Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #3

[BigCityAccountant]

Everyone seems to be missing my point. I am not saying SA is innocent of this crime. I admit that he is not a good person at all, and has some very deviant behavior in his past. However, so does a number of other people that live on that property as well. I absolutely do not believe the narrative that the prosecution used (in either trial) and that is where my doubts started. They claimed a rape and murder occurred and, other than a bullet fragment and a very suspicious key, they find absolutely no evidence of her DNA on that property. Even the bones raise questions, because it was testified that it was possible that they had been moved (which then makes sense, since that they were found in numerous places), not to mention they retrieved them with shovels (mind-boggling, imo) and the coroner was restricted from examining them at the site.
All of these facts leave me too many questions to say that either SA or BD received a fair trial, and that is where I stand. SA very well could have killed her, but he ABSOLUTELY deserves a new trial and Brendan should never have been incarcerated in the first place with the evidence they had on him (a coerced confession only and NO physical evidence whatsoever).
As a side note, can anyone give me any possible explanation as to why the coroner was walled off and not permitted to examine the murder site? I read somewhere that it was some kind of conflict of interest, but that didn't seem to bother them where Lenk and Colburn were concerned, so why was it so important to keep the coroner out? :shakehead:

They did in fact find her DNA on Avery's property....

 

[Deeptoad]

They did in fact find her DNA on Avery's property....

Not in his trailer, where the rape was alleged to occur and not in the garage, where the murder was alleged to occur. Their story or theory (they being LE) is heavily flawed by lack of physical or DNA evidence.

 

[MysticJynx]

So Strang, A defense atty, Says that LE upon learning that Th was missing, Figured they had their chance. So they planted the car, The bones, The blood, The key to make sure they got him.

COME ON.

Sometimes when something quacks like a duck it is a duck. If not for the case before I can not imagine people would think anything more than he was guilty.

At this point, I can see someone he knows trying to frame him but I don't believe it was LE . But mostly I see guilt

You can not convict someone for a murder of a person based on an incident he did 20 years before the Murder of said person. Again this is the same logic that railroaded him the first time. He had a burglary, the cat incident and the Gun incident prior to 1985 case of PB. They also thought these past crimes made him guilty of a horrific violent rape. Makes anyone just as bad judging him by something he did before he spent 18 years on a crime he did not commit. For judging him the same way the first sheriff did. THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE CAT its about Teresa Halbach. In fact if I had been TH's family and learned of the way the police handled my daughter remains with no care, just shoveling her into boxes and sifting through her. I would have had problems with the county myself for mishandling my child remains. I'd also being suing Manitowoc for not backing off the case as they told public they did, and now there is a question of who really done it. Had Manitowoc been off the scene and calumet collected all the evidence than maybe the guilty verdict wouldn't be so controversial now. Any further pain this is causing the Halbachs is the fault of Manitowoc County. But that is just me and just my opinion.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Everyone seems to be missing my point. I am not saying SA is innocent of this crime. I admit that he is not a good person at all, and has some very deviant behavior in his past. However, so does a number of other people that live on that property as well. I absolutely do not believe the narrative that the prosecution used (in either trial) and that is where my doubts started. They claimed a rape and murder occurred and, other than a bullet fragment and a very suspicious key, they find absolutely no evidence of her DNA on that property. Even the bones raise questions, because it was testified that it was possible that they had been moved (which then makes sense, since that they were found in numerous places), not to mention they retrieved them with shovels (mind-boggling, imo) and the coroner was restricted from examining them at the site.
All of these facts leave me too many questions to say that either SA or BD received a fair trial, and that is where I stand. SA very well could have killed her, but he ABSOLUTELY deserves a new trial and Brendan should never have been incarcerated in the first place with the evidence they had on him (a coerced confession only and NO physical evidence whatsoever).
As a side note, can anyone give me any possible explanation as to why the coroner was walled off and not permitted to examine the murder site? I read somewhere that it was some kind of conflict of interest, but that didn't seem to bother them where Lenk and Colburn were concerned, so why was it so important to keep the coroner out? :shakehead:

Just taking a guess here...they brought in the investigator's from the Dahlmer case in Milwaukee...because Manitowoc County Coroner conflict of interest....I guessing the Dahlmer guys were the first to examine the evidence...

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Not in his trailer, where the rape was alleged to occur and not in the garage, where the murder was alleged to occur. Their story or theory (they being LE) is heavily flawed by lack of physical or DNA evidence.

