Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #2

[AnnaCabana]

what video ? Nope, never heard about menards. Who said this ?

Here's a link to the video he called into the Nancy Grace show, states that Theresa left between 2-2:30...Listening agin I hear it was Thursday that him & his brother went to Menards and saw headlights down their road. But he does state she left his property by 2:30 How is that???

http://www.hlntv.com/shows/nancy-grace/articles/2016/01/05/nancy-grace-questions-steven-avery

 

[stephsb]

Yes, I agree that we don't have the full story. As you said there are other children in the house. But if Tadych's first reaction to the avery arrest is in regards to blood, I find it suspicious.

I can't say for sure, but I think if the pants were bleached like described, I could see her focusing more on big white splotches as opposed to tiny red ones. I'd say it's very plausible that I might know that there is little blood spots on my pants with big bleach spots, but no one would notice them unless I pointed it out to them.

But saying there were no bloodstains on dassey's pant's 6 months later after hmmm how many washes ? Seems rather reasonable to expect the blood could be gone. But I'll admit I don't know how many times something has to be washed to have blood removed.


I do agree games could be played with Barb, just the same as brendan.

But in terms of plausibility and probability, I lean more towards brendan had bleach and blood on his pants. For all I know, he helped Tadych clean something up and he told brendan to say he helped steve. ya know ?

Or while doing the laundry, Tadych noticed the blood ?

But, in terms of what I have heard, I think I lean towards brendan having bleach and blood on his pants. Barb aware of the bleach. Tadych aware of the blood. Brendan oblivious to it all.

All just speculation of course, but I don't think it's a crazy theory. All I have to believe is statements/observations attributed to these people BEFORE police interviewed brendan.

I am just looking at 3 pieces of evidence that are separate and actually fit together, if you assume no one is lying or misremembering.

Brendan said the pants had been washed a few times, but not immediately after. If what Brendan is saying is true, then the blood that ST allegedly saw could not have been from Brendan's pants (since they weren't washed right away) and the blood would have remained in the pants. If blood gets on clothing it needs to be washed immediately, and even then it still can stain. A few years ago, I had a small tumor removed from my cheek, and, like an idiot, chewed some of my stitches out in my sleep. I woke up that morning w. blood all over my pillowcase, sheets, and the sweatshirt I was sleeping in. I tried numerous methods of washing all three of the stained articles, and none of them ever came completely clean. No judgment on Brendan, but I doubt he was paying special attention to the blood stains. They should have been there if they weren't cleaned. I'd also like to take the time to point out that not only is the statement by ST hearsay, but anything ST said should be taken w. a grain of salt- he had a shaky alibi, as did BD (not Brendan, his brother) and both of them should have been regarded more carefully as suspects.

I do believe Brendan had bleach on his pants, and I do believe Barb was aware of it, but I don't believe that came from Steven's garage, unless and until I see more of Barb's statements. I don't believe ST's statement about the blood having anything to do w. Brendan. Seems to me like he may be concerned that someone would find blood on his clothes, and he was trying to blame it on one of the Dassey boys.

Also, Brendan was aware of the blood and bleach, at least after cops told him to be aware of it. He stated that the bleach splashed on his pants after pouring it (after cops tell him they know he was cleaning the garage) and IMO the evidence found in the garage is not consistent w. Brendan's story- just like most of the evidence is not consistent w. Brendan's story.

 

[stephsb]

Max just saw the last part of your post, about the three pieces of evidence fitting together if you assume no one is lying or misremembering- that is my biggest problem w. it. ST has a motive to lie, so does Brendan. Barb made these statements to investigators nearly 5 months after the incident, and was not mentioned in the immediate interview. Also no mention of finding blood in ST's statements.

 

[missy1974]

Here's a link to the video he called into the Nancy Grace show, states that Theresa left between 2-2:30...Listening agin I hear it was Thursday that him & his brother went to Menards and saw headlights down their road. But he does state she left his property by 2:30 How is that???

http://www.hlntv.com/shows/nancy-grace/articles/2016/01/05/nancy-grace-questions-steven-avery

When I first heard that they seen lights on a Thursday..... I looked at the date. TH was at his home on October 31st, it was a Monday, he says she left between 2-2:30. Thursday was November 3. Coincidentally, it was November 3 that Colburn called in the plates too. Not sure of the time. IIRC him and his brother saying they seen the lights was shortly after she went missing and before the vehicle was found.

 

[trigger]

I have a question who goes deer hunting around 3pm??

