Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheDuchess said:
OK - then give me one good reason that the very police officer that was being sued for $36 million by the prime suspect in this case called in the license plate of the missing woman several days prior to her vehicle being found in said suspects car lot. And why he didn't remember.
Click to expand...

I just gave the reasons.
 
ElleElle said:
Re-watched. Colbourn appears very shady, and the phone call does not make any sense. Why run a plate without following up on it? Did he write a report?

[video=youtube;KpsRtPCWHoM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpsRtPCWHoM[/video]
Click to expand...

Police officers don't write a report if they just call in a number. And we were not shown in the film what was said AFTER or BEFORE his statement. So, we don't know.
 
Sleuther87 said:
It does not, but it definitely does refute people's arguments that he's an honest guy who just made a few mistakes as a kid.
Click to expand...

norest4thewicked said:
Correct. And this is a perfect example of the film makers trying to cherry pick things to throw and see what will stick. People just don't have all the info, so they are naturally in an uproar for this "poor man" who was "framed".
Click to expand...

I don't know if we're reading different threads but I'm not seeing anybody say SA is some sweet, innocent man. We are discussing the possibility of him being involved in THIS crime, not his overall sweet demeanor lol JMO
 
Sleuther87 said:
It does not, but it definitely does refute people's arguments that he's an honest guy who just made a few mistakes as a kid.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anyone here or anywhere else say that SA was an honest guy who just made a few mistakes as a kid. I've seen people say his prior mistakes don't make him a murderer. I've seen people think he may be guilty but there is reasonable doubt and/or a setup. I've seen people think he's innocent of this murder.

And don't forget how certain everyone was of his guilty in the first trial too - the one he wrongly sat in prison for 18 years.
 
norest4thewicked said:
Police officers don't write a report if they just call in a number. And we were not shown in the film what was said AFTER or BEFORE his statement. So, we don't know.
Click to expand...

He asks her to run the plate. So you are saying that LE, in calling to verify perhaps written information, would call asking for a plate to be run and not call asking to verify information? I associate running a plate with seeing a vehicle... I very much want to understand an alternate reason for this call.
 
norest4thewicked said:
But, you didn't see the testimony before or after his testimony. You don't know what was said because this film took that testimony out of context. Police officers call in numbers all day every day. Maybe he honestly didn't remember why. And he certainly couldn't just guess. It was just something used to make him look bad when there could be many reasons and he possibly didn't remember.
Click to expand...

Take away the fact that this is testimony in a murder trial, and whatever was said before or after.

What logical reason could there be for calling in a plate number if they don't "see" it. And that plate number just happens to be that of a missing woman BEFORE that vehicle has even been found? and even saying the year/model of the vehicle? I find it hard to believe that he randomly came up with this plate number if it wasn't right in front of him and then guessed the year/model too. JMO I even wondered how he could guess the proper year .... but apparently you can tell by the VIN number ( I didn't know this before doing some looking online this week)
 
Sorry, I cannot remember, what was the receipt for? Thanks.
 
The obvious evidence points to the fact that he is guilty.
There was corruption by the police force.

However a jury can come to the conclusion of reasonable doubt even with that evidence. Only if this was an expose type of situation where the jury DID NOT KNOW that the evidence was suspected of being planted, should this conviction be overturned.

They did know. So the conviction is valid.

I've watched several jury discussions before. Many times they say in the jury room they set aside evidence that the prosecution thinks is very compelling. For example, they disregard the testimony of an eye witness. And then they come to the conclusion.

There are four pieces of compelling evidence in this case

A. The body
B. That it was burned on his property and he was there when that happened.
C. That he was the last person to see her alive
D. The way he called the phone.

As I stated earlier, sometimes juries will use the smallest piece of evidence to conclude that the person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

So the question I"m asking you is why you think the conviction should be overturned?

Corruption in the cops? Yeah they told them all that. They convicted him anyway because he's very obviously guilty.

If you don't think he's guilty then please explain the evidence above that has nothing to do with the police corruption.
 
LemonMousse said:
Expert evidence indicates that the bones were moved.

No one saw Teresa with Steven

Ropes and chains? Why are you making things up?

The handcuffs were not found in the ashes.

It wasn't a receipt. It was a bill of sale to be filled in when the car is sold.

Why would he ring her? Maybe he didn't. Misdial? Pocket dial?
Click to expand...

Something I am not clear on if you could answer I'd appreciate it, what did Theresa have to do with a bill of sale? She just took pictures of a van to be placed in the auto trader for sale. Did these photographers back then give out blank bills of sale as well after taking pictures? Thanks.
 
ElleElle said:
I don't think the Avery family had much class. Hey, at least he was taking a shower.

I found this, a little hard to see.

Y4wxd8h.png
Click to expand...

Wow, so how in the HECK did the bus driver see a woman out there taking pictures if her bus stops at the end of the long road ? I thought the bus dropped them off in front of the house. That almost doesn't make any sense.........

ETA Also, is the white ' road' at the lower left hand corner a through road ? That goes right to the property without being in sight or earshot of any of the Avery homes .
Also, thanks to whoever painted this little map with all the tiny purple dots for cars. Someone is as into this mess as we are .
 
Safeguard said:
"The Truth Makes A Sound Like The Ring Of A Bell".

Did you hear that sound from CA or OJ? I didn't. They were all over the place lying. And you could TELL.

I DO hear it in this case from SA. (Just as clearly as it sounds markedly FALSE when listening to Kratz).
Click to expand...

OJ and CA never took the stand, just like SA didn't. Check out the statement analysis (it's online) done of Avery's statements at his sentencing. The website is credible if you are someone who puts weight on things like statements proving guilt or innocence (I personally don't) The analyst does not believe Avery is innocent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sleuther87 said:
It's not a theory, it's a fact that neither Colborn nor Lenk were being sued.
Click to expand...

Right, but... the title of post is 'Why I believe the $36million motive is exaggerated..."

The post is this person's theory as to why the money motive isn't as viable as everyone thinks.

Correct in that Colborn and Lenk were not being sued at that point, but they certainly were deposed and worked for the county which was being sued.
 
Tawny said:
I don't know if we're reading different threads but I'm not seeing anybody say SA is some sweet, innocent man. We are discussing the possibility of him being involved in THIS crime, not his overall sweet demeanor lol JMO
Click to expand...

I've seen it said a lot that he has no motive, why would he want to go back to prison, he's about to get paid handsomely, etc. This paints a different picture of the man.
 
Do they know what vehicle the van seat from the fire was from? Do they think the killers set her on it and then into the fire? why would you burn a van seat? Also, wouldn't burning tires smell horribly? I wonder if they often burnt them.
 
I don't know if it was "pact" but isn't it true if you are on a jury, you are instructed that afterwords you aren't supposed to say which was any of the other jurors voted?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 129 more.
Total: 1,761 (members: 130, guests: 1,631)

Online statistics

Members online
130
Guests online
1,631
Total visitors
1,761
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,570
Messages
18,096,923
Members
230,883
Latest member
nemonic13
Back
Top