Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #3

[PrimeSuspect]

I've read so far the following in being pointed at in an alleged framing of SA, in various combinations:

- His brothers and/or
- His brother-in-law and/or
- One of his other nephews and/or
- The local police and/or
- The Sheriff's Dept and/or
- The DA and/or
- The FBI and/or
- Someone in TH's family or among her friends and/or
- The Wisconsin State Crime Lab

My bets are on the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Dept. planting evidence. Everything starts and ends with them, imo.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...ense-steven-avery-may-be-stone-cold-innocent/ Hope this is allowed, it has quotes from Strang about the hood latch.

The last time I heard a defense attorney say his client is 'stone cold innocent' was when Mark Geragos said it before the trial of Scott Peterson. I always found the wording of 'stone cold' a rather odd choice of words.

 

[TheDuchess]

Some of my questions


- Why did SA call TH's phone multiple times and at least twice, and obscured his own number by dialing *67 prior to her coming out that afternoon?
His lawyer stated that he often used the *67 feature because of his notoriety. It was a habit. That said, it is a feature available to and used by millions of people, so I really don't find it all that strange. As far as the attempt without the feature, I am not sure if it was ever addressed. I don't find it strange other than it was either a butt dial, which would not have had the feature on it, as you need to actually type that in.

- Who else did TH interact with that fateful day AFTER visiting the Avery property? We know for sure she interacted with SA. SA had the receipt and a copy of the Autotrader that TH gives to each client after getting paid and taking the pictures, and those were inside his trailer. TH had 2 appointments prior to visiting the Avery Salvage Yard but she was never seen or heard from again.
I think that Teresa interacted with her killer, whether it was SA, BD or SOD
- How did TH's cell phone, PDA, and camera get into SA's burn barrel?
They were placed there by either the killer (SA or SOD) or someone looking to frame SA
- How did SA get that cut on his right hand middle finger the very day TH was killed?
I believe he stated in the interview that he did cut it doing work around the junkyard.
- How did Brendan's pants (the ones he produced and said he wore the night TH was killed, and said he was wearing when he and SA were trying to get rid stains in the garage with bleach) get large bleach stains on them if what Brendan said was false?
I actually think that this is a really good question. One of the more interesting things I have learned after seeing the documentary. I am not sure because I don't know how much bleach there was on those jeans. But I also know that no bleach was found in the garage, correct? And there was a luminol hit but it could have been animal blood or something?
- How did SA's DNA (this was not blood) get onto the latch under the front hood of TH's SUV? (Brendan had disclosed his uncle popped the hood and disconnected something). Who disconnected the hose that was found already disconnected when the hood of the SUV was opened to take the DNA swabs?
I had heard that the person who opened the hood hadn't changed his gloves, but not sure about the hose
- So it wasn't SA who killed TH? Then who did? (The police? One of the brothers?) How did the brothers get SA's blood or DNA into TH's SUV? Then why did SA fire 10 or 11 shots from his own rifle in his garage?

It is difficult to say who else could have done it because LE did not investigate anyone else. They never even investigated any other suspects.

 

[khaki]

Kent Kratz and others have talked about many things about their case being left out of the documentary. To keep it balanced, Dean Strang mentioned many things about their case kept out of the documentary as well.

Here's one:

William Newhouse, a gun expert with the Wisconsin State Crime Lab, said he couldn't conclusively link a bullet found in a crack in Avery's garage to a .22-caliber rifle seized from his bedroom. (He could only confirm that it was definitely a bullet from a .22 caliber rifle). There was no DNA on the gun, no blood blow back that you’d get from shooting someone at that close range and no blood mist / spatter around the garage that would also be present had someone been shot in the garage. http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/...-with-halbachs-dna-b99643001z1-363819121.html

 

[Miette]

If any of you were a cop or investigator, how would you have approached this case?

- Who would you talk to first? Then who next?
- What would be your determination of TH's movements that day? (did she leave the Avery appointment and drive away?)
- Do you believe TH was killed while at the Avery property that day? If not, where do you think she was killed and what evidence leads you to your conclusion?

I think before any of that, I would ask myself 'Am I a Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department employee and would my involvement with this case be a conflict of interest?"

 

[TheDuchess]

The last time I heard a defense attorney say his client is 'stone cold innocent' was when Mark Geragos said it before the trial of Scott Peterson. I always found the wording of 'stone cold' a rather odd choice of words.

Yeah but Strang is not Geragos. Strang seems to have integrity. And he's also well beyond being involved in the case. He lost. I think he says that because it really bothers him. He has stated before that it scares him more that SA might just be innocent as the thought of being wrongfully convicted twice is just too horrible to accept.

