Steven Avery: Guilty of Teresa Halbach's Murder?

[Eileen730]

IMO I'm not convinced by Bobby Dasey or the bus driver/propane guy.

Propane guy just remembers seeing an SUV that was similar though, so he could have, and it wasn't TH's. Or he could have and it was TH's.... but he didn't see the driver.

I also don't know if I can believe Dawn from AutoTrader LOL

So in the end, I'm left not really knowing when she was there. I do not even know if I am convinced she was at Zipperer's before or after Avery's.

Yep, I don't have a clue LOL

I have many questions about Bobby Dassey.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Welcome to your new crack addiction! ;-D

Well, we certainly can't figure out the truth about this case--but if that isn't one of the most true statements---I don't know what is.

Thanks for making my morning! :laugh:

....and Welcome LifeCitizen :welcome4::welcome4: to the :rollercoaster::rollercoaster:

 

[Sustained]

To me, it all comes down to one piece of evidence. If the blood in TH's car is not from the sample taken years ago, then SA has to be involved one way or another. Where would LE have gotten SA's blood if not from the sample unless there was more blood drawn we don't know about ?

 

[missy1974]

To me, it all comes down to one piece of evidence. If the blood in TH's car is not from the sample taken years ago, then SA has to be involved one way or another. Where would LE have gotten SA's blood if not from the sample unless there was more blood drawn we don't know about ?

I have wondered about this. SA even wrote a letter to the lab asking if they had record of how many vials of blood were taken from him lol Not sure if he got an answer. In 2002-2003, did they take his blood, or was it strictly swabs they used? Was it routine to draw blood back in 1985, I really don't know.

ETA: btw, I'm not sure we will ever know 100% if that the blood did or didn't come from that vial.

 

[Sustained]

Another thing I'd like to know ...

How often does Barb Tadych visit Steven in prison ? If it were me and I thought my brother had forced my son into a murder, I'd never speak to him again - end of story.

 

[ElleElle]

Hi everyone, I'm a newbie here and to this case and like many others have just binge watched Making a Murderer.
I love true crime and a case hasn't grabbed me quite like this one for ages- the last case that grabbed me was the Sylvia Likens [cold] case.

This one is a real mystery- a guy who has already lost 18 years of his life for a crime he didn't commit in small town America, incest, an inbred backwards family, questionable evidence, crooked cops, changed testimonies, lying on the stand, - I'm fascinated!

I felt like I knew Avery was innocent [framed] after watching. So I came online and have been looking at this and that- transcripts, YouTube interviews etc. And now I don't know who killed poor Teresa.

I voted 'undecided,but believe a new trial is in order'.

I guess where I'm at is- I don't know if SA did it, I think the whole freaking family are weird with very low IQ's.
I don't think SA is a nice a person as the doco paints him- who runs someone (a relative even) off the road and points a gun at them (even if it wasn't loaded)? I've also seen bits of letters he wrote where he's acting like a psycho and threatening to kill someone (iirc his ex wife, but I could be wrong).

I'd like to know more about the creepy brothers Earl and Charles.
Bobby Dassey and Scott Tadych interest me too.
The ex boyfriend Ryan seemed edgy in court and I found myself not liking him from the few minutes I saw him on the stand. First thoughts were, wow she was way too good for him but hey, love is blind. lol. Also, him organising the search plays on my mind.

I think at this stage, the onlything that makes me think it wasn't SA is his attorneys. I really liked both of them. I didn't like Kratz at all, and wasn't surprised when the sexting scandalcame up.
Strang and Buting have spent countless hours with SA- I kinda trust that they would know if he was guilty. They've spent hours with him, witnessed his body language etc. As an armchair sleuth, I haven't.

There's so much we as the public don't know, but first hunches- it was maybe someone (or someones) in the Avery family and they set SA up.

:welcome:

I find it fascinating that alot of folks who watched this series have the same feelings about the witnesses/attorneys/county.

Facts and evidence are one thing, but behavior is huge for me, hence why I don't understand why there were no other suspects.

 

[LifeCitizen]

Thanks for the welcome Madeleine, and yes I'm already addicted, lol.

I realise it's an attorneys job to do their best for their client. I have heard Strang say he really doesn't know who murdered Teresa.
That's interesting what you said about the defence attorneys not asking their clients if they did it.

Thanks for the reply.

 

[LifeCitizen]

It's hard to know what are facts yet, for me. I like the idea of the just the established facts thread.