You know that does not bother me at all. She could have been killed anywhere there on that property. I know she died there and was burned there. HE puts himself with brandon having a bonfire there that night. Im sorry that is not coincidence that is admission in my book.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

You can not convict someone for a murder of a person based on an incident he did 20 years before the Murder of said person. Again this is the same logic that railroaded him the first time. He had a burglary, the cat incident and the Gun incident prior to 1985 case of PB. They also thought these past crimes made him guilty of a horrific violent rape. Makes anyone just as bad judging him by something he did before he spent 18 years on a crime he did not commit. For judging him the same way the first sheriff did. THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE CAT its about Teresa Halbach. In fact if I had been TH's family and learned of the way the police handled my daughter remains with no care, just shoveling her into boxes and sifting through her. I would have had problems with the county myself for mishandling my child remains. I'd also being suing Manitowoc for not backing off the case as they told public they did, and now there is a question of who really done it. Had Manitowoc been off the scene and calumet collected all the evidence than maybe the guilty verdict wouldn't be so controversial now. Any further pain this is causing the Halbachs is the fault of Manitowoc County. But that is just me and just my opinion.

No you can't and I am not saying they should but for me I am not finding someone guilty. I am looking at the evidence now and seeing if I believe he is guilty or innocence. I get to look at it all and see it from the broader context.
Isn't that the point of this?? To judge if he is innocent or guilty?

He murdered a cat in an heinous way. It just so happens he killed TH and put here in a bonfire too. That is not coincidence in my book. It is progression.

The problem is that sometimes people want to be obtuse to the facts because it makes a better story.

 

[Deeptoad]

You know that does not bother me at all. She could have been killed anywhere there on that property. I know she died there and was burned there. HE puts himself with brandon having a bonfire there that night. Im sorry that is not coincidence that is admission in my book.

The bonfire was not an out of the ordinary occurrence. SA did that regularly to rid the yard of rubbish - as was testified. Bone material was found over half a mile away from that burn pit, so there is another opportunity that tampering occurred.

The problem with DNA and other physical evidence not being found in the trailer or the garage is that is the precise theory the prosecution presented and that is the precise theory that brought a conviction. In that instance, reasonable doubt comes into play and the guilty verdict can NOT be reached.

 

[TheDuchess]

I agree with you and BigCity on this. I think it goes even further though too... It reminds me of the OJ thing, granted, most people were happy to see OJ go away... but when OJ committed that armed recovery of what he felt was he property - many people were shocked that he'd do something so stupid. Why screw up your second chance? Well, when you get a pass the first time (whether you did the crime or not), it builds a safety net for you. I think Steven had a little bit of false security that he could do whatever he wanted. I also think he's a twisted guy who does do whatever he wants and doesn't care about anybody else - that was his history.

The other part of it is that many are trying to apply logic to this murder in assessing what Steven would or wouldn't have done. Murder is not logical, nor is it perfect. In almost every murder that we discuss, there's some type of evidence left behind, there's evidence missing that should be there, there's some level of disbelief that the crime happened, there's evidence of cover-up.

You can't look at Steven Avery, or Brendan Dassey, and apply coherent logic to their decisions.

Something to chew on - if it was police framing .... how in the world did the police or somebody working with the police - get onto the lot, start a fire, throw the body in and make sure it completely burns without being noticed by any of the Avery family members. Are Steven's brothers working with the police? If they are - that means all of them together decided to kill an innocent woman and burn her to watch Steven go down - but guess what - that's not fool-proof. A jury needs to convict him! That's the stupidest framing plan I've ever heard. As much as I dislike Ken Kratz - when he said it would have been easier to kill Steven Avery if they wanted him out of the way - was actually accurate. It was ridiculous that he said it to the press... but in reality, it would have been easier for the cops to kill Steven than it would have been to commit their own murder, or get somebody to do it, and then frame Steven and hope, fingers-crossed, that he gets convicted.

I think you noted your own distinction there but discarded it. OJ was responsible for their deaths as proven in the civil suit and many believe he got away with murder. People were incredulous that he didn't murder anyone else, but ended up going down for such a silly thing, in other words, deescalated the crime.

