BigCityAccountant
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 250
The picture is deceiving, the antenna is on the driver's side. If you look closely in the pictures of her vehicle went it was found the antenna is there.
Yes, protocols are important and should be followed and for good reason. I don't agree that everyone who was on that scene was involved in some conspiracy or framing attempt or were colluding. Haven't seen evidence that TH was burned elsewhere/away from the Salvage Yard property. What value would it be to LE to have parts of TH found in not one place in the salvage yard? Again, just using common sense, it seems an effort to move larger pieces of bone elsewhere would be done to not have those pieces stand out.
The Dateline special on the case Friday night is my source for learning a cadaver dog 'hit' on the burn pit and burn barrels; before watching I wasn't aware of that.
Have you ever considered that you don't see that they were burned elsewhere because LE didn't show you?
Btw... I don't recall saying that everyone on the scene was in a conspiracy.
I have seen many posts that generalize and assume that if someone believes that there is corruption or questions the evidence, it is assumed that "everyone" is in on it. It only takes one as far as I'm concerned.
Dateline needs better fact checkers then, they got the dog hit on the burn pit wrong based on the trial transcripts that I read IMO
It's sad every single piece wasn't photographed and video'd exactly as it was being found to provide that level of proof (i.e. "I must see it for myself to believe it happened or exists"). I doubt anyone processing the scene back then was thinking of the future optics. They were going about the grim task of recovering what was left of a young woman and some of her personal items. Remember, a cadaver dog hit on the burn pit and the burn barrels; dogs don't lie.
The corroboration comes from multiple people (and witnesses) processing the scene and testifying to what they saw, did, who else they saw, etc. Unless you believe every single cop, detective, person who was at the scene are all colluding together and are willing to perjure themselves on the stand, why would anyone lie about where they found various pieces of human remains? And how do you get the dog handler to agree to go along with your ruse?
I also think.... if there are people in Manitowoc that were 'afraid' to talk 10 years ago.... they may not be 'afraid' to talk today. JMO
Yes, protocols are important and should be followed and for good reason. I don't agree that everyone who was on that scene was involved in some conspiracy or framing attempt or were colluding. Haven't seen evidence that TH was burned elsewhere/away from the Salvage Yard property. What value would it be to LE to have parts of TH found in not one place in the salvage yard? Again, just using common sense, it seems an effort to move larger pieces of bone elsewhere would be done to not have those pieces stand out.
The Dateline special on the case Friday night is my source for learning a cadaver dog 'hit' on the burn pit and burn barrels; before watching I wasn't aware of that.
I can only consider what I'm shown in terms of evidence. Saying those remains were burned elsewhere and LE just didn't show it, isn't in evidence.
Then which person collecting remains was the 'one' who was corrupt? I ask what value it would be to LE to have remains in different places on the Avery property? There needs to be some reason for the larger bones to be discarded elsewhere, it has to benefit someone.
I've seen opinions over the last few weeks from several posters that any of the following could be involved in TH's death:
- Lenk
- Colburn
- Some other cop involved in the case
- TH's brother
- RH
- TH's roommate
- TH's photography mentor
- Any of the Avery brothers, nephews, or Scott T.
- George Zipperer
And there have also been opinions that the following people might be involved in framing Avery:
- Lenk
- Colburn
- The cops that were with Lenk and/or Colburn
- Someone in the county clerk's office
- The DNA Analyst (Sherry C) or someone at the Wisconsin State Crime Lab
- Pam Strum
- Fassbender
- Weigart
- TH's friends, especially RH
- The DA
- The sheriff who owns a salvage yard and has a smelter
- 2 or more jury members
- One or more people who collected remains
Perhaps so. You asked where I obtained that information and I answered.
Interesting in light of the Zipperer talk
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMur...y_with_links_to_back_up_gene_kusche_may_have/
there's something fishy going on in Denmark
You are forgetting about the pelvic bones found at the quarry (also with no evidence photos, of course). Seems strange to me that SA would spread the bones all over the place. What would be the reason for that?
The picture is deceiving, the antenna is on the driver's side. If you look closely in the pictures of her vehicle went it was found the antenna is there.
I thought when they interviewed BD that he claimed that SA called him and asked him to come to a bonfire and that he claims he did go to SA's house that night for a fire. I think that was something I saw on Making a Murderer. This case has so many unanswered questions. I dont think anyone will ever figure it out really. Hopefully SA's new lawyer can present some new evidence.
Just curious...since you are in the field.... my hubby has blood drawn regularly.... although he hasn't watched the show, I have discussed this with him... and I have shown him the pictures... in all the blood he has had drawn in the last month, he said none of the holes were nearly that big and he really had to look to see them.
I am not sure what kind of needles they use to draw the blood out for testing, but I imagine they don't have to be big since a large amount is not needed for testing. It just seems like such a big hole LOL I guess it could be dried blood and it's just giving the hole the appearance of being larger?
I'm sorry if this has already been discussed to death, but I haven't read every post in every thread.
I watched Saturday night's Dateline, and also the special on I.D. I was hoping we'd hear more from the prosecution about what, if anything, they think happened in the bedroom. And if they don't think anything did, why did BD say what he did about what happened in the bedroom?