In the doco, it seems a lot was left out- I'm assuming the ex and the flatmate were interviewed, but you didn't see anything about them at all.

Thanks for the reply as well.

 

[missy1974]

It's hard to know what are facts yet, for me. I like the idea of the just the established facts thread.

In the doco, it seems a lot was left out- I'm assuming the ex and the flatmate were interviewed, but you didn't see anything about them at all.

Thanks for the reply as well.

Welcome to websleuths!

According to the ex... you would be assuming wrong LOL He testified that investigators spoke to him and Scott (the room mate) together, just about the last time they seen her, the ex was not asked for an alibi and actually didn't even inform them he was an exbf, someone else told investigators. (makes me wonder why someone would point that out to the investigator)

 

[LifeCitizen]

Thanks for the welcome , and lol! Geez, this is worse than I thought. What a totally flawed investigation. I can't believe the ex wasn't asked for an alibi and that they weren't interviewed separately.

Who was the someone else do you know? like a friend?

 

[dexter75]

I Absolutely agree with you here, Madeleine!

An addiction, it is.:thinking::websleuther::gathering::discuss::lookingitup:

My daughter text me two nights ago, asking where to find the transcripts to this case? She and her entire office are discussing the case. (works in Our County's court house, imagine that )

I directed her HERE, to Websleuths of course, and specifically stated " don't blame me should you happen to become addicted "
:innocent:

Welcome to your new crack addiction! ;-D






They were hired by SA and were paid hundreds of thousands for their services. Providing a vigorous defense for their client is their ethical responsibility. They might believe he's innocent or they might have their doubts, but they surely don't know unless their client confessed to them, as they weren't there while the crime was committed. I heard most defense attorneys never ask their clients if they did it (source: verified attorneys AZlawyer and GritGuy). Strang and Buting's professional responsibility was to advocate for their client to the best of their ability, and that they did and quite well.

 

[dexter75]

Very " flawed " IMO

That's putting it rather nicely

Welcome, to your new stompin' grounds!:welcome:

I DO enjoy reading everyone's input, as my opinion of the case has changed some, since the beginning. ( As far as what may have actually happened, who killed TH )

I DO believe SA is innocent.

I believe LE played a part in planting evidence, and initially I thought I KNEW who committed the crime.

Now, I am not so sure as folks have thrown out a few VERY plausible explanations/theories for what

may have happened. ( Experts would have been nice. Crime scene photo's, Complete phone records, etc)

Anyway, WELCOME & Glad you're here!
:greetings:

Thanks for the welcome , and lol! Geez, this is worse than I thought. What a totally flawed investigation. I can't believe the ex wasn't asked for an alibi and that they weren't interviewed separately.

Who was the someone else do you know? like a friend?

 

[HelpingHeart]

I posted earlier, but someone please explain the below.

The key: why would she have just one key for her car on a keychain? Most have house keys etc. with their car key. The DNA - none of hers on it. Maybe because she doesn't use it (or was wiped clean?). Her brother could have had the spare & gave to detectives. They acted weird about being on the property when asked about it. Watch the YouTube video about Andrew Colburn's call in to dispatch. You hear a lady (who sounds like the woman who found her car) say "the car is here!" to someone in the background. This was two days before her car was found.

The bones: I heard that some forensic person said that a bonfire couldn't burn an entire body (especially within a few hours). It has to be a certain temperature.

Timing: How could Steven & Brendan been able to do everything from 3:30pm (Brendan getting off his bus) till 5:00pm, when Barb got home. Brendan was home & she saw him. Then he acted as if he needed to get back to school during the interrogation. So I know he has got to be 100% innocent. He just made something up because he's not all there, & from fantasy (the book he read). The bus driver saw Teresa at 3:30ish & a trucker saw her vehicle leave Steven's property around 3:45-4:00.

The blood/DNA- There was no DNA anywhere in his home or garage. Even if you said the Brendan bleach story - something would have been found. No time to clean all of that up! And traces would still have been found. Even if Steven did it, he didn't do it on his property. His sister or other family (the brothers of Steven or Barb's husband & other son also could be the ones who did it in my opinion) would have seen/smelled/suspected something. Flesh burning probably smells pretty bad. The blood in her car was because whoever did it put her back there. But why would Steven not clean up his own blood in the car? Or hers? And his finger cut - why would his blood go in those two spots where they went? You also wouldn't just cover with a few branches. And was found quickly. Hmm.

