Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #3

[Madeleine74]

Yes, classic case of Direct Evidence (eye witness to the crime) being wrong. PB thought SA was the guy, she was primed to pick out his picture in a 6-pack lineup from some things LE did to influence that. Many wrongful convictions being overturned were due to incorrect eye witness testimony. These are the years before there was DNA testing. And DNA, which is circumstantial evidence, tells the real tale.

 

[Jaiddie]

If you assume that since one LE event was corrupt based on a past LE event, you are not looking for truth, you are letting bias decide.

Past behavior is a good indication of future behavior and it also shows escalation. If you are going to state that the reason SA was found guilty is based on the jury not having all the information than excluding past behavior is the same thing and could have shown the jury his nature. So in that case that goes toward a motivator for guilt.

Im not impressed so far with the docudrama

This can also be said for LE in this instance as well, imo. I am not convinced of Avery's guilt or innocence, but I AM convinced that LE and officials have much to answer for all the confusion in this case. SA has Zellner representing him now and if the day comes where he is exonerated, LE and officials have no one to blame but themselves for how unprofessionally this investigation took place.

 

[Soulmagent]

If you assume that since one LE event was corrupt based on a past LE event, you are not looking for truth, you are letting bias decide.

Past behavior is a good indication of future behavior and it also shows escalation. If you are going to state that the reason SA was found guilty is based on the jury not having all the information than excluding past behavior is the same thing and could have shown the jury his nature. So in that case that goes toward a motivator for guilt.

Im not impressed so far with the docudrama

You could also apply your past behavior theory to the officers involved in both cases.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

You could also apply your past behavior theory to the officers involved in both cases.

I don't think it is a direct application since many of the people involved in the Rape case were not there any more.

Watching the interviews for the lawsuit, Some of these people are priceless.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Up to Murder Episode 3. So far I don't see anything that makes me feel like LE is planting anything.
I feel that There are 2 choices.. He did it, Or someone he knows did it and wants him to go down and framed him.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

I guess it would have been all night on the 3rd although I have read Earl (not sure if correct name) stayed on the property while the family was gone. What do you think he cleaned up? If I remember correctly there was no DNA of Teresa's found anywhere in the trailer or garage except a bullet that was contaminated by the person doing the DNA test. And, if he did do this, he forgot to take the key with him. So, he left the RAV4, the license plates, (which I don't know if they were fingerprint tested), the bones, the burned phone, camera etc and the key.

...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.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/41h2r8/ryan_lived_in_terrsas_house_from_newspaper/

Keeps getting stranger and stranger. From a news article on Nov 13, 2005:

"Hillegas spoke of Halbach on Saturday morning from her rented Calumet County farmhouse, where he and another friend are staying to keep an eye on things. It was some comfort, he said, to be surrounded by his good friend's belongings, her photographs and her cat, Mila."

They had been split up for 5 years, so I this is another thing I find kinda weird.:dunno:

I don't...my niece and her ex-boyfriend broke up when they both went to different colleges...they are still good friends...and I expect to see him at her wedding later this year.

 

[Deeptoad]

Up to Murder Episode 3. So far I don't see anything that makes me feel like LE is planting anything.
I feel that There are 2 choices.. He did it, Or someone he knows did it and wants him to go down and framed him.

Without giving anything away, I think it becomes very apparent in 4 or 5. I think 5 was the episode that had me gnashing my teeth.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

...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 so agree with that.. Essentially after the first justified case, He can always say that and cause people to think about it. But the truth is that LE was going to be way more careful when processing anything to make sure they had all the evidence and it was collected correctly.

I think he figured he was a man who could never be convicted again of anything and used that to his advantage.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Without giving anything away, I think it becomes very apparent in 4 or 5. I think 5 was the episode that had me gnashing my teeth.

I am watching but I see more that points to guilt than not.

 

[lisasalinger]

I am not considering his initial wrongful conviction in anyway, except the fact that officials in that county were facing a $36 million civil suit. I also am not of the opinion that if Ryan had anything to do with her death that he and her brother would have done the actual work of framing SA. I do however have my doubts about him because of the phone and voicemail tampering done by the two of them. Add the fact that Teresa had been having issues with someone bothering her by phone, which her co-workers admitted was happening, gives me pause. If the person who was bothering/stalking her had been SA, I'm sure she would have told her boss when he asked her about it. Instead, she told him not to worry about it. That sounds like it was someone personal, such as an ex.
I cannot say that SA did not murder her as I was not there. I also am not going strictly by the doc, as I watched it quite awhile ago, and have been researching it everywhere I can since then. I do not, however, believe that SA should have been convicted as the whole investigation and trial was a joke. And Brendan should not even have been charged at all since all they had on him was that messed up confession. They had absolutely NO circumstantial or physical evidence that Brendan had been on the crime scene. I also plan on reading the 2005 transcripts, but I have no doubts that the police planted things to make sure SA went down for this. That is the one thing that the documentary showed me. I saw, along with most people who actually watched it, the shadiness that was going on with the key, blood in van, bullet, and even the bones. I mean, the coroner was even walled off and not permitted on the site. That doesn't scream shady to you? As I said I do plan on reading the transcripts as well, as I am not certain of SA guilt or innocence. However there are many more characters in this saga that I feel the same way about. Too bad LE decided to fixate ONLY on SA. In my opinion, there are many possibilities on who actually killed her, Ryan is most definitely on that list, but I have no doubts after what I have seen from the raw footage that the doc displayed, that it is very possible that LE found her murdered and decided to take care of the massive (36 Mil) Avery problem once and for all.

