Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery

[Fred J Walsh]

3 weeks earlier, they said that Avery bought shackles and cuffs - with Barb Janda. How they know this, I don't know. Is it true ? i don't know. but if true, yes... I do think that it's something you consider.

The handcuffs and leg irons detail was reported in the press (with quotes from Avery) and is included in legal documents.

"Police found... a pair of handcuffs and leg irons in his house," says an article from Milwaukee Mag.

"And the handcuffs and leg irons? 'I bought them,' Avery said. 'I wanted to try out something different with Jodi.'"

Additionally the Criminal Complaint against Brendan Dassey mentions that "items of restraint... including handcuffs and leg irons" were allegedly recovered from Steve Avery's residence -- and that handcuffs and leg irons were part of the description offered by (or, fed to, depending on case view) Brendan Dassey during his interviews/interrogations.

Complainant is informed that during a search of the residence of Steven A. Avery, law enforcement located items of restraints within Avery's residence, including handcuffs and leg irons...

[Allegedly] Steven Avery then escorted Dassey into Steven's bedroom where Dassey observed Teresa Halbach lying face up on Steven Avery's bed. Dassey indicated that Teresa Halbach was nude and was restrained to the bed with handcuffs and leg irons...

The one caveat I'd note is that you'd need to check the Brendan interviews/interrogations to determine who brought up the notion of cuffs and irons first: the investigators, or Brendan. Regardless, it can easily be argued that Brendan knew about the handcuffs and leg irons detail as they were items reportedly recovered by police.

 

[john3293]

That poor woman begged for her life. Can you even imagine being bound to a bed, raped and assuming you're going to die a horrible death and then someone shows up and for just a moment you think perhaps you are saved? Then, the person she thought might save her rapes her as well and helps to murder her. Sorry, but that just really gets to me.

And, I guess it gets to me because I believe he did kill her. I believe he killed her and dragged his teenage nephew into it which is another part of the story I find highly disturbing. But for Steven, I don't believe Brendan would have committed such a horrendous crime and what a waste of such a young life. Reading his confession just makes me so sad, for both Teresa and him.

Maybe because I can remember all this happening and having it all happen near me I just feel "closer" to this whole case than others but I guess this just isn't necessarily what I want on my mind at night.

Maybe you should actually watch the documentary instead of believing everything you were fed by the media back in....what, 2007? I think the election and all this ISIS bombing stuff has taught people how biased the media is (and I'm not the least bit into politics). No one even questioned this 10 years ago. You believed what was reported on TV as GOSPEL. You believe that because that's what the media told you happened. Yeah, you deal with this stuff all day but are reluctant to possibly watch this show? I live in Wisconsin....this stuff (corruption) is commonplace. Maybe you just don't want to admit you might be part of the problem.

 

[CoolJ]

My opinion is that it was a hired hit and set up to point finger at Avery. 36 million is a lot of coin. JMO

 

[Brightbird]

These appeal docs for Avery are interesting. Basically they argued that he didn't get a fair trial because he wasn't allowed to give evidence on who else might have killed Teresa. He was only allowed to say that the police planted evidence or Brendan was the killer. The defence argues that there were other people that the jury would have been more likely to accept as framing him. By not being able to use these theories, the defence was quite restricted in how much they could cross-examine witnesses. For example, they couldn't really challenge Bobby and Scott about their mutual alibi and the inconsistencies in the timeline. They list 5 other people that were at the property that day - Scott, Bobby, Chuck, Earl and Robert Fabian. Scott, Chuck and Earl have pretty serious records of violence against women. Chuck had a history of harassing female customers of the auto yard. Bobby was physically examined and had scratches on his back he said were from a puppy. Bobby also had the same type gun as Steven that police allege was used on Teresa. Scott's co-worker reported that Scott was trying to sell Bobby's gun following the murder.

They also suggest that Chuck or Earl may have framed Steven because of jealousy of his pay out and sharing the family business.

More at links:

http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wkow/newsdocs/avery documents 1-22.pdf

http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wkow/newsdocs/avery document page 23 +.pdf

 

[Tiger09]

That's interesting because if the other fam members have a history of violence against women then what if they answered the door in a towel, but TB mistook them for SA? Like maybe she got the name, etc wrong? Because if a stranger answers the door in a towel, I'm looking away and not getting intricate details. It's possible that if she had spoken to SA on the phone, she could've assumed it was him.