SA is the opposite. First of all, he did NOT commit the attempted rape. Secondly, his crimes appeared to escalate after his incarceration. So he went from burglar, to cat killer, to assault on the cousin....and everyone used that to be convinced that SA was guilty of the attempted rape because he fit the mold. But not only that, now they feel it shows a progression to skip right over the attempted rape and go straight to cold blooded murder. So in other words....burglar, cat killer, assault...murder. While I buy that, there is no escaping the 18 years spent in prison. What was he doing in prison? Did he behave? Was in getting into trouble? His wife left him and they he had some awful words, but accepted it. I know I'd probably have some awful words as well.

But I really don't think we can compare this to the OJ case at all. In fact, it is the polar opposite. OJ was a killer who got off and went and did something silly and stupid and got himself thrown in prison. SA was an innocent man who was imprisoned for a crime he didn't commit and did something horrific (supposedly.)

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The bonfire was not an out of the ordinary occurrence. SA did that regularly to rid the yard of rubbish - as was testified. Bone material was found over half a mile away from that burn pit, so there is another opportunity that tampering occurred.

The problem with DNA and other physical evidence not being found in the trailer or the garage is that is the precise theory the prosecution presented and that is the precise theory that brought a conviction. In that instance, reasonable doubt comes into play and the guilty verdict can NOT be reached.

It is not reasonable doubt if people believe she was murdered there and are unsure exactly how or when.
There are many cases where a body is never found.. They put together what they had and convict.

Reasonable doubt is when you don't believe someone did something more than you do.

I don't believe for one minute that the police killed her.

 

[MysticJynx]

I want to know what is the law about a lawyer working on your post conviction trial hearings who is doing drugs. Who was asked to resign cause of his own deviant behavior. Should we then questions more of the cases he prosecuted. Being on drugs, would he not be able to make good judgement calls on anything? KK was not removed from the Post trial hearings despite the DOJ knowing about his sexual harassment for a year, from the Avery/Dassey hearings. DOJ splapped him on wrist suspended his license for a whopping 4 months and he gets to continue practicing law. Seems to me that LE sticks with their own. From the correctional officers up to the DCI agents. What happened to not holding LE above anyone else? They are not the all mighty and powerful OZ. They are humans and citizens of the USA just like me and should be held to the same standards as steven avery, brendan dassey, you and me.

 

[Jaiddie]

They did in fact find her DNA on Avery's property....

Where? Not talking about the Rav4, where in that trailer or garage did they find her DNA other than the questionable key and bullet fragment?

 

[Deeptoad]

It is not reasonable doubt if people believe she was murdered there and are unsure exactly how or when.
There are many cases where a body is never found.. They put together what they had and convict.

Reasonable doubt is when you don't believe someone did something more than you do.

I don't believe for one minute that the police killed her.

Nor do I. What I do believe is that they had motive and opportunity to hang him with it. There were very few persons of interest, no other 'suspects' investigated as thoroughly as SA and $36 million other reasons to want him back on the inside.

As you continue to watch, you'll understand why a good many people take that position.

I don't know if he did it or not - as I stated when I first came to these threads. What I do know is that justice was miscarried and, in my best common sense, his nephew is most likely innocent of all charges.

 

[Jaiddie]

You can not convict someone for a murder of a person based on an incident he did 20 years before the Murder of said person. Again this is the same logic that railroaded him the first time. He had a burglary, the cat incident and the Gun incident prior to 1985 case of PB. They also thought these past crimes made him guilty of a horrific violent rape. Makes anyone just as bad judging him by something he did before he spent 18 years on a crime he did not commit. For judging him the same way the first sheriff did. THIS IS NOT ABOUT THE CAT its about Teresa Halbach. In fact if I had been TH's family and learned of the way the police handled my daughter remains with no care, just shoveling her into boxes and sifting through her. I would have had problems with the county myself for mishandling my child remains. I'd also being suing Manitowoc for not backing off the case as they told public they did, and now there is a question of who really done it. Had Manitowoc been off the scene and calumet collected all the evidence than maybe the guilty verdict wouldn't be so controversial now. Any further pain this is causing the Halbachs is the fault of Manitowoc County. But that is just me and just my opinion.

:clap::clap::clap:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Nor do I. What I do believe is that they had motive and opportunity to hang him with it. There were very few persons of interest, no other 'suspects' investigated as thoroughly as SA and $36 million other reasons to want him back on the inside.

As you continue to watch, you'll understand why a good many people take that position.

I don't know if he did it or not - as I stated when I first came to these threads. What I do know is that justice was miscarried and, in my best common sense, his nephew is most likely innocent of all charges.

I know what is coming.. I have followed the thread and I have been keeping tabs in news. I am just watching it for detail sake and so far I see SA hanging himself.