 

[Tawny]

I have a question who goes deer hunting around 3pm??

Everyone LOL. Hunting ends at sundown.

But I don't think they went deer hunting

 

[rocket_girl]

Quick question. Anyone know what has become of Steves ex and kids? I wonder if the kids were there when we saw him released the first time and that maybe the baby that he didn't know who it was may have been a grandchild? I wonder if the kids came back to him when he was released and then maybe distanced themselves after? Or if he has had any contact whatsoever since they were kids?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The family's Facebook group stated that the baby he was holding was his niece's baby. The niece that is now acting as the main spokesperson for her family.

 

[MaxManning]

Brendan said the pants had been washed a few times, but not immediately after. If what Brendan is saying is true, then the blood that ST allegedly saw could not have been from Brendan's pants (since they weren't washed right away) and the blood would have remained in the pants. If blood gets on clothing it needs to be washed immediately, and even then it still can stain. A few years ago, I had a small tumor removed from my cheek, and, like an idiot, chewed some of my stitches out in my sleep. I woke up that morning w. blood all over my pillowcase, sheets, and the sweatshirt I was sleeping in. I tried numerous methods of washing all three of the stained articles, and none of them ever came completely clean. No judgment on Brendan, but I doubt he was paying special attention to the blood stains. They should have been there if they weren't cleaned. I'd also like to take the time to point out that not only is the statement by ST hearsay, but anything ST said should be taken w. a grain of salt- he had a shaky alibi, as did BD (not Brendan, his brother) and both of them should have been regarded more carefully as suspects.

I do believe Brendan had bleach on his pants, and I do believe Barb was aware of it, but I don't believe that came from Steven's garage, unless and until I see more of Barb's statements. I don't believe ST's statement about the blood having anything to do w. Brendan. Seems to me like he may be concerned that someone would find blood on his clothes, and he was trying to blame it on one of the Dassey boys.

Also, Brendan was aware of the blood and bleach, at least after cops told him to be aware of it. He stated that the bleach splashed on his pants after pouring it (after cops tell him they know he was cleaning the garage) and IMO the evidence found in the garage is not consistent w. Brendan's story- just like most of the evidence is not consistent w. Brendan's story.

I'll have to check the dassey trial transcripts again, but I don't think that it explicitly said there were no stains on the pants, but rather that no DNA could be obtained from them.

I hear what you are saying, and I get it. But not being able to extract DNA or confirm that something is blood, doesn't mean that it is not blood. In fact, if someone told me a stain on his pants "could" be blood, I'd believe it was likely blood based on the various statements. Not that I could prove it, but again it's about probability and plausibility.

Yes, if someone says their son had blood on their pants and his pants were mixed in, I have reason to evaluate that as potentially the truth. Did he say those pants specifically ? nope. I get it.

But when multiple statements jive, I tend to believe the probability of ALL those statements being true goes up. Doesn't mean they are true, it's just purely about plausibility and probability.

So the question for you, is after you watched your pillowcases, sheets, sweatshirt, would it have been possible to obtain DNA from those items ?


I will check the documents to see if there is explicit noting of visible stains - blood or otherwise. Stains are one thing, but determining what the stain is from is another thing. For example, just like the luminol hit on the floor, isn't it possible that even a blood stain on his pants might possibly be from a deer ?

 

[GigiG]

Everyone LOL. Hunting ends at sundown.

But I don't think they went deer hunting

As a born-and-raised city person, I'll have to take your word on that, though it makes sense to me in terms of not having people (inc. other hunters) killed by accident.

But in doing some research on deer hunting, I read that there is something to Bobby Dassey showering before he went hunting. Apparently, that is a thing; removing your own (human) body scents, then applying some kind of deer scent to yourself or clothing to attract the prey.

Again, as a city-dweller, I don't know. So much here is inscrutable to me...

ETA: I don't think they went "deer" hunting either...

 

[Marah]

Local Milwaukee RAdio Station is doing a special tonight.

http://www.wtmj.com/listen-live

 

[stephsb]

I'll have to check the dassey trial transcripts again, but I don't think that it explicitly said there were no stains on the pants, but rather that no DNA could be obtained from them.

I hear what you are saying, and I get it. But not being able to extract DNA or confirm that something is blood, doesn't mean that it is not blood. In fact, if someone told me a stain on his pants "could" be blood, I'd believe it was likely blood based on the various statements. Not that I could prove it, but again it's about probability and plausibility.