Sent from my SM-T310 using Tapatalk

 

[Really?]

I am up to the point where the guilty verdict is read for Brendon...

I'm sick

 

[Really?]

After watching this doc....are there people who don't believe this was a set up to avoid paying money to Steven avery?

 

[TTF14]

After watching this doc....are there people who don't believe this was a set up to avoid paying money to Steven avery?

I don't really know what to think because after watching it, I went and read through some of the thread here on WS, and there was stuff left out of this documentary that was in the trial.

 

[MaxManning]

These appeal docs for Avery are interesting. Basically they argued that he didn't get a fair trial because he wasn't allowed to give evidence on who else might have killed Teresa. He was only allowed to say that the police planted evidence or Brendan was the killer. The defence argues that there were other people that the jury would have been more likely to accept as framing him. By not being able to use these theories, the defence was quite restricted in how much they could cross-examine witnesses. For example, they couldn't really challenge Bobby and Scott about their mutual alibi and the inconsistencies in the timeline. They list 5 other people that were at the property that day - Scott, Bobby, Chuck, Earl and Robert Fabian. Scott, Chuck and Earl have pretty serious records of violence against women. Chuck had a history of harassing female customers of the auto yard. Bobby was physically examined and had scratches on his back he said were from a puppy. Bobby also had the same type gun as Steven that police allege was used on Teresa. Scott's co-worker reported that Scott was trying to sell Bobby's gun following the murder.

They also suggest that Chuck or Earl may have framed Steven because of jealousy of his pay out and sharing the family business.

More at links:

http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wkow/newsdocs/avery documents 1-22.pdf

http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wkow/newsdocs/avery document page 23 +.pdf

Agreed, I think all this deserved to be investigated. I'd say this part is the most baffling imo.

I understand the concern of everyone being paraded into the courtroom , but if these men weren't properly investigated then how can anyone be sure they weren't involved ?

It's not like any of these people were just absurd to investigate as potential suspects. I honestly don't understand how you can have a fair trial and not have properly investigated all these guys. I believe the ex boyfriend and roommate also should have been investigated. Maybe they had air-tight alibis ? But I don't see any evidence that they were ever investigated.

 

[MaxManning]

I definitely don't think he or anyone else deserves a pass per se, but they do deserve a fair trial where you don't have the man (Colborn) who hid/sat on information that could have freed you also investigating a murder charge against you. It was conflict of interest on so many levels.

I think he deserves a trial with people NOT associated with the state of Wisconsin, as weird as that sounds.

To me it is about both police corruption and finding her murderer. They are intertwined. How can cases be handled honest and open mindedly when LE has a suspect in mind and not willing to explore other avenues, as they did to him the first time with the rape charge. She would have never gotten true justice from the rape crime as the wrong man was in jail.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

Yes, I agree with you. I think people in that small town or even in that state are likely too biased and have too many preconceptions.

Overturning the Avery conviction is also likely the only way a real investigation every occurs. As long as Avery is in prison for this crime, no further investigation by law enforcement will likely be done.

While I can't say I am convinced that Avery is innocent, I don't think I'd ever be confident he got a fair trial until these guys were investigated. They aren't just random people, they all were extremely close to the location, just the same as Avery.

 

[Really?]

I binge watched this and like so many of you, had to turn it off for a bit at episode 4. What they did to Brendan was inexcusable. His own lawyer and the investigator were clearly biased. Everything the PI did, from repeatedly telling Brendan to confess and say he was sorry, to directing him to draw pictures of the supposed crime scene, to sobbing at the stand when shown a photo of Teresa - he was working for the defense!!!!!
And Dassey's attorney let him be questioned alone by police, knowing he was underage and cognitively impaired. What defense attorney does that?
Also, the absence of a single bit of Teresa's DNA in either the bedroom or the garage, which were both totally cluttered with debris when she was reportedly stabbed and or shot makes no sense. No sense. These were not intelligent, sophisticated men. They could not possibly have removed all traces of blood.
Lastly - Lenk found the key. That alone is a HUGE conflict of interest.
I'm sure the film left things out, but unless these facts were blatant lies, I don't see how the jury convicted either of them. And I really don't understand why all the appeals this far have been denied.

