Really?
South Jersey USA
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2012
- Messages
- 4,920
- Reaction score
- 5,003
Yes !
She is the catalyst for all this imo. It's basically a he said she said where the she is LE related. He was never going to win.
Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #2
- Thread starter TheDuchess
- Start date
- Status
Yes !
She is the catalyst for all this imo. It's basically a he said she said where the she is LE related. He was never going to win.
MaxManning
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,438
- Reaction score
- 8
I can see someone believing that the murder possibly took place in the garage.
That belief would be based on Dassey telling his mother that he was helping Steve clean the garage floor with bleach on the night of the murder.
There was a luminol hit on a 3x3/3x4 spot in the garage, but as Strang said on Kelly files that could have been from deer blood.
No one has said "we were cleaning up deer blood that night". But it is true that the expert said in dassey files that it indeed could be deer blood, it doesn't have to be human blood.
I don't think the garage can be ruled out for that reason. But even if it was her blood in the garage, that doesn't mean she was killed there, it would just mean the body was likely there at some point.
Update -- Something over the head, such as a pillow, is a simplistic example of how someone could be shot in the head and not have any blood splatter. If the murder happened in the garage, that is likely the only way it could have gone down - imo.
About the slitting the throat confession by Brendan- from what I posted above, the purpose of the 5/13 interview was to make the terrible info Brendan gave, that didn't fit w. the facts, consistent so he could give a plea/testify against Steven. Ultimately the 5/13 interview was thrown out because Kachinsky is a garbage attorney, but here are some key points relating to them trying to discredit Brendan's original (obviously false) story:
pg 821
W: Did you cut her throat
B: No
pg 832
F: And to help yourself. Because like you said the worst is over. You, you've never waivered on the fact that you helped Steven do this, and that's the truth. OK. It's just some of those little details that had to be ironed out. When you saw Teresa in the house and up until she went to the garage, was she, did you ever see her bleeding? In the house?
B: No
F: Did anyone ever hit her or hurt her that you saw, in the house
B: No
pg 838
W: OK. What about the bed sheets, did he do anything w. the bed sheets at all?
B: Not that I know of
W: Where else would I find blood if I was looking for blood? In the house? Tell me where I should look
B: I don't know
W: Tell me where I could find anything, give me something
B: On the carpet
W: What would be on the carpet, you think? What do you think would be there?
B: I don't know, like skill cells or something?
pg 840
F: That's good. I think that's good, I really do. While you, while you went out, I asked him about it, if he saw any blood on Teresa or Teresa bleeding at all while she was in the house and he said no **I believe he's talking to bad cop Weigert who just stormed out at this point** Ah, then you came in, we were talking about his injury. Brendan, when Teresa was on the bed, where, what was on the bed, sheets, blankets, what was on the bed?
B: Pillows, blankets, sheets
F: Was she on top of all of that
B: Yeah
F: Ok, was there anything else on the bed?
B: No
F: Any plastic or anything like that?
B: No
pg 844
F: OK, the bed sheets and the bedding, do you know whether or not that was taken off and burned, cuz the first time you said, you thought it was. Again, we just want the the truth, not what other people are saying, Teresa wants the truth, the Halbach's aren't going to be happy w. you that you did this, but they're gonna be happy that you're telling the truth, you understand that, right? Ok the sheets and the bedding, did it get destroyed or not?
B: Yeah
F: Who did that?
B: Steven
F: He did that, you see him do that?
B: No
F: How do you know he did that?
B: Cuz that, the two days after I was over there, he said he got rid of em
F: And how did he get rid of em?
B: He burnt em
pg 821
W: Did you cut her throat
B: No
pg 832
F: And to help yourself. Because like you said the worst is over. You, you've never waivered on the fact that you helped Steven do this, and that's the truth. OK. It's just some of those little details that had to be ironed out. When you saw Teresa in the house and up until she went to the garage, was she, did you ever see her bleeding? In the house?
B: No
F: Did anyone ever hit her or hurt her that you saw, in the house
B: No
pg 838
W: OK. What about the bed sheets, did he do anything w. the bed sheets at all?
B: Not that I know of
W: Where else would I find blood if I was looking for blood? In the house? Tell me where I should look
B: I don't know
W: Tell me where I could find anything, give me something
B: On the carpet
W: What would be on the carpet, you think? What do you think would be there?
B: I don't know, like skill cells or something?
pg 840
F: That's good. I think that's good, I really do. While you, while you went out, I asked him about it, if he saw any blood on Teresa or Teresa bleeding at all while she was in the house and he said no **I believe he's talking to bad cop Weigert who just stormed out at this point** Ah, then you came in, we were talking about his injury. Brendan, when Teresa was on the bed, where, what was on the bed, sheets, blankets, what was on the bed?
B: Pillows, blankets, sheets
F: Was she on top of all of that
B: Yeah
F: Ok, was there anything else on the bed?
B: No
F: Any plastic or anything like that?
