Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #3

[Jaiddie]

For anyone doubting that Kratz really does have the Narcissist Disorder that has been claimed, I give you this:

[video=youtube;jVgpoPUTJ-E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVgpoPUTJ-E&app=desktop[/video]

Btw: He is definitely still just as creepy as ever, imo.Check out his facial expressions and the gleam in his eye when he answers her question about people thinking he did TH murder. Not to mention how disdainful he is to her once Strang gets put into the convo.

 

[Madeleine74]

The jury decided unanimously, and they were the triers of fact. SA stays in prison unless he has new evidence to prove his assertions.

 

[missy1974]

Agreed. That has never really been explained. I thought of that a while back....just going off of what was either reported or in the 2005 thread. me=:lamb:

jumping off of this post/thought.... not directed at you at all!

This is kinda what I was saying earlier. I think that all the pre-trial garbage really did taint the public's view. How could anyone listen to Kratz give that horrific story and not want SA and BD to rot in hell? I totally get that! I have not read the thread from 2005... but I imagine that a lot of it was based on the theories of Ken Kratz and they didn't even make it into the court room... he couldn't prove it.... he didn't even have BD testify!!!! It is brutal, in my opinion, that a prosecutor and some LE can get away with some of the statements they made before the trial, and there is no way, again in my opinion, that he was ever going to receive a fair trial.

I have always been somewhat frustrated with the Canadian legal system because we have laws that prevent making comments/accusations like this.... after this, I will never complain about not "hearing" anything before a trial starts ever again.

 

[MysticJynx]

it was also pointed out during the trial that the account number assigned to it was the same as the Avery's..... I really don't think it was as sneaky as Kratz made it sound.... not after reading the transcripts.

AND... it was also pointed out that on October 10th, she went to photograph a car for SA and it was considered a hustle call.... meaning, he called her directly, didn't call Auto-Trader first, so Auto-Trader and presumably no one, would have known she went there unless she told someone. She never submitted any of her 'hustle calls' until after the fact to Auto Trader, faxed them in. If he really was trying to lure her there.... why not call her directly?

I was just reading this testimony and commenting on the testimony thread of day 2. The Account number that was on that slip was just made, because the receptionist DP didn't bother to look into the name address and number as she clearly knew he was a reoccurring customer since she testified that he wanted the same photographer as BEFORE, she decided to just appoint it another account number a new one. And on that note she knew as maybe her reoccurring customers did that she was the ONLY photographer for that area. Only making appointments on Mondays. He also did not ask for TH by name. So really how did she know, other than the area code of the number he gave that he was even talking about TH? DP claims she did not know this customer.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

jumping off of this post/thought.... not directed at you at all!

This is kinda what I was saying earlier. I think that all the pre-trial garbage really did taint the public's view. How could anyone listen to Kratz give that horrific story and not want SA and BD to rot in hell? I totally get that! I have not read the thread from 2005... but I imagine that a lot of it was based on the theories of Ken Kratz and they didn't even make it into the court room... he couldn't prove it.... he didn't even have BD testify!!!! It is brutal, in my opinion, that a prosecutor and some LE can get away with some of the statements they made before the trial, and there is no way, again in my opinion, that he was ever going to receive a fair trial.

I have always been somewhat frustrated with the Canadian legal system because we have laws that prevent making comments/accusations like this.... after this, I will never complain about not "hearing" anything before a trial starts ever again.

LOL---it took me 4 days off and on to read the 58 pages in the 2005 thread :cheerful:

 

[BigCityAccountant]

In the true-crime book Bad Blood - A Murder in Marin County, 16-year-old Marlene Olive and 20-year-old Chuck Riley killed her parents (well he did the actual killings - mother by hammer, strangling, and stabbing, father by shooting) and then took the bodies to a nearby park, China Camp State Park, at night and doused them with gasoline and set them on fire in an abandoned cistern. It's been a few years since I read the book (out of print now) but I remember there were still large bones (maybe body parts) left after the fire and they went back two more nights and with more evidence to burn continued to try to get the bones down to ashes. Olive was tried as a juvenile and was jailed four years. Parole board approved Riley's release from prison in 2014 after 39 years in prison, but Jerry Brown reversed the Board's decision in 2015.

