TheDuchess
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2010
- Messages
- 2,325
- Reaction score
- 604
I probably have a minority opinion on this case, but I really detest manipulated films which are labeled a 'documentary.' They are usually as fair minded as the ones Michael Moore puts out. Documentaries imo seem to always be agenda driven.
I remember this horrific case when it happened. I kept up with it from the minute we learned TH was missing, through them finding her burned remains. Then the arrest of Avery and his nephew. Once it went to trial I kept up with the case closely like so many others.
I do not believe any of the evidence was planted. To me there was just too many things for LE to have a chance to plant.
I believe what happened is once Avery won his lawsuit he thought he was untouchable. After then he stupidly thought no matter what he did in that pile of junk place where he lived.... LE would leave him alone... thinking they would be too afraid to arrest him again.
The evidence against them was overwhelming imo. She had even told someone that when she had come there two weeks prior he opened the door with nothing on but a towel iirc. What business man does that to a young woman he doesn't even know? TH went there to do a photoshoot for an ad. He was the one who summoned her there and she was never seen alive again.
I remember them doing one by a filmmaker from the UK on Guy Heinz Jr. who murdered 8 family members promoting his innocence. It too was one sided and never amounted to anything. GHJrs still remains in prison (LWOP.)
I believe this film was released now because the time is ripe. In the last couple of years or so police officers and law officials have all been painted with the same wide brush as if they all are guilty when they aren't. But to many who may already have deep biases against police officers or DAs in general will probably believe this. Others who never even heard of the case before now nor kept up with all of the evidence entered at trial probably also believe Avery is innocent.
I do not think this film will get him a new trial. But if it does, I don't have a problem with that, and I believe he will be convicted again. Its easy to say something was planted but for that to be true it must be proven. So far I have seen there is no proof of that at all.
IMO
Thanks for the input who was aware of the case in real-time. I respect your opinion, and obviously mine is quite different.
That said, I think many of our issues is "reasonable doubt" and with the concept of "reasonable doubt" one must side with the defendant. I don't think the jury allowed any of the reasonable doubt which was clearly stated in what I have seen from the case, to permeate their beliefs. Plus, so much procedural stuff like the fact that Manitowoc was ever allowed anywhere near this investigation. I firmly believe that if they had stayed out of it as they should have, there would be absolutely no case.