B: No
pg 844
F: OK, the bed sheets and the bedding, do you know whether or not that was taken off and burned, cuz the first time you said, you thought it was. Again, we just want the the truth, not what other people are saying, Teresa wants the truth, the Halbach's aren't going to be happy w. you that you did this, but they're gonna be happy that you're telling the truth, you understand that, right? Ok the sheets and the bedding, did it get destroyed or not?
B: Yeah
F: Who did that?
B: Steven
F: He did that, you see him do that?
B: No
F: How do you know he did that?
B: Cuz that, the two days after I was over there, he said he got rid of em
F: And how did he get rid of em?
B: He burnt em
Safeguard
On Time Out
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2015
- Messages
- 2,289
- Reaction score
- 5,706
A filthy, piggy, dirty garage, spotlessly cleaned to remove blood evidence, then filthy, piggy, dirtied up again, (including DUST everywhere)? yeah. I can't see it.
norest4thewicked
True Crime Writer
Just some thoughts to share.
I don't believe that Teresa was killed on the bed or in the garage. I think that she was raped there and perhaps got away somehow and ran to the garage where she was shot (but not killed). I believe she was killed outside and that is where all the blood evidence is.
As far as the blood vial goes, there is no way that this blood was used to plant evidence. It would have deteriorated too much in a decade. The color would have changed. It would not even look like fresh blood anymore. Fresh blood is more translucent. It was fresh blood in Teresa's vehicle. It was Steven Avery's fresh blood.
I don't believe that Teresa was killed on the bed or in the garage. I think that she was raped there and perhaps got away somehow and ran to the garage where she was shot (but not killed). I believe she was killed outside and that is where all the blood evidence is.
As far as the blood vial goes, there is no way that this blood was used to plant evidence. It would have deteriorated too much in a decade. The color would have changed. It would not even look like fresh blood anymore. Fresh blood is more translucent. It was fresh blood in Teresa's vehicle. It was Steven Avery's fresh blood.
Why do you believe she was raped on the bed? Just curious what evidence this is based on.
CoolJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2012
- Messages
- 4,241
- Reaction score
- 2,132
Yes quite possibly. And I said I question if a murder even took place. Meaning I consider it(suicide) a possibility. Truthfully, I think it was much more sinister than that, with regards to LE involvement in her death. JMO
10 min is not a lot of time to clean a shower, or a sink. 10 min is IMPOSSIBLE to clean a crime scene such as the one Brendan described. Slitting a throat leaves blood splatter everywhere, not to mention that mattress would have had blood on it, they'd never have been able to get it all out. That's just the obvious evidence, they'd never get all the trace, they probably wouldn't know what to look for.
During Dassey's trial, a crime scene tech testified that maybe someone like him could have cleaned the garage as thoroughly as it was done. Avery and Dassey were not crime scene techs, Dassey had an IQ of between 69-73. There is no way a crime occurred in that bedroom or garage, at least not like they described.
Of course, Fassbender and Wiegert, being the helpful guys they were, tried to clean up Brendan's timeline so they had closer to an hour for cleanup (still ludicrous) and help out his story by moving the murder scene from the bedroom to the garage/jeep. Ugh.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MaxManning
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,438
- Reaction score
- 8
http://www.today.com/popculture/mak...ur-goal-was-question-us-justice-system-t65161
If this kind of thing is proven, shouldn't that be enough to overturn the conviction ? Or is there no mechanism in our system to handle such a situation ?
I can understand people deliberating and changing opinions on a given issue, but trading votes doesn't seem like it should be a part of our system.
But it now makes sense why mutilating the corpse charge was voted as not guilty.
If this kind of thing is proven, shouldn't that be enough to overturn the conviction ? Or is there no mechanism in our system to handle such a situation ?
I can understand people deliberating and changing opinions on a given issue, but trading votes doesn't seem like it should be a part of our system.
But it now makes sense why mutilating the corpse charge was voted as not guilty.
Scott Tadych was the one visiting his mom in GB.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
CD82
Active Member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2012
- Messages
- 590
- Reaction score
- 94
Well, my point was that it poked holes in his testimony. I personally don't believe she was killed on the property.
JanIreland
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2012
- Messages
- 151
- Reaction score
- 368
Person 5 Steven Avery
Burned a pet cat to death on a fire after first dousing it in petrol .
He chases a women down with a gun and runs her off the round , she thought he was going to kill her .....obvious lack of self control.
2 rape allegations against him from 2 separate women.
Attacked and tried to strangle his girlfriend calling her names and accusing her of all sorts .