As I understood, and forgive me I'm just starting the transcripts...but Kratz says they found her shin bone in the burn pit. I'm guessing that was a large bone and not pieces??? Perhaps 2 feet long or so, just judging by mine and I'm short..LOL

 

[GigiG]

jumping off of this post/thought.... not directed at you at all!

This is kinda what I was saying earlier. I think that all the pre-trial garbage really did taint the public's view. How could anyone listen to Kratz give that horrific story and not want SA and BD to rot in hell? I totally get that! I have not read the thread from 2005... but I imagine that a lot of it was based on the theories of Ken Kratz and they didn't even make it into the court room... he couldn't prove it.... he didn't even have BD testify!!!! It is brutal, in my opinion, that a prosecutor and some LE can get away with some of the statements they made before the trial, and there is no way, again in my opinion, that he was ever going to receive a fair trial.

I have always been somewhat frustrated with the Canadian legal system because we have laws that prevent making comments/accusations like this.... after this, I will never complain about not "hearing" anything before a trial starts ever again.

Thank you, Canada. Our more sane and ethically responsible neighbor.

 

[missy1974]

someone has gone through the trouble of putting together a timeline using the available exhibits, testimony.

http://cdn.knightlab.com/libs/timel...N9uiYOG0k&font=Default&lang=en&initial_zoom=2

 

[ElleElle]

The jury decided unanimously, and they were the triers of fact. SA stays in prison unless he has new evidence to prove his assertions.

How about a retrial with all the movements on the Avery property that day? SA was not the only on the property that day.

 

[Sinsaint]

This thought came to me....if there was a quarry next to the Avery property...and as I understand this quarry was not owned by the Avery's (correct me if I'm wrong)..but what a better way to dispose of a body! The quarry usually has gravel and such that is used in construction--IE: road building, etc. Dump trucks come to the quarry and fill up, take their loads of gravel, rock...whatever and dump it on the construction site. Did I mention that about that time they were doing construction and making 141 wider??? That would mean that the remains would not all go to one place, some to construction on 141, some to someone's new building, etc. etc.
In my opinion, SA burned her in the pit and decided to distribute the remains via the quarry, but ran out of time.

Was he carrying one bone at a time to the quarry?

 

[missy1974]

Just give up Missy. For some people, if Kratz said it happened... Well, it must be true. Kratz also said he was "the prize" so most people should take his word for anything with a grain of salt.

I can't believe that he is able to still practice law after everything he was caught doing. Apparently his business is "drying up" now. :boohoo:

 

[Sinsaint]

During the opening statement in the trial transcripts, Kratz said SA called her to make an "alibi" call "two hours" after she was there. Kratz said he was going to show the jury about that call. That is where I got that from. When SA called the Auto Trader he said he was Barb Janda, not Steve Avery. He made the call to Auto Trader--not Barb. Telling someone that you are not someone who you are claiming to be ---is disguising who you are.

He told the Dassey jury that Brendan threatened to kill a woman in opening statements. He forgot to prove that statement during the trial. He seems to have a habit of making statements without supporting evidence.

 

[Sinsaint]

No, I thought I had read they found 5 or 6 buckets around his house. I could be wrong.

Buckets of what? Air? You surmised that the quarry was were he was going to dump the bones to then be accidentally used in construction projects. Only one or two of her bones were found at the quarry. Was he moving the bones to the quarry one at a time? Seems to me he would have been able to carry more than two bones to the quarry even if in just one trip.

 

[MysticJynx]

Also just wondering if anyone had noticed in the affidavit for search warrant Nov 5 2005 that they did not mention that AC was the first to question SA on November 3rd. They mention the date and that this is when she went missing but they skip right to DR being the one to go there and question SA on Nov 4. 2005. and did the walk through with permission from SA.

