Steven Avery: Guilty of Teresa Halbach's Murder?

[Madeleine74]

I think if one did not want to be caught, they would bury a body deep in the woods or even burn the body in its vehicle.

I just find it hard to believe he burnt her remains on his property.

People do what they're used to doing. Burning stuff is what Avery is used to doing. He knows burning will reduce something down to bits and ashes.

 

[Sinsaint]

When taking the framing aspect into account it makes no sense to me they would remove all of Theresa's DNA from it. Why would they do that? It was her key after all. All they would have to do is put his DNA on top of it showing he was the last one to touch it. The forensic experts have said in past cases that the last one to touch an item without gloves will usually result in the strongest DNA profile depending on the type of surface of the item. They have specifically mentioned sweat too and how it can leave a DNA profile when skin cells fluff off along with the dripping sweat. If the DNA found on the key came from his sweaty hand then I can see how it would remove DNA belonging to Theresa.

Ugh... He isn't sweating bleach. His sweaty hands wouldn't wash away her DNA. If anything there would have been a mixture of both Avery and Halbach DNA. No one had a reason to remove only Halbach's DNA. The key itself, with the ability to unlock and turn her SUV is the only link needed to connect that key to Halbach. We don't need her DNA to make that connection. DNA is one of those things that can't be detected with the naked eye. It's not like each and every person leaves a unique color DNA behind that can be seen with the naked eye. You can't detect only a certain cell type and wipe away only that DNA. Whoever cleaned Halbach's DNA off the key material did so while removing their own DNA. Imagine three black cats all sleeping in the same bed. Can you detect and clean only the hair from one particular black cat or is it more likely you just remove every black hair from all three cats?

I have never heard of any case showing only skin cells or sweat can be planted. How can that happen.. when as you say... you cant even see skin cells visually with the naked eye? It seems to me this kind of DNA is transferred due to the DNA being wet at the time of contact such as saliva, sweat, or sperm then probably skin cells would be present.

DNA is a relatively new thing. And it actually isn't transferred being wet only. Watch a few crime shows. When a lab technician checks for DNA on fibers, hard surfaces, etc. they take a DRY q-tip and rub the surface. This dry rubbing transfers the DNA cells from the tested surface to the cotton tip. Anything that has rubbed up against you, wet or dry, has the ability to have your skin cells on it. If that item is then rubbed on something else, those cells can then transfer to that item.

I do believe Avery was sweating profusely that day. Didn't one of the witnesses who saw him say he was sweaty? He either touched the hood latch with his sweaty hand or his head or hair was wet with sweat when he was under the hood removing her battery cable imo and it brushed up against the hood latch. Skin cells would surely be present. imo

Kratz was the guy who theorized Avery was all sweaty. All part of his wet dream fantasy of the crime IMO. The technician who processed Avery's car and it's belongings testified he never changed gloves from Avery's vehicle to Halbach's. Imagine dipping your fingers on an ink pad and then touching everything in sight. All those black smudges you leave behind on everything you touch are cells. Dip your fingers on an Avery DNA ink pad and you'll end up with the same result, minus all the tell tale black smudges.

For him to be innocent every piece of forensic evidence linking him to the crime would have had to be planted. All of the witnesses would have to be lying including his own family. I just find that very illogical.

Actually, this is a case very lacking in forensic evidence.

Also his defense attorneys tried to dispute the FBI testing where it showed it had no additive in the blood taken from the crime scene. They tried to say it was unreliable yet in the OJ murder case way back in the early 90s this very same test was done and admitted into court by the presiding Judge. If Barry Sheck didn't believe the test was reliable he would have said so way back then and he is an expert in this field. So it seems this same kind of testing has been done for many years now. I bet there are other cases too where the Judge allowed the testing results to be entered at trial since many DTs claim the police framed their client and planted evidence.

You're actually incorrect. A man on death row in California had an EDTA test done on a sample of blood found on his t-shirt. The test was positive for the chemical but it was ignored by the appeals court. A rather harsh dissenting opinion from one of the judges spelled it out though. He was framed. The difference between O.J. And the above guy is that the blood in question was planted almost immediately after being drawn.

Avery's stored blood was almost ten years old. There are no studies that would show how long blood could be stored with the preservative remaining in it's original form. Would it break down? Would it dissipate? Another factor is how sensative is the test? Does it pick up 1 part per thousand or 1 part per million? Think of the test in terms of a pregnancy test. The egg implanted into the woman two days ago. Her body starts creating HCG but it's a very low rate. The doctor does a blood and urine test and both produce negative results. The woman is, in fact, pregnant but the tests weren't sensative enough to detect the hormones.