Btw, I live in a small town, so I know how the dynamics of a small town works. That is also what makes this documentary so scary. It very well could happen to me or someone I love one day if someone in LE decides they have a problem with us. That is the emotion you spoke about, that I think most are coming away from this feeling.

Hi Jaiddie,

My original response was really more of a general thought, as opposed to identifying where you stand on the case. You've brought up some good stuff here. As for who was bothering Teresa - we only know of that one conversation that Teresa had with her colleague saying she had been dealing with some calls/issues (paraphrasing) but we don't know anything beyond that. Maybe it was a bill collector, or something related to business. There are a bunch of reasons why people dodge others, and feel bothered by calls, and they're not necessarily romantic or threatening in nature. I do think there are question marks relating to the phone evidence and I'm anxious to get my hands on actual records to see the details of the data from all parties involved.

Did you see the recent interview with Jodi? She flat out calls Steven a monster and says he's absolutely guilty of this. I know Jodi is a questionable character so it's hard to believe everything she says. But, how much do you really know about Steven's background? Are you aware of all his sexual aggressions with young relatives? They are on record. He was absolutely a sexual deviant. I'm not excusing what happened to him in the 1985 case at all - but there was a reason Steven found himself in that trouble - because with his background it was absolutely believable. Again, not saying he should have paid for that... but we can't forget who Steven Avery really is. Is he capable of murder? I say yes, without question. Running your cousin off the road and holding a shotgun to her (because she was spreading rumors) is not just ludicrous, it shows some real hot-head, aggressive, and potentially sociopathic, behavior. His whole history supports that. Add 18 years in the slammer for something you didn't do - can you imagine the rage bubbling up in this guy?

 

[BigCityAccountant]

I am not considering his initial wrongful conviction in anyway, except the fact that officials in that county were facing a $36 million civil suit. I also am not of the opinion that if Ryan had anything to do with her death that he and her brother would have done the actual work of framing SA. I do however have my doubts about him because of the phone and voicemail tampering done by the two of them. Add the fact that Teresa had been having issues with someone bothering her by phone, which her co-workers admitted was happening, gives me pause. If the person who was bothering/stalking her had been SA, I'm sure she would have told her boss when he asked her about it. Instead, she told him not to worry about it. That sounds like it was someone personal, such as an ex.
I cannot say that SA did not murder her as I was not there. I also am not going strictly by the doc, as I watched it quite awhile ago, and have been researching it everywhere I can since then. I do not, however, believe that SA should have been convicted as the whole investigation and trial was a joke. And Brendan should not even have been charged at all since all they had on him was that messed up confession. They had absolutely NO circumstantial or physical evidence that Brendan had been on the crime scene. I also plan on reading the 2005 transcripts, but I have no doubts that the police planted things to make sure SA went down for this. That is the one thing that the documentary showed me. I saw, along with most people who actually watched it, the shadiness that was going on with the key, blood in van, bullet, and even the bones. I mean, the coroner was even walled off and not permitted on the site. That doesn't scream shady to you? As I said I do plan on reading the transcripts as well, as I am not certain of SA guilt or innocence. However there are many more characters in this saga that I feel the same way about. Too bad LE decided to fixate ONLY on SA. In my opinion, there are many possibilities on who actually killed her, Ryan is most definitely on that list, but I have no doubts after what I have seen from the raw footage that the doc displayed, that it is very possible that LE found her murdered and decided to take care of the massive (36 Mil) Avery problem once and for all.

Btw, I live in a small town, so I know how the dynamics of a small town works. That is also what makes this documentary so scary. It very well could happen to me or someone I love one day if someone in LE decides they have a problem with us. That is the emotion you spoke about, that I think most are coming away from this feeling.

You have to consider more facts....In the original thread..took me days to read...but there was a teenage girl that claimed she was raped by SA in 2004...she didn't follow thru because she didn't want to go through the process since he had already been charged with TH's murder..according to the information in the original thread...SA claimed he would kill her and her family if she said anything....I wonder where she is today and how she feels about all of this...Is there a statute of limitations on her case?