Motive: There's no motive for Steven to have done this. He was about to get tons of money (36mil). He seemed normal & not nervous when being interviewed by reporters (before the bones were found) & didn't mind the cops checking out his property. Why would he let them check it out knowing that he still had her car, bones, and other items laying around? Because he didn't know they were there, because he's not guilty! Anyone else would have run the cops off (to clean up better).

The bullet: Contaminated by the lady doing the forensics. She said so, and that should be thrown out and not pointed out any further as evidence.

Hood DNA: Why would his DNA be under her hood, but not in the car anywhere, door handle, trunk latch, etc. ? The man doing the car search wasn't wearing gloves when he lifted the latch, so there's that.

I am not 100% saying Steven is innocent, and he very may well be guilty. However - it did not happen how the cops coerced Brendan into saying it happened. And not even on the property at all. That's why I don't think he did it. Why would he do it offsite, but bring the evidence back to his house? The key would have been thrown into the river or somewhere, the car would have been crushed or left far away from Avery's, bones & her items would have been fully removed, & he wouldn't have kept her auto trader book & receipt out in his home.

 

[dexter75]

Behavior,

like the way a person conducts a search/investigation? Not pursuing all leads/suspects, confirming alibi's and looking at backgrounds/anything out of the ordinary in EVERYONE involved? ( potential suspects )

Or, perhaps the way the press conference was conducted? ( as far as the Story that was told to the media regarding how TH was killed )

I'm not going to go on and on AGAIN, as we all have :deadhorse:& list EVERY instance
in this case where SOMEONE was crass or careless. ( again, being nice )

I agree, Behavior in THESE positions IS and SHOULD be a HUGE deal.:scream:

BEHAVIOR, ETHICS, CONDUCT very important.

( These folks work for THE PEOPLE )

BEHAVIOR, speaks VOLUMES.

IMO

:welcome:

I find it fascinating that alot of folks who watched this series have the same feelings about the witnesses/attorneys/county.

Facts and evidence are one thing, but behavior is huge for me, hence why I don't understand why there were no other suspects.

 

[LifeCitizen]

Thanks for the nice welcome Dexter my new stomping grounds- er, yep!

This place is great I agree!, so many great minds at work, throwing stuff out there, looking at different angles- I've learnt heaps from people here already.

 

[Murtagh21]

SUSTAINED: I don't want to presume anything, but in your post on the blood evidence in Teresa's vehicle, were you intimating that the 3 blood stains NOT tested for EDTA were planted by law enforcement? If that is your position, I would argue that the odds of the FBI picking ONLY the stains that did not show traces of EDTA are astronomical.

 

[Sustained]

SUSTAINED: I don't want to presume anything, but in your post on the blood evidence in Teresa's vehicle, were you intimating that the 3 blood stains NOT tested for EDTA were planted by law enforcement? If that is your position, I would argue that the odds of the FBI picking ONLY the stains that did not show traces of EDTA are astronomical.

Nope - not sure how you came up with that. My point was simply that Avery has to be guilty based solely on blood evidence if :

1) The EDTA test is proven valid or another more recent test is used (I'm sure Ms. Zellner is all over this, as according to what I read, the lack of EDTA in a sample does not necessarily that the larger tube sample could be excluded as the source)

2) There was no other source of SA's blood available other than himself and the tube in evidence (I have no idea if this is true).

IMO, either all of the stains were planted or none.

 

[Murtagh21]

HELPINGHAND: My two cents on your questions.

CAR KEY: It is possible that the key found in Avery's trailer was a spare. My wife has a huge key ring and she sometimes attaches the spare key to the key ring. Even if Teresa didn't have a spare key, the fact is that Avery's DNA was found on the key. IMO, Avery advocates want it both ways. They argue that law enforcement went through two locked doors at the Clerk's Office, planted Avery's blood in 6 locations inside Teresa's vehicle, but decided NOT to use that blood to plant other pieces of forensic evidence. This includes Avery's Touch DNA being found on the hood of Halbach's vehicle and, of course, Avery's Touch DNA being found on the key.

Colburn's call to dispatch has been proven to be much ado about nothing. It was a gotcha moment created through selective editing by the filmmakers of the Netflix documentary. If the filmmakers had no agenda, they would have included portions of Colburn's testimony that showed the impetus for this call was Detective Weigert giving Colburn permission to run the plates of Teresa's vehicle. In addition, Strang ignored Colburn's claim that he made the call on 11/3/05, and went with his own theory that the call was placed on 11/4/05.