Thanks again for this post...ditto on all of it......plus I feel so badly for the parents of the convicted.

 

[MaxManning]

After watching this doc....are there people who don't believe this was a set up to avoid paying money to Steven avery?

After watching doc, I was right there with you. But clearly there are details left out that many believe are important to the case. I'd say it's fair to say that there are details left out on both sides - prosecution and defense - that most would think are relevant.

I still say it's possible that the police were corrupt and planted evidence and that Avery could STILL be guilty. The investigation was lacking due to their tunnel vision, same as with his original conviction.

But to answer your more direct question, yes, I do believe that avoiding paying money to Avery could have been a primary motive to focus on him alone and potentially even plant evidence. I also think they had opportunity and means to do that. A needle hole in top of that vial needs to be investigated to understand how that could have happened. Tampering with that is criminal, and it was clearly tampered with, unless someone can provide an explanation.

That's the part that puzzles me. What does it take for a judge to accept that the needle hole on the top of that vial of Avery's blood is NOT of concern. Is judge possibly corrupt too ? that's possible. right ?

But again, me believing this to be a valid concern, doesn't allow my mind to exclude Avery as a suspect. Just means he didn't get a fair trial.

 

[MaxManning]

Maybe you should actually watch the documentary instead of believing everything you were fed by the media back in....what, 2007? I think the election and all this ISIS bombing stuff has taught people how biased the media is (and I'm not the least bit into politics). No one even questioned this 10 years ago. You believed what was reported on TV as GOSPEL. You believe that because that's what the media told you happened. Yeah, you deal with this stuff all day but are reluctant to possibly watch this show? I live in Wisconsin....this stuff (corruption) is commonplace. Maybe you just don't want to admit you might be part of the problem.

I agree with this, but I think you should also resist holding the documentary as the Gospel either. I think it did accomplish it's likely goal of highlighting the believable stance that police were biased and at minimum that limited the investigation to Avery and at worst possibly led to them planting evidence. They also coerced Brendan and fed him details to repeat, that's obvious.

But there's also alot left out of the documentary that has led me to question whether Avery is innocent. Police being corrupt and Avery being guilty is a possibility.

Have we not learned anything from the O.J. trial ?

The documentary is not the gospel either.

 

[MaxManning]

Ok, complete theory here, but based on the documents that brightbird posted - http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wkow/newsdocs/avery document page 23 +.pdf

Is it possible that Brendan was truly involved in moving a body ? Suppose that Scott Tadych and/or Bobby were the killer(s). Wouldn't the pressure to not say anything be even greater if it was his mother's boyfriend and his own brother ? He could have even by influenced by them to say certain things to implicate Avery.

That would also explain how possibly the bones were moved as there was evidence that some bones were in another location on the property.

Brendan might have also been told by Scott/Bobby to say that Avery said he was going to spread the bones in different locations. My question for that is why wouldn't he move ALL OF THEM away from his trailer?

So it would make sense that if someone moved bones to avery's property and a few were found at the location - possibly closer to janda house - that maybe scott/bobby realized they had to introduce an explanation for that - through brendan.

Again, all this very much a speculative theory, but it would make sense as to why Bobby and Scott seemingly had it in for avery at the trial. Am I the only one that wasn't sold on their dual alibis ?

Edit - forgot to add that this document mentions something I was unaware of. Barb Janda was the owner of the van being sold. Barb Janda also was with Steve Avery when he purchased those shackles and cuffs, so Scott/Bobby were aware of their existence. Brendan might not have been, but Scott and Bobby could have told them.

Yes, it's perfectly possible that Avery might have those things out in the open and so Brendan might have known of their existence. However, Scott and Bobby are more likely to understand why those items could be something law enforcement would find of great interest.

This also explains why Avery gave the name B. Janda to auto trader -- It was Barb's van. Now that makes complete sense to me.

This also means that Scott/Bobby likely KNEW hallbach would be there that day, because barb was likely the one who said -- sell it for me. right ?