 

[Tawny]

It shows behavior that is abrupt and rage motivated. It shows that he is capable of violence without care for the consequences. It shows a pattern of behavior.
The focus is the truth. Not just LE.

Just because someone is not guilty of Rape does not mean they are not guilty of murder.

The focus of the docuseries is law enforcement's behavior, bias, and tactics. The docuseries never once claims SA's guilt or innocence. Is it biased? I'd say yes... they are biased on the side of pointing out the horrendous failure of LE in not one, but TWO, cases regarding SA.

I think the rape case was a crappy break. He was definitely railroaded there. No doubt if the docudrama is true. I don't ever believe all of what is in documentaries because they are always biased.
But I also see GA who looked liked SA also had blue eyes and blond hair and I believe that LE aside, PB really believed it was the guy and it was her testimony that put him away. Without her, I think he would not have been convicted.

No, Allen had brown eyes, Avery had blue eyes. (snip) PB believed it was SA because 1) the person taking her statement said out loud in front of her "that sounds like Steven Avery" and 2) the "sketch artist" aka SHERIFF showed her his sketch of Avery instead of doing it the way it's always done which is to hear her description and sketch from that. How does that sound like a good idea? They didn't just railroad him, they had it out for him, they were determined to pin it on him.

So, why is it sooooooooooooooooooooooooo outrageous to believe they'd do it again, this time with even more at stake? LOL!

 

[Jaiddie]

Just taking a guess here...they brought in the investigator's from the Dahlmer case in Milwaukee...because Manitowoc County Coroner conflict of interest....I guessing the Dahlmer guys were the first to examine the evidence...

Again, my point is if they were so concerned about conflict of interest that they kept the original coroner out, why then was Lenk and Colburn allowed anywhere near that crime scene to conveniently find the key pieces of evidence?

 

[TheDuchess]

Where? Not talking about the Rav4, where in that trailer or garage did they find her DNA other than the questionable key and bullet fragment?

I pointed out this very uncommon distinction a while back in that it is one of the only cases I can think of where we had this peculiar combination of private and public properties in a crime scene. We have the public area of the junkyard, where customers come in and out and pretty much have free reign. Yet we also have several private residences on the very grounds of this property. It makes for an interesting discussion as to what is and what isn't considered his property. I would see that the trailer and garage could be his private property, but anything else is pretty easily accessible from anyone else, so I would give evidence found on his private property, i.e. not accessible to the general public, more weight than evidence found on the more public areas that are accessible. So the key and the bullet, I would consider found in private areas. The bones and the car are in public areas, thus less of a definitive link to SA. We've discussed at length how many of us feel about the reasonable doubt about the key and bullet fragment are, which leaves us with the evidence found in the public areas, such as bones, cell phone, pda, the car, etc...

 

[Jaiddie]

The bonfire was not an out of the ordinary occurrence. SA did that regularly to rid the yard of rubbish - as was testified. Bone material was found over half a mile away from that burn pit, so there is another opportunity that tampering occurred.

The problem with DNA and other physical evidence not being found in the trailer or the garage is that is the precise theory the prosecution presented and that is the precise theory that brought a conviction. In that instance, reasonable doubt comes into play and the guilty verdict can NOT be reached.

Thank you! I am so shocked by how many people come away with this thinking what transpired was OK as long as they got their guy. Our criminal justice system is NOT supposed to work this way, and this is what makes this situation so scary. This is not the only place in America that this is happening, this time they just had the misfortune to have 2 film students watching their every move.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

...and you think that it was not his plan all along to claim that he was being set up...I think the first interview he did...he said he was set-up...I think he really thought people would just think that LE was out to get him..and he would get away scott free.

I was drawn to this case when it was unfolding all the way through trial verdict.

I have to admit I am totally fascinated now that it is in the news again. My fascination isn't even with the documentary because every film deemed to be a documentary really is agenda driven to begin with. So I didn't expect it to be any other way other than how it was presented.

What keeps me coming back to this case now are the posters right here on WS who have put so much time and effort into this case. I thoroughly enjoy reading all the points of view given by both sides. This isn't the first case where a majority of posters believe one way and the minority believes another.