Also they tried to make a big deal out of the vial having a puncture hole in the stopper yet never thinking about how the blood would get into the vial in the first place. What did they think that it was poured in somehow? Surely they could have asked an expert or someone who does blood work on patients to find out that simple answer?

IMO

My concern isn't the hole. My concern is a box that was sealed shut after the initial blood draw. That seal was broken by the lab who tested the blood in 1996. The vial and box were then resealed by the lab in 1996. There is no indication the blood was ever viewed by anyone after that point. So who opened it back up after that and for what purpose?

 

[Murtagh21]

ELLE: After twice calling Halbach's employer using Star 67, he called a 3rd time at 4:35 PM stating that Teresa had not shown up for the photography appointment. Avery's crude attempt at creating an alibi only lasted a few days. For whatever reason, he decided to abandon this concocted story and admitted to a local news reporter that Teresa DID show up for the appointment. This television interview was shown on the Netflix documentary.

SINSAINT: The presence of Avery's DNA on the victim's key is one of many issues in this case where logic spoils it for those who embrace the conspiracy narrative. If law enforcement officers are going to go to the trouble of obtaining a key/code to the Clerk's Office, retrieve Avery's blood without leaving traces of EDTA, and somehow gain access to the victim's vehicle before it is found by Pam Sturm, why not take full advantage of this massive effort by simply depositing a minute amount of blood on the key? Why this random strategy of planting blood in some locations and planting Touch DNA in other places?

Kratz did NOT create the scenario where Avery was sweaty. This reference was presented by conspiracy theorists favorite tortured innocent, Brenden Dassey. Hate to break it to ya, but the physical evidence in this case was quite strong and resulted in the conviction of Steven Avery. The only measuring stick for the strength of the prosecution's case is the ultimate result. The results tell you all you need to know about the inculpatory nature of the evidence in this case.

If one wishes to compare cases, the forensic evidence collected in the Avery case is stronger than the combined evidence collected in the Wayne Williams, Scott Peterson, Casey Anthony, and Robert Blake murder cases. IMO, you could have convicted 5 perps on the evidence collected in the Avery case.

 

[Sustained]

ELLE: After twice calling Halbach's employer using Star 67, he called a 3rd time at 4:35 PM stating that Teresa had not shown up for the photography appointment. Avery's crude attempt at creating an alibi only lasted a few days. For whatever reason, he decided to abandon this concocted story and admitted to a local news reporter that Teresa DID show up for the appointment. This television interview was shown on the Netflix documentary.

SINSAINT: The presence of Avery's DNA on the victim's key is one of many issues in this case where logic spoils it for those who embrace the conspiracy narrative. If law enforcement officers are going to go to the trouble of obtaining a key/code to the Clerk's Office, retrieve Avery's blood without leaving traces of EDTA, and somehow gain access to the victim's vehicle before it is found by Pam Sturm, why not take full advantage of this massive effort by simply depositing a minute amount of blood on the key? Why this random strategy of planting blood in some locations and planting Touch DNA in other places?

Kratz did NOT create the scenario where Avery was sweaty. This reference was presented by conspiracy theorists favorite tortured innocent, Brenden Dassey. Hate to break it to ya, but the physical evidence in this case was quite strong and resulted in the conviction of Steven Avery. The only measuring stick for the strength of the prosecution's case is the ultimate result. The results tell you all you need to know about the inculpatory nature of the evidence in this case.

Please provide a link/evidence/anything where SA stated Teresa had not shown up for the photography appointment and that's why he called at 4:35.

 

[Murtagh21]

SUSTAINED: Here ya go. Reason #7.

http://www.thewrap.com/making-a-murderer-prosecutor-ken-kratz-steven-avery-9-reasons-guilty/

This weekend, I will go through the trial transcripts in order to verify whether Kratz covered this specific issue at trial.

 

[lghtnshdw]

I do not believe he did it - Mainly because I don't think he would have been able to clean up the blood evidence. That is the one over arching question - - - - - where is the blood? You don't stab someone in the stomach, cut their throat, then have to strangle them without having some blood somewhere - not on the mattress - not in the cement crack in the garage - I'm hearing only the back of the RAV4 where she wasn't they say!! Something VERY fishy here. And while he is apparently not a nice guy, we hear Teresa's brother talk about how Avery got out of prison the first time and he thinks that's going to happen again - let's remember he wasn't guilty the first time.

 

[lghtnshdw]

Kratz was the only person I heard say he was sweaty....as he spewed the word out of his mouth...that man by the way relieved of his duty after sexual harassment and sexting girls. So if this came from Brenden, when exactly was that? Is that in the Making a Murderer series? Or do you have some other documentation?

 

[Sustained]

SUSTAINED: Here ya go. Reason #7.

http://www.thewrap.com/making-a-murderer-prosecutor-ken-kratz-steven-avery-9-reasons-guilty/

This weekend, I will go through the trial transcripts in order to verify whether Kratz covered this specific issue at trial.

Please provide an actual transcript from an interrogation or the trial to confirm this ... thanks.

 

[Murtagh21]

SUSTAINED: So much for taking a weekend break. LOL. Trial transcripts from Day 12 demonstrate that Steven Avery called Teresa Halbach at 4:35 PM on 10/31/05. The call was answered and the duration of the call was 13 seconds. No cell tower was associated with that particular call which indicates that the duration of the call was spent in voice mail. Assuming the cell phone is destroyed prior to the call being made, the only way to retrieve that voice mail message is by someone calling on a land line, and using/accessing messages through a password.

It appears that it was impossible to know the content of Avery's message to Halbach, but Kratz argues that since the call was made after Halbach's phone had been destroyed in Avery's burn barrel, logic dictates that Avery called Halbach's cell number in order to construct an alibi. I agree that this narrative makes the most sense, especially when compared to the intimations by Buting that some of Halbach's voice mail messages were deleted by her ex-boyfriend. It's important to note that Blaine Dassey noticed flames coming out of his uncle's burn barrel at 3:46 PM.

 

[Juniorsleuther]

I don't even think he called her phone for a alibi I think he called her phone to hear her voice on the machine. I think he had killed Teresa by this point and was staring at her lifeless body and called to hear her voice. SA had a sick obsession with her IMO. I am mearly speculating but that is all we can do with regards to that call. I don't think SA was smart enough, I honestly think he was just full of himself, and his past wrongful conviction was his way out! I truly think he felt in touchable! That's why he was so lazy with the evidence! Now I know people keep screaming why is there no blood ??? Because SA did not kill TH at the sight Kratz and the rest of the prosecution said !! I believe he lured her out in the salvage yard! Raped her stabbed her shot her. Why he brought the charred remains back to his fire pit is beyond me... That's if they were even brought back or even burned away from that fire pit at his house. They don't even know the story because Brandon is not a witness, only to a burnt body laying in a fire pit... IMO. But brandan in his interviews that is when he is talking and they are not puttin words in his mouth says Stephen Called around 630-700 to come to the Bon fire ! SA had a lot of time at this point to do what ever he was doing IMO

 

[Sustained]

SUSTAINED: So much for taking a weekend break. LOL. Trial transcripts from Day 12 demonstrate that Steven Avery called Teresa Halbach at 4:35 PM on 10/31/05. The call was answered and the duration of the call was 13 seconds. No cell tower was associated with that particular call which indicates that the duration of the call was spent in voice mail. Assuming the cell phone is destroyed prior to the call being made, the only way to retrieve that voice mail message is by someone calling on a land line, and using/accessing messages through a password.

It appears that it was impossible to know the content of Avery's message to Halbach, but Kratz argues that since the call was made after Halbach's phone had been destroyed in Avery's burn barrel, logic dictates that Avery called Halbach's cell number in order to construct an alibi. I agree that this narrative makes the most sense, especially when compared to the intimations by Buting that some of Halbach's voice mail messages were deleted by her ex-boyfriend. It's important to note that Blaine Dassey noticed flames coming out of his uncle's burn barrel at 3:46 PM.

IMO, the Kratz theory is just that - a theory. TH's cell phone might have been turned off or the battery dead. Is there a transcript of Blaine telling investigators about the 3:46 PM sighting ?

EDIT - Found the trial transcript of Blaine D. talking about the 3:46 burn barrel sighting.

I'm not sure how calling TH's cell at 4:35 PM and getting VM would construct an alibi ? And as far as I know, there is no recorded proof of SA telling anyone that TH did not show for the appointment.

 

[iluvmua]

just my take on this...... but I think he was attracted to her and when she rebuffed his advances that is when he decided to kill her. jmo

SA is right where he belongs. the Netflix documentary left out so many things that points to him being guilty of killing TH.

IMO...... SA talked BD into this horrific crime. If SA was going down, then someone else was going down with him.