THE BONES: The only concrete conclusions rendered at trial regarding human bone analysis are as follows...

- Dr. Eisenberg was of the opinion that the fire pit in Avery's yard was the main burn pit

- Bones found in that pit contained fragments from every bone in Teresa's body from the neck down

- Three larger bones were found in a burn barrel owned by Avery's sister

- Portions of a tire(s) were used as an accelerant in BOTH the fire pit and a burn barrel located 20 feet from Avery's front door

- Portions of a tire(s) were found entwined with the bone fragments

- Mixed in with the bone fragments were screws, nails, wires, 5 clothing rivets from Teresa's denim jeans, teeth from a zipper, and ammunition/shell casings

- Bevelling in two skull fragments demonstrated that Teresa was shot once in the rear of the head and once in the side of the head

People certainly have the right to engage in fanatasy narratives, but the facts indicate that Teresa's clothing and her body were thrown into the same fire pit where a bonfire was set in the early evening of 10/31/05. Yard debris was thrown on top of Teresa's body and the steel tire belts literally melted around some of the bone fragments. Teresa's palm pilot, cell phone, and digital camera was tossed into a burn barrel in that same area. Teresa's personal belongings were then set on fire in that barrel.

Three larger bones were later placed in a burn barrel located across the road from Avery's residence. After the fire died down, a shovel found in the fire pit may have been used to break up Teresa's bones. IMO, all of this evidence points to Steven Avery as being the lone criminal agent in the DEATH of Teresa Halbach. I don't believe that Brenden Dassey took part in Teresa's murder, but I am convinced that he assisted his uncle in some form or fashion.

BLOOD/DNA: What is left out of the "there is no way they could clean everything" narrative is that Avery/Dassey (e.g., primarily Avery) had 5 days to clean two small areas. Avery's bedroom was extremely small and Teresa's upper body would have taken up a very small area of the garage floor. It's important to note that when Luminal was sprayed in an area close to where the bullet fragment was found, a 3-4 foot portion of that concrete floor glowed brightly. It was determined that the Luminal reacted to bleach on the garage floor. Upon his return home, Dassey's mother asks him how he got bleach on the front of his clothes and Dassey told her that he was helping his uncle clean the garage. Coincidence? I think not.

TERESA'S VEHICLE: You need to look at the pictures taken by Nicole Sturm and the forensics team. The car is obscured by pieces of plywood, tree branches, and a car seat. The license plates were also removed and were later found in another vehicle on the Avery compound. Just another in a long line of facts left out of the Netflix documentary. Avery's blood was not found in two places inside the LOCKED vehicle, but in six locations. Teresa's DNA was found in the back of the vehicle in the form of a bloody transfer stain from her hair. If the "real" perps wanted Avery to take the fall for the murder, why obscure the vehicle? Why not place it in plain sight?

MOTIVE: After Avery was placed in jail, two women came forward stating that Avery had raped them in 2004. The women did not know one another, yet both women stated that he threatened to kill their entire family if they reported the assault to the police. What motivates a sexual sadist to act upon his fantasies? Individuals who commit these heinous crimes are motivated by self-gratification.

HOOD LATCH: It's important to note that INSIDE Teresa's vehicle, there were 8 latent prints that did not have enough distinguishable characteristics to be sourced to a specific individual. Welcome to real world forensics. This isn't television, the movies, or a slanted documentary. There are no "should haves" in the world of forensics. Avery opened the hood of Teresa's vehicle in order to disable it. This effort resulted in his DNA being left on the latch, but not enough to produce distinguishable prints. In terms of the technician not wearing gloves, it would be highly unlikely that he wouldn't have left his own prints on the latch AND magically transfer Avery's skin cells on that same latch.

 

[HelpingHeart]

Like I said Murtagh - not saying he's 100% innocent & you could very well be right, but it still doesn't add up. There would be some DNA of hers in his home. Cleaning up or not. The cops were on the property before the 5th I thought asking him questions. Also, why would he not crush the car & clean her car more thoroughly? How was there time before Barb got home? I think it could be Steven's brothers or bro in law too. It just doesn't add up.

 

[HelpingHeart]

http://brobible.com/entertainment/a...ained-blood-evidence-making-murderer-garbage/