 

[MaxManning]

Ok, this doc is worth reading, because Tadych is a very suspicious individual in all this. - http://ftpcontent.worldnow.com/wkow/newsdocs/avery document page 23 +.pdf

Page 24

Calument police took a statement from a co-worker of Tadych saying that he left work a nervous wreck and mentioned that one of the dassey boys had blood on their clothes and that they had gotten mixed up in his laundry. The statement was taken on 3/2/06. That's a direct tie between Tadych and knowledge of blood on one of his kid's clothes.

This evidence was not allowed based on a "three factor" test. Anyone know what that means ?

That's craziness. Obviously this is evidence that the prosecution would WANT to include if they were trying to tie Brendan to the crime. However the motive to NOT include it might be that they don't want to give an alternative to Avery.

Would love to hear Brendan being questioned about Tadych. Just to see what that relationship is like.

 

[Brightbird]

After watching doc, I was right there with you. But clearly there are details left out that many believe are important to the case. I'd say it's fair to say that there are details left out on both sides - prosecution and defense - that most would think are relevant.

I still say it's possible that the police were corrupt and planted evidence and that Avery could STILL be guilty. The investigation was lacking due to their tunnel vision, same as with his original conviction.

But to answer your more direct question, yes, I do believe that avoiding paying money to Avery could have been a primary motive to focus on him alone and potentially even plant evidence. I also think they had opportunity and means to do that. A needle hole in top of that vial needs to be investigated to understand how that could have happened. Tampering with that is criminal, and it was clearly tampered with, unless someone can provide an explanation.

That's the part that puzzles me. What does it take for a judge to accept that the needle hole on the top of that vial of Avery's blood is NOT of concern. Is judge possibly corrupt too ? that's possible. right ?

But again, me believing this to be a valid concern, doesn't allow my mind to exclude Avery as a suspect. Just means he didn't get a fair trial.

I was reading Reddit threads and it seems a number of people think the needle hole isn't that odd, from their professional experience. The sticky tape is still dodgy though, but could be lazy work. That's the sort of thing the documentary should have covered more - what was the prosecutions theory on that vial? The blood in the car is probably the hardest thing for me to believe was planted. Those appeal documents suggest that someone else on the property could have got Steven's blood when he cut himself (thinking of the blood in the bathroom here), but that's getting a bit far fetched for me.

 

[MaxManning]

Page 25 - charles avery who was convicted for sexual assault in the past

Police interviewed Zina Lavora who had her car towed by Charles and the Avery junkyard. After the tow, she said that charles had begun sending her flowers and repeatedly asking her to go out on dates. (was he the guy calling hallbach?) He even went to her home, rang the bell, and left candy and a giftwrapped box containing a $100 bill. He called her for 3 weeks and she had told coworkers she was afraid of him.

How was this not admissable ?!!?!?

There are more reports of similar behavior by charles with people in relation to the junkyard tows.

 

[MaxManning]

I was reading Reddit threads and it seems a number of people think the needle hole isn't that odd, from their professional experience. The sticky tape is still dodgy though, but could be lazy work. That's the sort of thing the documentary should have covered more - what was the prosecutions theory on that vial? The blood in the car is probably the hardest thing for me to believe was planted. Those appeal documents suggest that someone else on the property could have got Steven's blood when he cut himself (thinking of the blood in the bathroom here), but that's getting a bit far fetched for me.

That's what I was wondering. What would be plausible reasons for the needle hole. What was the reason the reddit thread gave for the hole being there ? Who would have done that and what was the purpose ?

 

[MaxManning]

Charles Avery had no alibi for the night of the crime. Does Barney Fife work at this police department ? Does a judge not understand how ridiculous it would be that this guy wasn't investigated ?!?!?

 

[Brightbird]

That's what I was wondering. What would be plausible reasons for the needle hole. What was the reason the reddit thread gave for the hole being there ? Who would have done that and what was the purpose ?

This is one thread on it but I read about in few different ones. Not sure I really understand. I think there are different kinds of tubes. But basically it's vacuum sealed and the puncture is simply where the blood travels from the syringe. I believe if a lab worker needed to extract blood they would insert a syringe back into the same hole. The defense lawyer said he talked to the lab and this was not their method. There are some Reddit posters who also dispute it. But it does take away from the whole smoking gun piece of evidence.

https://m.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/3xpof9/hole_in_the_top_of_the_blood_tube_normal/