 

[MaxManning]

Some of my questions


- Why did SA call TH's phone multiple times and at least twice, and obscured his own number by dialing *67 prior to her coming out that afternoon?
Suspicious - agreed. I am one who agrees this is suspicious. Does it mean he murdered TH ? nope. But certainly I use it to weigh my opinions.


- Who else did TH interact with that fateful day AFTER visiting the Avery property? We know for sure she interacted with SA. SA had the receipt and a copy of the Autotrader that TH gives to each client after getting paid and taking the pictures, and those were inside his trailer. TH had 2 appointments prior to visiting the Avery Salvage Yard but she was never seen or heard from again.

This is a misconception that I had to, and I now see I was wrong. It was not a receipt, it was an empty bill of sale. The bill of sale was for a car, and it's purpose was to report the sale of the car if/when it happened. So when/if Steve sold the car, then that would be what he filled out and presented to the auto trader. It was NOT a receipt for the pictures. I made this same mistake, but verified that I was incorrect after TheDuchess pointing this out. The wording in the dassey transcripts was vague/misleading and I didn't have a clear photo of the document. I actually thought the document should have been filled out after completion of her taking pictures and getting paid. Not so.



- How did TH's cell phone, PDA, and camera get into SA's burn barrel?
Depending on what you believe, the police, or the killer. How did bones from halbach get in Barb Janda's burn area ? If the bones were moved, is it crazy to think those might be moved too ?


- How did SA get that cut on his right hand middle finger the very day TH was killed?
Suspicious. I agree. But he worked in a junk yard. So it's not a smoking gun imo

- How did Brendan's pants (the ones he produced and said he wore the night TH was killed, and said he was wearing when he and SA were trying to get rid stains in the garage with bleach) get large bleach stains on them if what Brendan said was false?

Agree with you here, and I'm probably the strongest supporter of this being indicative that brendan did help steve clean the garage floor that night. But the pants didn't have blood on them, or more accurately -- 6 months later they were not able to detect/confirm blood on them. The garage floor didn't have confirmed human blood on it. So is there a smoking gun here. Trust me, I am with you on seeing this as important, but I agree it's just one piece of evidence, not proof of anything.


- How did SA's DNA (this was not blood) get onto the latch under the front hood of TH's SUV? (Brendan had disclosed his uncle popped the hood and disconnected something). Who disconnected the hose that was found already disconnected when the hood of the SUV was opened to take the DNA swabs?
You will need to refer back to earlier threads and go over the interview transcripts, and you will see that they presented the idea that the hood was opened and brendan repeated it. How did they know the hood was opened ? because the knew the battery cables were disconnected. So they KNEW that getting brendan to say that the hood was opened, would give evidence that he shouldn't know. But, check back on this thread and you will see, it's simply not the case that brendan said this before it was fed to him.


- So it wasn't SA who killed TH? Then who did? (The police? One of the brothers?) How did the brothers get SA's blood or DNA into TH's SUV? Then why did SA fire 10 or 11 shots from his own rifle in his garage?
I still contend that I lean towards SA as most likely, and CA a close second. But I don't rule out police ENHANCING evidence because they thought they knew who did it. I even believe that police could have planted evidence and avery could still be guilty. In regards to the 10 or 11 shots. You are accepting that as relevant. The forensics show only 2 shots to the head. If you read the dassey trial transcripts you know there are gun casings all over the property, so why would it be odd for him to fire 10 or 11 shots on the property ? they have likely shot thousands of shots around the property and possibly in the garage -- you need to ask yourself why they didn't see those bullet casings and bullet until 6 MONTHS after the murder. right ? Lastly, don't you think 10-12 shots is a bit excessive ? But, if brendan says that amongst any other things he said that contradict, why does it have to be truth ?

See my answers above ^^^

 

[TheDuchess]

I think before any of that, I would ask myself 'Am I a Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department employee and would my involvement with this case be a conflict of interest?"

:takeabow:

Drop your microphone and walk away. You have just won the Internet!

 

[Madeleine74]

From the trial transcrpt (Dassey trial), direct examination of Thomas J. Fassbender, Special Agent with Wisconsin Dept of Criminal Justice.


The question is asked about the steel hood that was leaning up against the Rav4. This was in addition to many other items on, up against, and placed around the Rav4 to obscure it.

 

[Madeleine74]

Still on direct examination of Fassbender...

About the Rav4, condition of the SUV, seizure of the SUV:

 

[Madeleine74]

Direct exam of Fassbender...