*I said claimed as I'm giving SA the benefit of the doubt, because as far as I know, charges have not been brought against him...

I think you also have to consider SA early on tried to say the prosecutor from Calumet County killed her...now he is claiming his brothers killed her...

You also have to consider he claimed he didn't kill the cat at first, he was just there...but then claimed it was an accident.

Steven: Another mistake I did... I had a bunch of friends over, and we were fooling around with the cat... and, I don't know, they were kind of negging it on and...

Court Document (dated 1982) highlights: "a cat", "on fire", "party to the crime of cruelty to animal".

Steven: I tossed him over the fire... and he lit up. You know, it was the family cat. I was young and stupid and hanging around with the wrong people.

Read more at: http://transcripts.foreverdreaming.org/viewtopic.php?f=524&t=24352

A few months later, Avery and another man were charged with cruelty to animals after dousing Avery’s cat with gasoline and oil and tossing it into a bonfire at the Avery junkyard. Though he claimed he had nothing to do with the cat’s death, Avery was found guilty and imprisoned for nine months.

Avery is a pathalogical liar...I don't know how anybody can believe him. Oh cry me a river...everybody in the world is out to get SA.

 

[Jaiddie]

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMur..._overly_insensitive_response_to_those_mostly/

This poster explains exactly how I feel about this doc and what it brings to light. My heart goes out to the Halbach family and friends that they have to relive this all over again, but I feel it is very unfair to blame the film-makers as, if LE had ran the investigation "by the book" in the first place (especially since they were dealing with someone who they had wrongfully convicted before) then there wouldn't have been any incriminating footage to show and this doc would probably have been completely different. Again, it is the fault of LE and officials that this is happening, and this time the Halbachs anger and pain should be directed their way. The fact that the Halbachs have went this whole time believing that their daughter was raped and tortured when there is absolutely no evidence to support that claim is absolutely disgusting to me.

Anyway, just wanted to post this because I felt that this is the true reason the film-makers made this show.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

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

 

[lisasalinger]

I so agree with that.. Essentially after the first justified case, He can always say that and cause people to think about it. But the truth is that LE was going to be way more careful when processing anything to make sure they had all the evidence and it was collected correctly.

I think he figured he was a man who could never be convicted again of anything and used that to his advantage.

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.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

AS I am listening to SA talk to his sister Janda after Brendan loses atty. She says.. HE WAS BY YOU THAT NIGHT..
He says YES WE HAD THE BONFIRE AND THEN WE WAS HOME BY 9 WHEN I TALKED TO GF.

He puts himself at the scene, having a bonfire that very night. So, Are you telling me that when he was not looking, Someone who had Murdered her earlier and hid the car and body on the property waited and then threw the body on there and left it?

Come on.. Some things are just not plausible!
He meets her that day. She is never seen again. That night him and Brendan have a bonfire. Just so happens.. That he admits to.
His own words.

 

[MysticJynx]

So Just sitting down to watch the series..

EP1

I already see issues with defending him. He tosses cat on fire, Breaks in a bar, And then he goes after his cousin in the middle of the road hits her car and pulls a gun on her. And everyone is giving excuses for it.

That incident shows his rage and willingness to hurt someone because they ticked him off....

Remember these are the same incidents police had on Steve Avery before they accused of him of a brutal rape and attempting to murder PB. They did not make him the attacker of PB in 85 and these same incidents do not make SA the murderer of Teresa. That is the same tunnel visioning logic the Sheriff's department used in his first case. I can't even believe KK is bringing up that cat again proves to me that he also tunnel visioned and found him guilty because of the cat incident before he was even charged with the murder of Teresa...


And I have a questions. When they charge you with something, but it says You were a party to this crime. What does that exactly mean. That there was more than one person who does the crime?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Remember these are the same incidents police had on Steve Avery before they accused of him of a brutal rapist and attempting to murder PB. They did not make him the attacker of PB in 85 and these same incidents do not make SA the murderer of Teresa. That is the same tunnel visioning logic the Sheriff's department used in his first case. I can't even believe KK is bringing up that cat again proves to me that he also tunnel visioned and him guilty because of the cat incident before he was even charged.

They did not make him do anything here. He is admitting himself to being there and having a bonfire that night with Brendan.

We all know that killing animals is used as an indicator of bigger crimes to come so I don't see that as anything unusual.

 

[Jaiddie]

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:

 

[BigCityAccountant]

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 beat me to the punch...my thoughts exactly....if there wasn't the other case...if SA didn't plant it in the minds of people...would the merits of this case...cause him to be convicted....there would have to be some substantial evidence to come forward for me to NOT think he was guilt.