... I read about this a week or so ago and I had never heard about it before, but Buting made a similar comment at about the 2 minute mark as well [video=youtube;ijuyclsH3E0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijuyclsH3E0[/video]

I have read speculation that it was part of the "Avery Law" that was to be passed within days of TH going missing. IIRC the Avery Law, or maybe a different law, included something to do with compensation and increasing it for the wrongly accused.

I thought it was interesting and thought I would share. If the State literally had a check sitting there with his name on it, I don't understand why he didn't get it regardless of what was going on at the time, he was still imprisoned wrongfully the first time, with no doubts. IMO I also can't help but think this added to motive for LE to frame him.... again, JMO.
 
missy1974 said:
Did Superficial Questioning Affect Halbach Case?

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/n...ial-questioning-affect-halbach-case/93415858/

John Ferak breaks down the "superficial" interviews with those that were considered close to TH and/or who had contact with her the last day or two.
Click to expand...

According to Herried, "the person he was chatting with stated that friends of her told her not to hang around Avery's but she thought Steven was a nice guy."

BBM
Well this certainly contradicts the narrative that she was "creeped out" by him now doesn't it.
 
missy1974 said:
Did Superficial Questioning Affect Halbach Case?

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/n...ial-questioning-affect-halbach-case/93415858/

John Ferak breaks down the "superficial" interviews with those that were considered close to TH and/or who had contact with her the last day or two.
Click to expand...


My favorite reporter strikes again! :crush:I absolutely LOVE this guy! He is not afraid to keep on digging and he lays all the grimy dirt out for the whole world to see without pulling any punches. ;) Keep em coming, JF!
 
Jaiddie said:
My favorite reporter strikes again! :crush:I absolutely LOVE this guy! He is not afraid to keep on digging and he lays all the grimy dirt out for the whole world to see without pulling any punches. ;) Keep em coming, JF!
Click to expand...

Did anyone see the one and only comment?

"Hey Robbie I find it odd that your bud is having a big fire on his land then let on averys seven time! Seems to plant items.Then he lied about seeing steve burning.

While the person is a long long way from Wisconsin (Africa as a matter of fact). Does anyone know who Robbie could be?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 125 more.
Total: 2,138 (members: 126, guests: 2,012)

Online statistics

Members online
126
Guests online
2,012
Total visitors
2,138
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,939
Messages
18,132,222
Members
231,187
Latest member
missylaforme
Back
Top