Yes, if someone says their son had blood on their pants and his pants were mixed in, I have reason to evaluate that as potentially the truth. Did he say those pants specifically ? nope. I get it.

But when multiple statements jive, I tend to believe the probability of ALL those statements being true goes up. Doesn't mean they are true, it's just purely about plausibility and probability.

So the question for you, is after you watched your pillowcases, sheets, sweatshirt, would it have been possible to obtain DNA from those items ?


I will check the documents to see if there is explicit noting of visible stains - blood or otherwise. Stains are one thing, but determining what the stain is from is another thing. For example, just like the luminol hit on the floor, isn't it possible that even a blood stain on his pants might possibly be from a deer ?

From what I remember from the Dassey trial, they didn't even run tests on any of the stains on his pants, so of course it's possible he had deer blood on his pants, I would say it's possible the stains on his pants could have come from any source w.o testing. I can check the transcripts as well to make sure of this.

As for my own bedding and clothing, I would imagine that the stains could have been positively identified as blood, and possibly DNA may have remained, since I did not wash them w. an agent that would destroy DNA, although washing may have degraded it. From my understanding, even using bleach will only degrade DNA and make it harder to get a match. I am certainly no forensic expert, however. This article says that you can wash bloodstained clothes and certain forensic techniques will still be able to detect the hemoglobin:http://www.exploreforensics.co.uk/detecting-evidence-after-bleaching.html

I see why you believe he had bleach and blood stains on his pants, I was just trying to point out it is relying on the assumption these three people who are making statements that you believe jive are telling the truth, and I think its very plausible they were lying. As I said, ST certainly had potential motive to lie, as did Brendan. I do believe Barb is telling the truth (although it is also possible she was led into making the statement she did, or that she was confused on the date). I would have a much easier believing he did have blood stains on his pants if both Barb and ST had noticed them and said something to LE immediately. I'm not convinced at all that ST saw anything in the laundry, and his statement doesn't jive w. Brendan's, who said that he didn't wash his pants until later (he had only washed them a few times in the months since the murder). Instead, Barb doesnt mention blood, but does mention bleach, ST mentions blood on someone's pants, but no bleach, and does not say they are Brendan's, and Brendan says he had bleach and blood on his pants, and didn't wash them until later. Their statements don't jive to me at all. JMO

 

[GigiG]

Local Milwaukee RAdio Station is doing a special tonight.

http://www.wtmj.com/listen-live

JMO, but after listening to that, I have to say that that guy sounds as biased as most Wisonsinites did 10 years ago. He isn't open-minded about looking at the case from any other point of view than that which he originally embraced.

 

[MysticJynx]

Here is the thing that has been tumbling over in my thoughts....

THE Time Line for October 31st, 2005.

8:12am Steven Avery's Phone is recorded as the number that called Auto Trader to set up the appointment for his Sister. call was about 3 mins long.
Barb Janda's Van to be photographed. He leaves her number as the call back number.

9:15am Teresa Halbach is contacted by Auto Trader about appointment(s)?

11:45am I read it was about 11:45 or so when she called Barb Janda's Phone number and left the voicemail that she
would be there around 2:00pm MAYBE EVEN LATER

QUESTIONS. Who called Steve to let him know she left a message? Did she have these other appointments preset or were they also called in that morning? The other two appointments being Schmitz and Zipperer. Did she call them to confirm times of her visit? When were these calls made?
Is that why the Maybe Even Later statement was said in the first place. Cause she was also trying to confirm her other appointments and
could not give an exact time to when these other appointments would be.

1:30pm The first appointment Schmitz was in New Holstein Wisconsin, On the outskirts of Calumet County. He said he
would testify that she was there around 1:30 and stayed 10-15 mins. He also used approximates. I suppose this could go
either way with give or take a few minutes. But lets stay on time She left between 1:40 and 1:45pm.

1:52pm she recieves a 1 minute and 9 second call that now has a different LCELL number than earlier that day. Not
exactly sure yet what these ICELL and LCELL mean, so if someone could explain it great. My assumption is this is a cell
tower in which her phone is now pinging off of. Possibly now from a Manitowoc County Tower? However New Holstein is
only moments away from the county line of Manitowoc. Either way I believe that Teresa was on the road driving towards
the Manitowoc Address of the Zipperer's or Avery's. From The new holstien resident to the Zipperer's resident is aproximately 45
mins by car without any traffic.