I will state this. How come there are conflicts on when SA left that weekend. I am confused. One site for him states that the interview of him seen on the news at 5pm Nov 4 2005 talking with the Red Van behind was from the previous night of Nov 3rd. Says SA left for the Cabin up north on Nov 4th. I also did read in Strang's Opening that he left early Nov 5th. Was it early? Was obvious before PS and NS found the car on the property.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/
http://www.stevenaverycase.com/

 

[dexter75]

Kratz got away with a LOT of this type of behavior, IMO.

He told the Dassey jury that Brendan threatened to kill a woman in opening statements. He forgot to prove that statement during the trial. He seems to have a habit of making statements without supporting evidence.

 

[dexter75]

:sick:

For anyone doubting that Kratz really does have the Narcissist Disorder that has been claimed, I give you this:

[video=youtube;jVgpoPUTJ-E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVgpoPUTJ-E&app=desktop[/video]

Btw: He is definitely still just as creepy as ever, imo.Check out his facial expressions and the gleam in his eye when he answers her question about people thinking he did TH murder. Not to mention how disdainful he is to her once Strang gets put into the convo.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

He told the Dassey jury that Brendan threatened to kill a woman in opening statements. He forgot to prove that statement during the trial. He seems to have a habit of making statements without supporting evidence.

Yes...but then Dean Strang specifically mentions it that the time is 4:35pm in his opening arguments.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Also just wondering if anyone had noticed in the affidavit for search warrant Nov 5 2005 that they did not mention that AC was the first to question SA on November 3rd. They mention the date and that this is when she went missing but they skip right to DR being the one to go there and question SA on Nov 4. 2005. and did the walk through with permission from SA.

I will state this. How come there are conflicts on when SA left that weekend. I am confused. One site for him states that the interview of him seen on the news at 5pm Nov 4 2005 talking with the Red Van behind was from the previous night of Nov 3rd. Says SA left for the Cabin up north on Nov 4th. I also did read in Strang's Opening that he left early Nov 5th. Was it early? Was obvious before PS and NS found the car on the property.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/
http://www.stevenaverycase.com/

Dean Strang statement:

15 November 5, Saturday, Steven has left to
16 go to the family cabin up in Crivitz, early that
17 morning, where Allen goes every weekend and most
18 of the family goes up too. Steven has gone up on
19 Saturday morning. But about 10:30 on Saturday
20 morning, Pam and Nikole Sturm find the Toyota
21 they suspect, correctly, as it turns out, is
22 Teresa's.
Page 133

So far from what I've come accross--they haven't mentioned a specific time--just early the morning of the 5th. Remember it is open deer season up there at this time--early morning could have been before the sun came up--but we do know it was before 10:30, when they found the car.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

The jury decided unanimously, and they were the triers of fact. SA stays in prison unless he has new evidence to prove his assertions.

Ok...lets list the suspects per Avery...LOL

1st - Kratz
2nd - My brothers Earl and Chuck
3rd - insinuating a sheriff by way of letter to the reporter at WISN..did anyone catch the handwritten letter where he says "do an investigation of the Sheriff of Manitowoc County, ask him where his van is"
4th - Can't wait to see who's next in line

according to him...Anyone and everyone did it---Except him.

 

[stephsb]

Ok...lets list the suspects per Avery...LOL

1st - Kratz
2nd - My brothers Earl and Chuck
3rd - insinuating a sheriff by way of letter to the reporter at WISN..did anyone catch the handwritten letter where he says "do an investigation of the Sheriff of Manitowoc County, ask him where his van is"
4th - Can't wait to see who's next in line

according to him...Anyone and everyone did it---Except him.

EA and CA are totally legitimate suspects, and are the kind of people that real investigators would have looked into. Also, were is the statement where he blames Kratz?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk