Prosecutor Ken Kratz

[CoolJ]

Yes of course it was KK's opinion too, he was the actual Prosecutor.

BJ was believing BD because of what he told her. She knows her brother and what he was capable of. I don't think she had to be brainwashed to believe SA was guilty. I did feel sympathy for her initially because it must have been devastating to learn what she did, her family did not support her and she did express wanting to have been able to save Teresa. That disappeared when she was attacking the victim's family though.

Unfortunately there are corrupt people in positions of authority, I just don't see how corruption from LE played a part in the conviction.

Sent from my SM-P550 using Tapatalk

No, No, lets get this straight if we are going to discuss. BD told his mother what the cops told him to tell her!

I just get the feeling that some really don't understand how coercion works.

It feels like some don't give a crap about Justice for TH. The only thing they seem to care about is bringing down Steve Avery and his family. I get that feeling from the Manitowoc cops, the SPECIAL prosecutor, certain journalists and many many internet shills.

If these people were truly concerned about justice for TH i really don't believe they would be fighting so vehemently against people asking questions. If Avery did this, he is not going to walk so these people should have nothing to be concerned about. UNLESS they really do have something to be concerned about.

How can I not have suspicions about folks who are fighting tooth and nail against those seeking nothing but the truth?

 

[dexter75]

No, No, lets get this straight if we are going to discuss. BD told his mother what the cops told him to tell her!

I just get the feeling that some really don't understand how coercion works.

It feels like some don't give a crap about Justice for TH. The only thing they seem to care about is bringing down Steve Avery and his family. I get that feeling from the Manitowoc cops, the SPECIAL prosecutor, certain journalists and many many internet shills.

If these people were truly concerned about justice for TH i really don't believe they would be fighting so vehemently against people asking questions. If Avery did this, he is not going to walk so these people should have nothing to be concerned about. UNLESS they really do have something to be concerned about.

How can I not have suspicions about folks who are fighting tooth and nail against those seeking nothing but the truth?

THIS!
DITTO!
VERY WELL SAID! EXCELLENT POST!
JMHO


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Karinna]

No, No, lets get this straight if we are going to discuss. BD told his mother what the cops told him to tell her!

I just get the feeling that some really don't understand how coercion works.

It feels like some don't give a crap about Justice for TH. The only thing they seem to care about is bringing down Steve Avery and his family. I get that feeling from the Manitowoc cops, the SPECIAL prosecutor, certain journalists and many many internet shills.

If these people were truly concerned about justice for TH i really don't believe they would be fighting so vehemently against people asking questions. If Avery did this, he is not going to walk so these people should have nothing to be concerned about. UNLESS they really do have something to be concerned about.

How can I not have suspicions about folks who are fighting tooth and nail against those seeking nothing but the truth?

Exactly. And one only has to read about the wrongful conviction of Avery in the prior rape case, and that says it all about good ole Manitowoc county.
SA was right IMO, if they could set him up once they certainly could do it again and they did.
And how damn convenient for them that they could then nab him in the Halbach case. And steal BD's life to secure their conviction against Avery too. Those good old boys etc. sure got lucky didn't they.

 

[dexter75]

SBM

I can agree with this part. They have a point of view and it was that SA was framed by LE. To me that means their goal with MAM was to prove SA was not guilty JMO

I respect everyone's point of view😉
I took her words as meaning
She chose Steve Avery because he had such a " coincidental " go around with law enforcement.
Not once, not even twice, IMO.

He is a PERFECT EXAMPLE of how our justice system can and DOES fail a person.
JMO

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[BigCityAccountant]

SBM

I can agree with this part. They have a point of view and it was that SA was framed by LE. To me that means their goal with MAM was to prove SA was not guilty JMO

.
I don't agree. IMHO, I think when they set out to do the documentary, I think they thought they were covering a murderer which was the result of what had happened to him prior. Thus, the title...MaM. In other words, did the system create the murderer because of what happened to him. But, I think somewhere along the way~~it became evident things were just not adding up...too many things were questionable as to how they were handled, so I think the focus became more of whether the system failed him a 2nd time.

I don't think they went into it with a presumption of not guilty or guilty. I do think along the way, they felt it was possible that what he was claiming COULD be true~~thus, the appearance of a not guilty slant.

Whether or not he is or isn't~~MaM is thought provoking. Lets take SA out of it altogether...

What if this was your son or daughter...locked up for something they didn't do~~gets out~~actually DOES become a murderer. Is it the system's fault for locking them up in the first place? Did the system create the murderer or was that person a murderer before he/she entered the system. If the system is responsible, what can be done to prevent it in the future? How do we protect innocent people like TH (RIP TH) from become a victim?

On the other hand...what if your son or daughter truly was innocent, a first time, a 2nd time. What if LE corruption is rampant? What do we do as a society to prevent the corruption? From current events, this doesn't look like an isolated event~~it appears to be happening all over the country and possibly the world. Innocent people are having their lives destroyed.

I don't understand why people state the show if about SA's innocence or guilt...to me it begs the higher meaning behind the message, not whether or not SA is guilty or innocent.

JMHO of course.

 

[RANCH]

The people who made MAM have every right to use the show to prove SA was framed by LE and therefore not guilty. In my opinion that's the whole point of the show. JMO

 

[CoolJ]

The point of the show was to highlight exactly how easy it would be to frame someone for murder.
Take innocence or guilt out of the equation. Forget whether you believe whether or not Colbourn and Lenk planted evidence......
The point is that any cop very easily could set you up for murder, and there is not a damn thing you can do about it. The only chance you have is if somewhere down the line, usually about 10+ years of being locked up, someone with some compassion AND influence hears your story and basically dedicates their life to fighting for your freedom.

All it takes is a couple crooked authority figures with a motive to put you away. The law and justice system is on their side. You end up with a guy like Kachinsky trying to "help you out".

 

[Limaes]

I was responding to your statement: "She knows her brother and what he was capable of."
Classic example of presumption.

Which was a response to BJ supposedly being fed fairytales about SA.

 

[Limaes]

No, No, lets get this straight if we are going to discuss. BD told his mother what the cops told him to tell her!

I just get the feeling that some really don't understand how coercion works.

It feels like some don't give a crap about Justice for TH. The only thing they seem to care about is bringing down Steve Avery and his family. I get that feeling from the Manitowoc cops, the SPECIAL prosecutor, certain journalists and many many internet shills.

If these people were truly concerned about justice for TH i really don't believe they would be fighting so vehemently against people asking questions. If Avery did this, he is not going to walk so these people should have nothing to be concerned about. UNLESS they really do have something to be concerned about.

How can I not have suspicions about folks who are fighting tooth and nail against those seeking nothing but the truth?

Here we go [emoji57]

Same old diatribe. Anyone who doesn't go along with the flock must have ulterior motives. Internet shills blah blah blah.

Now...back to the case

 

[Limaes]

Exactly. And one only has to read about the wrongful conviction of Avery in the prior rape case, and that says it all about good ole Manitowoc county.
SA was right IMO, if they could set him up once they certainly could do it again and they did.
And how damn convenient for them that they could then nab him in the Halbach case. And steal BD's life to secure their conviction against Avery too. Those good old boys etc. sure got lucky didn't they.

Perhaps one should also read about SA confessing to something he didn't do to save JS from going to prison. Then one would learn that the State had the perfect opportunity to "nab him" but didn't.

 

[IDK]

BigCityAccountant and CoolJ: Thank-you very much for your eloquent posts. I couldn't agree with you more, though I couldn't have made the points so clearly myself.

 

[missy1974]

.
I don't agree. IMHO, I think when they set out to do the documentary, I think they thought they were covering a murderer which was the result of what had happened to him prior. Thus, the title...MaM. In other words, did the system create the murderer because of what happened to him. But, I think somewhere along the way~~it became evident things were just not adding up...too many things were questionable as to how they were handled, so I think the focus became more of whether the system failed him a 2nd time.

I don't think they went into it with a presumption of not guilty or guilty. I do think along the way, they felt it was possible that what he was claiming COULD be true~~thus, the appearance of a not guilty slant.

Whether or not he is or isn't~~MaM is thought provoking. Lets take SA out of it altogether...

What if this was your son or daughter...locked up for something they didn't do~~gets out~~actually DOES become a murderer. Is it the system's fault for locking them up in the first place? Did the system create the murderer or was that person a murderer before he/she entered the system. If the system is responsible, what can be done to prevent it in the future? How do we protect innocent people like TH (RIP TH) from become a victim?

On the other hand...what if your son or daughter truly was innocent, a first time, a 2nd time. What if LE corruption is rampant? What do we do as a society to prevent the corruption? From current events, this doesn't look like an isolated event~~it appears to be happening all over the country and possibly the world. Innocent people are having their lives destroyed.