Is the last known person to see Theresa , Theresa mentioned a previous occasion he came to the door in towel which gave her the creeps . Actually requests Theresa to call . Uses different name .....calls twice more from a blocked number and the once more after she is last seen alive from an unblocked number . Is seen at the fire and admits building the fire her remains are then found in . (Accuses cops of planting before anything is found) His gun is used in the killing .....Has a fresh deep cut on his hand that would of bled ...
that is before we look at the planting evidence
CoolJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2012
- Messages
- 4,241
- Reaction score
- 2,132
Strang might represent Avery again :
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...rang-we-may-represent-steven-avery-again.html
I've taken a week or so break from researching this case, and my first article back has Strang admitting he himself is unsure of Avery's innocence :
--------------------------------------
Which I think is a common sentiment for the people who have chosen to take an objective look at the case instead of hopping on the "Making a Murderer" bandwagon and discounting any detail that doesn't point to Avery's innocence. Myself, I believe it's possible the police could have planted all of the evidence and Avery might still guilty. I would have voted not guilty because I have MORE than reasonable doubt as to if he is guilty.
I also have reasonable doubt that he is innocent. Glad to hear that Strang agrees.
I think most, if not all, will agree that the trial was anything but fair and with even the limited amount of investigation and tunnel focus on avery, we can't be sure that any number of junkyard characters could be responsible.
Unless Avery and Dassey are freed , there will likely never be a real investigation of this murder. Having the investigations and their trials being acknowledged as unfair and a complete sham, is first step to any kind of action that might confirm who the killer was. On a higher level, I still don't understand who's authority it would come under to investigate the abuse of the system , which was used to convict avery and dassey. Also, who is capable of investigating law enforcement and scrutinizing their behavior in handling the investigation ?
I saw Strang and Kratz on that Kelly Files segment, and it came across as far too brief to be of worth. Kratz felt the strongest evidence was the DNA on the hood latch. Which points to him being oblivious to the concept that most people believe all or some of the evidence was planted, whether it be by law enforcement and/or Avery's brothers.
There could be an hour segment, just on that blood topic alone. I was hoping they'd have cleared up things like the vial of blood having a hole in the top of of it, which the documentary used to manipulate the audience and never explained that the hole is HOW THE BLOOD GOT IN THE VIAL!So we still have countless people still walking around believing this was some kind of smoking gun. I admit, while watching the documentary, I was one of those people!
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xpof9/hole_in_the_top_of_the_blood_tube_normal/
Sadly, the media is now more interested in gaining ratings/viewers via the popularity of the documentary than actually breaking it down and sorting fact from fiction. Some even report statements in the Avery appeal transcripts as if they are something he is just now saying, but the appeal is like 6 years old. journalism is dead
Amazing that we still haven't seen avery trial transcripts. One would think that Avery and his legal team would want those made available as soon as possible while the public interest is white hot. Or... maybe there is reason to NOT give the full picture ? Whatever the reason is, I am suspicious as to why we haven't seen them yet.
I apologize for my suspicion if the Avery trial transcripts have been made public in the past few weeks, and I have just yet to discover them. If so, definitely link them as I'd love to see them.
This "making a murder bandwagon" everyone speaks of is very annoying. First of all, the documentary doesn't make any claims with regards to SA's guilt or innocence. They are showing us the corruption that went on to get the guilty verdict in both cases. This isn't about guilt or innocence. It's about corruption and the apparent ease with which LE and government officials can put anyone they want away for life.
Apparently there are some who either
1) can't see it (don't believe people in positions of trust and authority can be corrupt)
2) don't care (SA is substandard human and belongs in jail)
MaxManning
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 1,438
- Reaction score
- 8
As I said on the post, if a pillow or something of that nature was over the head, where is the splatter ? Nothing to clean up by pooling blood. There is evidence of a pool of blood, whether it was deer or human, that was cleaned up.
So the question is , if someone puts a pillow over someone's head and shoots them twice through the pillow, is there splatter ?
I honestly don't know for sure, but my guess is that the pillow would have splatter on it, not the garage.
I don't personally believe she was killed in the garage. But just saying I don't assume that if she was, it had to be as described by the defense. Because I agree, that if there isn't an explanation for how blood didn't get everywhere, it's not plausible.
CoolJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2012
- Messages
- 4,241
- Reaction score
- 2,132
You are basically dictating word for word the rebuttals by sexual predator Ken Kratz.
Until more jurors come out and verify this, I am taking it w. A grain of salt. Two reasons: first degree murder is life in prison. If the jurors were trying to "send a msg to the appellate courts" (which I've never heard a jury thinking of) why not convict on the lesser charges, and throw out the first degree? A compromise verdict means little when you've convicted him on the charge carrying mandatory life. The second reason is the reasoning of sending a msg to the appellate courts- why in the world would they be thinking of appellate courts when the decision is in their hands? No need to send a msg to an appellate court if you find him not guilty.
If juror misconduct is proven, however, he has a great case for a new trial, and absolutely deserves it (IMO)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
norest4thewicked
True Crime Writer
I believe she was raped on the bed because of Brendon's original statement and because of the drawing that SA had made while he was in prison, wanting to rape and kill a woman. Also, the restraint items were found in the burn pile with her bones.
Concrete source for SA's "drawing" other than hearsay?
I believe the restraint items being found there was proven to be false? Anybody have that info at hand?
- Status