As I read what has been said about claims of tainted evidence or planted evidence, and how it could have happened, I realize those same issues could be made in every murder case. In all cases when search warrants are done on property and home the owner is not allowed to be involved in the SW nor are they allowed in the home at the time its ongoing. LE may at some time may have the homeowner come back into the home with LE present if they believe robbery was involved or if they were the one who came home and found the victim deceased. I have seen search warrants of a murder scene, both home and property. last from a couple of days all the way through 3 weeks like LE did in the Greone case. So each law enforcement agency has the opportunity to plant evidence.

I am mystified somewhat that blood transfers have now become suspect somehow when all blood transfers usually looks like a swipe/smear when the wet blood comes in contact with the surface it made contact with. A big issue has been made about the vial of blood belonging to Avery yet even lab technicians here have said a hole in the stopper is a common procedure. I believe I read where the FBI tested the blood found at the scene and found no additive used to make sure the blood doesn't coagulate. I do remember this very same argument coming up in OJs murder case and traces of the additive was supposedly found at the scene. I don't see any logical reason why ALL of the additive would mysteriously disappear if the 'planted' blood came from this vial. I don't think the FBI would have tested it looking for it if the experts knew it would dissipate either.

I still say that Avery did this heinous murder. Imo, he felt entitled because of what the justice system put him through by falsely imprisoning him for 18 years. While I certainly think that was a big miscarriage of justice, I also think, it left him very bitter developing a severe hatred against all young women around the rape victim's age. TH represented that woman, imo. He wasn't known for being respectful to women in the first place and the false imprisonment only made him detest women more. While some say his prior acts aren't an issue, I do believe past behavior is very important when judging what someone is capable of doing. Anyone that can pour gas/oil on a defenseless animal and burn it to death just for the hell of it is not normal. One doesn't grow out of this kind of inhumane activities. There was said to be bones scattered around the junk yard and I think those are other defenseless animals who crossed his path which he had also killed over the years. Knowing he was abusive to women and also abusive to pets as well shows me he has the traits of a psychopath. Those who have read extensively over the years about psychopaths who turned to murder knows one of things that sets them off is if they feel they were wronged they will go to any lengths necessary to get even and yes, even murder. They are also known to murder victims that in their mind represents who and what they hate. With Avery, it was every young woman like TH but she happened to be the one he chose. Imo, he made sure of that and that is why he was setting her up trying to make her feel more comfortable coming out to the pile of junk. I think from the first time she came there he had selected TH as his victim. She was to be raped and murdered and that way he would not only get even with the woman who sent him to prison he would be ahead of his twisted game by taking it to the next level. IMO

If the phone message he supposedly left on TH voicemail is true then it shows he had something to hide by leaving a message asking her why she didn't show up. Already he was trying to cover his tracks.

But I very much respect everyone's opinion on this case and can see why many question it especially knowing how the documentary was produced. That is what they wanted to happen when they made the film in the first place. That is why they excluded all the evidence entered in the trial for there was no other reason for them to do that other than trying to sway the public's opinion.

But even his own attorneys admit they have no proof supporting their claims of tainted or planted evidence. At least they have been honest about that.

It is really easy to claim the police planted evidence to frame this man. If I had been their attorneys back then that is what I would have gone with too so I fully understand why that was the DTs theory in the trial. Even the lawsuit wasn't going to paid by individual LE officers because all counties have insurance policies in place for lawsuits against them.

I do have compassion for Brendan. I think for a very long time Avery had made him do many evil things this kid didn't want to do. I do think he really feared him and what he would do to him if he did not do as exactly as he told him to do.

In the end though I don't think this will get either one of them a new trial unless they can come up with proof and not just allegations and unsupported claims.

IMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The focus of the docuseries is law enforcement's behavior, bias, and tactics. The docuseries never once claims SA's guilt or innocence. Is it biased? I'd say yes... they are biased on the side of pointing out the horrendous failure of LE in not one, but TWO, cases regarding SA.



No, Allen had brown eyes, Avery had blue eyes. Are you even watching? PB believed it was SA because 1) the person taking her statement said out loud in front of her "that sounds like Steven Avery" and 2) the "sketch artist" aka SHERIFF showed her his sketch of Avery instead of doing it the way it's always done which is to hear her description and sketch from that. How does that sound like a good idea? They didn't just railroad him, they had it out for him, they were determined to pin it on him.

So, why is it sooooooooooooooooooooooooo outrageous to believe they'd do it again, this time with even more at stake? LOL!

I just looked at his picture.. The mug shot I am looking at he has blue eyes in.

I have been looking at lots of pictures of him and most his eyes look blue but In a few I see some where his eyes could be brown so I will concede that..