2:27pm about the time she would be coming up on one of the other two properties in Manitowoc County. She gets a call from
auto trader which lasts until 2:32pm. She is said to have stated she was 10 mins out....... From whose residence I wonder?

Questions... So where did she go first? The Zipperer residence that places her at their home between 2:00 and 2:30. Which can't be right. She
couldn't have been there, she had to drive 36 miles from the 1st customers home. So Teresa arrived at the Zipperer residence between 230 and 3. Making their testimony faulty. Zipperer testimony would be more faulty had Teresa went to the Avery residence first, where
Bobby Dassey claimes to have "WATCHED" her take pictures until she walked back to Avery's trailer between 2:30 and
2:45pm. Had she gone first to the Avery residence when exactly did the Zipperers see Teresa that day? Could they have
been the last residence she visited? Or did Bobby Dassey lie about the time he saw her, and Teresa was as the Zipperer residence during this 2:30-2:45pm time line of his.


How long would an Auto Trader Photography Appointment normally last?


Also on her phone record that is posted around the internet that claim he called her at 2:24 and 2:35. This is confusing. can someone verify the times he made those three calls to Teresa's phone. Cause there was no call at 2:35 on the evidence photo I saw. I see there is 3 calls before the one from auto trader. 2:12pm 1 minute long, 2:13pm 37 seconds long, 2:24pm 8 seconds long. There is also a call at 2:41 that was about a minute long, Who was that from? So far according to what i've heard and read the two im pretty sure about being from Avery's phone is the 2:24 one and one that came in much later at 4:35pm that lasted 13 seconds and has the CFNA feature at the end of that line.

Call me a little confused on these records.

 

[Marah]

I thought he just said that Teresa's blood was in Steven Avery's car. Is that true or did I hear it wrong? (Radio program)

 

[rocket_girl]

Here is the thing that has been tumbling over in my thoughts....

THE Time Line for October 31st, 2005.

8:12am Steven Avery's Phone is recorded as the number that called Auto Trader to set up the appointment for his Sister. call was about 3 mins long.
Barb Janda's Van to be photographed. He leaves her number as the call back number.

9:15am Teresa Halbach is contacted by Auto Trader about appointment(s)?

11:45am I read it was about 11:45 or so when she called Barb Janda's Phone number and left the voicemail that she
would be there around 2:00pm MAYBE EVEN LATER

QUESTIONS. Who called Steve to let him know she left a message? Did she have these other appointments preset or were they also called in that morning? The other two appointments being Schmitz and Zipperer. Did she call them to confirm times of her visit? When were these calls made?
Is that why the Maybe Even Later statement was said in the first place. Cause she was also trying to confirm her other appointments and
could not give an exact time to when these other appointments would be.

1:30pm The first appointment Schmitz was in New Holstein Wisconsin, On the outskirts of Calumet County. He said he
would testify that she was there around 1:30 and stayed 10-15 mins. He also used approximates. I suppose this could go
either way with give or take a few minutes. But lets stay on time She left between 1:40 and 1:45pm.

1:52pm she recieves a 1 minute and 9 second call that now has a different LCELL number than earlier that day. Not
exactly sure yet what these ICELL and LCELL mean, so if someone could explain it great. My assumption is this is a cell
tower in which her phone is now pinging off of. Possibly now from a Manitowoc County Tower? However New Holstein is
only moments away from the county line of Manitowoc. Either way I believe that Teresa was on the road driving towards
the Manitowoc Address of the Zipperer's or Avery's. From The new holstien resident to the Zipperer's resident is aproximately 45
mins by car without any traffic.

2:27pm about the time she would be coming up on one of the other two properties in Manitowoc County. She gets a call from
auto trader which lasts until 2:32pm. She is said to have stated she was 10 mins out....... From whose residence I wonder?

Questions... So where did she go first? The Zipperer residence that places her at their home between 2:00 and 2:30. Which can't be right. She
couldn't have been there, she had to drive 36 miles from the 1st customers home. So Teresa arrived at the Zipperer residence between 230 and 3. Making their testimony faulty. Zipperer testimony would be more faulty had Teresa went to the Avery residence first, where
Bobby Dassey claimes to have "WATCHED" her take pictures until she walked back to Avery's trailer between 2:30 and
2:45pm. Had she gone first to the Avery residence when exactly did the Zipperers see Teresa that day? Could they have
been the last residence she visited? Or did Bobby Dassey lie about the time he saw her, and Teresa was as the Zipperer residence during this 2:30-2:45pm time line of his.