Discovery of TH's license plates:

 

[MaxManning]

From the trial transcrpt (Dassey trial), direct examination of Thomas J. Fassbender, Special Agent with Wisconsin Dept of Criminal Justice.


The question is asked about the steel hood that was leaning up against the Rav4. This was in addition to many other items on, up against, and placed around the Rav4 to obscure it.

I am not trying to be disrespectful here, but please make note that cross examination is important to read :

Q: And would -- you -- in your opinion, you thought it would take two people to move it ?

A: Two people to easily manage it is how he asked the question. Not just move it, but how to properly or easily manage it


Q: Okay. So you're not suggesting to this jury that one person would be unable to move this about?
A: No, I'm not.

Q: Have you ever picked it up?
A: Couple days ago. Last week, I believe, I tried to pick it up and I can lift it.

I point this out respectfully, as I have made many errors like this while researching this case.

 

[TheDuchess]

anic:

I leave for a few hours.... come back and we are upstairs!!!!! Does this mean we have to behave? hehehe

I have a question for those that think the key was not planted (by LE or anyone else)..... How do you explain or rationalize no other DNA being found on it?

It's the lack of other DNA on that key/lanyard that gets me. Not a trace of TH? If I went missing today and my truck key was found, you would find my DNA, my husbands, probably my kids.... shoot, I would be shocked if my dogs DNA wasn't on it, and hopefully there would be a trace of DNA from the person responsible for me being missing. I cannot find a rational reason for no other DNA on that key.

To prove that I am indeed open to other ideas - perhaps SA left them in his pocket and the key went through the wash? I dunno.

 

[Madeleine74]

Direct exam of Fassbender...

Discussion of Branden's jeans:

 

[MaxManning]

Direct exam of Fassbender...

Discovery of TH's license plates:

Is anyone doubting that the plates were found ? Also, does discovery of the plates point to Steve Avery any more than anyone else with access to the junkyard ?

I also think you should take note of the dassey trial transcripts regarding all the things that the defense chose not to test for prints, DNA, blood, hair or other fibers. Because that is another factor in why I don't rule out the planting of certain evidence. I have to agree it's odd to me what they chose to test and not test for these things. It's as if they knew exactly what they wanted to test. I have to admit that.

Not saying I believe they planted, but it's odd to me regarding that aspect.

 

[Madeleine74]

It's been alleged that various things were planted and/or tampered with. Testimony is useful because it identifies who exactly found various pieces of evidence, where, and what state they were in when found. For instance, the testimony is the Rav4 was found covered with stuff, surrounded by stuff, license plate off, doors locked. Further, testimony is that the vehicle was not opened by anyone and was taken to the secured garage of the crime lab. I think that's important because if something was tampered with, it needs to be determined where and when that happened.

 

[missy1974]

hmmmm if the RAV4 was locked at the scene.... the officer that was looking at one of SA's vehicles and then went to the RAV4 and opened the latch without changing gloves.... how did they open the hood? they needed to hit the release that was inside the vehicle. Maybe both vehicles were in the crime lab when it happened? I will have to go back and see if I can find that, where that happened, the scene or crime lab.

 

[Madeleine74]

It didn't happen at the scene. The testimony above demonstrates that no one opened the Rav4 or attempted to. It was secured and maintained until the crime lab folks removed it and took it to their facility.

 

[Soulmagent]

I noticed when SA was being questioned at the police station ,he had a soda in front of him as did the officer who was questioning him,it made me question if that can was used as a way to get his DNA . The opportunity is there for that. You can see it for yourself in the documentary. I personally dont know if they would do that but being as this case shows itself to be irregular I have to question which party gets the benefit of doubt in this case.

 

[MaxManning]

It didn't happen at the scene. The testimony above demonstrates that no one opened the Rav4 or attempted to. It was secured and maintained until the crime lab folks removed it and took it to their facility.

Actually, one thing that is noted is that there is no crime scene tape over the openings of the cars like the door grooves, which i was told is somewhat standard, but I believe they explain this by saying that weather situation forced them to expedite the process of removing the car from the area.


In terms of someone planting evidence in the car. You do realize that some people believe that the police planted the car, meaning they'd obviously have access to the inside of the vehicle before planting it. right ?

Also, there is evidence of are fine fellow Mr. Lenk signing out of the crime scene, but never signing in. right ?

So if that goes unnoticed, what else goes unnoticed ?

So, with the knowledge that people believe LE was planting evidence, would it surprise anyone if the guy watching the car said no one entered the car ?


I am just saying this, to say that it's futile to try and convince people who believe evidence was planted that it was not.

I am not convinced that anything was planted, but I see lots of odd things that make me question it.