I don't understand why people state the show if about SA's innocence or guilt...to me it begs the higher meaning behind the message, not whether or not SA is guilty or innocent.

JMHO of course.

This is an excellent post BCA!

These are exactly the things I remember discussing with my husband right after I watched it. And you are right, the title and watching the first episode made me think ohhhh this guy didn't do the first crime, gets out and turns into a murderer... giving the title MAKING a Murderer. I remember my husband making the point, even if he did do it, would he have done something like that if he hadn't spent that time in jail? (he has never watched the show, but the poor guy has had to listen to me talk about for hours LOL)

Anyway, thanks was not enough!

 

[missy1974]

The point of the show was to highlight exactly how easy it would be to frame someone for murder.
Take innocence or guilt out of the equation. Forget whether you believe whether or not Colbourn and Lenk planted evidence......
The point is that any cop very easily could set you up for murder, and there is not a damn thing you can do about it. The only chance you have is if somewhere down the line, usually about 10+ years of being locked up, someone with some compassion AND influence hears your story and basically dedicates their life to fighting for your freedom.

All it takes is a couple crooked authority figures with a motive to put you away. The law and justice system is on their side. You end up with a guy like Kachinsky trying to "help you out".

Another excellent post! Thanks CoolJ

It also showed us just how easy it was to railroad someone for a sexual assault that they did not commit and spending years in jail. 16 alibi witness and all.

 

[missy1974]

BigCityAccountant and CoolJ: Thank-you very much for your eloquent posts. I couldn't agree with you more, though I couldn't have made the points so clearly myself.

thanks for pointing them out, I had missed them earlier today and probably would have missed them

 

[CoolJ]

Here we go [emoji57]

Same old diatribe. Anyone who doesn't go along with the flock must have ulterior motives. Internet shills blah blah blah.

Now...back to the case

It's not an attack on you personally. It's an observation about all of the people I see speaking out against Avery. They try to degrade his family and are trying to shut down others who are only seeking the truth. It doesn't make any sense to me. JMO

 

[Karinna]

Perhaps one should also read about SA confessing to something he didn't do to save JS from going to prison. Then one would learn that the State had the perfect opportunity to "nab him" but didn't.

You got a link for that??

 

[Karinna]

Here we go [emoji57]

Same old diatribe. Anyone who doesn't go along with the flock must have ulterior motives. Internet shills blah blah blah.

Now...back to the case

Or more like a case of some people "can't handle the truth".

 

[missy1974]

According to google the book is to be released on January 24, 2017.

I doubt it will have anything we have not heard already. It will be his narrative, again, and his narrative was shown in the MaM series, his narrative and his new conferences, etc. were one of the reasons I questioned everything. So to say that his (or the prosecutions) side was not shown on MaM, I'm not sure that's completely true.

I'm sure it will talk about the hood latch and the luring by his using a fake name (his sisters name who owned the van). I can't imagine there is much he can write about that a lot of us here have not already heard or read.

Someone will buy the book and read it and dissect it before I even have a chance to look for it, which is great, it means I won't have to buy it, which I probably wouldn't do anyway! lol

 

[BigCityAccountant]

You got a link for that??

.
Karrina, I believe Limaes is referring to when SA and JS were fighting and she got in the car when she was drunk and started to drive away and I believe the police were there and stopped them. SA said he was driving when in fact JS was driving. I don't have a link and I don't recall where it is, but the discussion is somewhere in these threads and I believe in an interview between SA and police.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

According to google the book is to be released on January 24, 2017.

I doubt it will have anything we have not heard already. It will be his narrative, again, and his narrative was shown in the MaM series, his narrative and his new conferences, etc. were one of the reasons I questioned everything. So to say that his (or the prosecutions) side was not shown on MaM, I'm not sure that's completely true.

I'm sure it will talk about the hood latch and the luring by his using a fake name (his sisters name who owned the van). I can't imagine there is much he can write about that a lot of us here have not already heard or read.

Someone will buy the book and read it and dissect it before I even have a chance to look for it, which is great, it means I won't have to buy it, which I probably wouldn't do anyway! lol

.
Do you remember when (date wise) he sent that letter to SA telling him to tell his story? Was it after MaM came out? I'm wondering if he was planning that book BEFORE MaM came out or if he is riding on the coat tails of MaM to get rich. Not that I think book royalties get you rich by any means.