How long would an Auto Trader Photography Appointment normally last?


Also on her phone record that is posted around the internet that claim he called her at 2:24 and 2:35. This is confusing. can someone verify the times he made those three calls to Teresa's phone. Cause there was no call at 2:35 on the evidence photo I saw. I see there is 3 calls before the one from auto trader. 2:12pm 1 minute long, 2:13pm 37 seconds long, 2:24pm 8 seconds long. There is also a call at 2:41 that was about a minute long, Who was that from? So far according to what i've heard and read the two im pretty sure about being from Avery's phone is the 2:24 one and one that came in much later at 4:35pm that lasted 13 seconds and has the CFNA feature at the end of that line.

Call me a little confused on these records.

I believe I read she was at Avery's last but can't remember where. Will keep looking.

In any case, I love this post. I think hashing out the timeline is key. Her voicemail indicates she is trying to confirm the time she's coming, so it makes sense SA would call her back to confirm the time. Are there any transcripts of SA discussing the phone calls?

 

[Marah]

Did they have to dig up the bones? Were they buried or just laying on the top?

 

[JudyBolton]

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

BBM
Maybe because there were 2 or more jurors who made it clear they would not budge on that point? Maybe they also happened to be related to certain county officials. Maybe they intimidated the 7 jurors who initially voted "Not Guilty".
Sorry - I know I'm posting a reply to something written days ago - I had a wedding and I'm trying to catch up with all the comments!

 

[diesel]

I thought he just said that Teresa's blood was in Steven Avery's car. Is that true or did I hear it wrong? (Radio program)

He must be quoting Nancy Grace because she said that too on her show this week. Six places in Avery's car. She said "six places in his car" to be exact. Never heard this before nor read it anywhere. I haven't seen it listed in the 90% more evidence than shown on the documentary either. Anyone?

 

[MysticJynx]

I believe I read she was at Avery's last but can't remember where. Will keep looking.

In any case, I love this post. I think hashing out the timeline is key. Her voicemail indicates she is trying to confirm the time she's coming, so it makes sense SA would call her back to confirm the time. Are there any transcripts of SA discussing the phone calls?

It is correct that he is said to be the last person to see her alive. Which in the case I made above would mean that J. Zipperer should never have seen her at all that day. Since she would never leave the Avery lot according to the States Case. The state cant have it both ways, which means if she was indeed at the zipperer residence first, it would have been after 2:30 and 3:00pm not between 2:00-2:30. Between 1:40-2:25pm she was driving 36 miles into Manitowoc. Since that confirmed call from Auto trader from 2:27-2:32 has her not arriving yet where ever she was going for at least ten minutes. That means that there is no way that Bobby could have seen her at 2:30 if Teresa was at the Zipperers residence first. I would put her at the zipperer residence at about 2:40pm or so. This is Before she took the pictures and did her sales thing. before she went to the last known stop at the Avery Salvage.

So Which house was she at at 2:30pm October 31 2005.

Because of the testimony that Bobby says he watches her from a window of his trailer, Because of the only person who could confirm his time was giving conflicting statements from the first statements he made in 2005, than on the stand in 2007. ST, being his only alibi. I really think Teresa was last seen at the Avery Salvage Yard around 3:30-3:45 as the bus driver testified too. I believe that Bobby and Scott had something to do with her disappearance and murder.

It would mean that their claim of going hunting, NOT TOGETHER, at 2:45 more likely 3:45. Would make that hunting trip for both men to be about 1 hour long. Not sure about hunting. but seems to me like it would take longer. And why so late in the day. And why for ST when he was just visiting his sick mom, then goes hunting, then goes back to see her with Barb around 5:30?

Had the state looked into their own timeline they would have noticed such inconsistencies and explored other avenues. Or so I would have hoped. Seems they just didn't care once again when it came to this man. They let the tunnel vision guide their investigation and all possibilities of other suspects go unseen.

Manitowoc needed to back off from the beginning and sadly they did not. The tunnel vision and conflict of interest they presented overwhelmed the justice for poor Teresa Halbach, Her family and her friends.

 

[Marah]

He must be quoting Nancy Grace because she said that too on her show this week. Six places in Avery's car. She said "six places in his car" to be exact. Never heard this before nor read it anywhere. I haven't seen it listed in the 90% more evidence than shown on the documentary either. Anyone?

It will be interesting to see if it is in the court transcripts. I hope someone quickly gets them online!