JMO

 

[Juniorsleuther]

just my take on this...... but I think he was attracted to her and when she rebuffed his advances that is when he decided to kill her. jmo

SA is right where he belongs. the Netflix documentary left out so many things that points to him being guilty of killing TH.

IMO...... SA talked BD into this horrific crime. If SA was going down, then someone else was going down with him.

JMO

Yes I believe your right on he money about this I share the same opinion! How do you feel about the phone call made at around 430? Something just came to me about it, I think he called to hear her voice on the answering machine ! He was obsessed with her and I quite think he fantasized about his possible relationship with her, and although she was dead at this point I truly feel he called to hear her voice the less horrific voice he just finished hearing! Rejection was why SA killed TH

 

[HelpingHeart]

Hi. I didn't read through everything, but I always wondered if she could have committed suicide or murdered by someone else (not the police). Then a theory by a psychic (don't really believe what they say but her "vision" seemed to make sense). But then the brother/police found her body and were worried what the religious family would think, as well as maybe need the life insurance money (not approved if suicide occurred). So someone moved it to Steven's property to frame him/cover up what really happened to Teresa?? The cops win (don't have to look stupid or pay Steven) & the family can still get her insurance money & not let the world know she took her life (her videos were strange). I feel bad even saying this could be an option because I feel for this girl, just something to have as a theory. Hope it wasn't the case.

I just also know that Steven needs a new trial & there was not enough evidence. It all seemed planted & doesn't add up:

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- The "psychic" said that she shot herself & then when discovered someone put her in her car (the back) to take to a crematorium. Just saying what she said, which does make you wonder... There was also 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.

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.

 

[Murtagh21]

From everything I've read, the alibi theory/narrative is predicated on the prosecution's timeline. Bobby Dassey sees Teresa taking pictures at his uncle's residence at 2:30 PM, he takes a shower, and then sees Teresa and his uncle walking towards his uncle's residence between 2:40-2:45 PM. Phone records demonstrate that after 2:41 PM, Teresa's phone is never used again. Blaine Dassey sees his uncle place a plastic bag into a burn barrel, he subsquently sees fire coming from inside the barrel at 3:46 PM, and he doesn't see Teresa's vehicle on the premises. Avery then calls Teresa's cell phone at 4:35 PM.

The prosecution postulates that if Teresa was alive between the hours of 2:42 PM and 3:46 PM, she would have had her cell phone with her and she would have used it in some form or fashion. The fact she had not used her phone by 4:34 PM raises the question as to Avery's rationale for leaving a 13 second voice mail message? If Avery wanted to schedule another appointment, why not broach the subject with Teresa when she was on his property? I believe he felt safe calling her cell phone two hours after she arrived at his property. Avery had already destroyed the cell phone in his burn barrel, so he knew that law enforcement could never prove the context of his voice mail message.

IMO, Avery initially thought he could use this 4:35 call as a way of distancing himself from Teresa. For whatever reason, he decided not to mention the 4:35 call to investigators and he went with the following narrative... She came to my property, she took pictures of the van, she give me an Auto Trader magazine/bill of sale, and then she drove away a little while later. Avery had to think fast because he had no idea when Teresa would be reported missing. Ergo, the destruction of her body/personal belongings, cleaning the garage with bleach, and moving/obscuring her vehicle in a matter of hours.

 

[Sustained]

From everything I've read, the alibi theory/narrative is predicated on the prosecution's timeline. Bobby Dassey sees Teresa taking pictures at his uncle's residence at 2:30 PM, he takes a shower, and then sees Teresa and his uncle walking towards his uncle's residence between 2:40-2:45 PM. Phone records demonstrate that after 2:41 PM, Teresa's phone is never used again. Blaine Dassey sees his uncle place a plastic bag into a burn barrel, he subsquently sees fire coming from inside the barrel at 3:46 PM, and he doesn't see Teresa's vehicle on the premises. Avery then calls Teresa's cell phone at 4:35 PM.

The prosecution postulates that if Teresa was alive between the hours of 2:42 PM and 3:46 PM, she would have had her cell phone with her and she would have used it in some form or fashion. The fact she had not used her phone by 4:34 PM raises the question as to Avery's rationale for leaving a 13 second voice mail message? If Avery wanted to schedule another appointment, why not broach the subject with Teresa when she was on his property? I believe he felt safe calling her cell phone two hours after she arrived at his property. Avery had already destroyed the cell phone in his burn barrel, so he knew that law enforcement could never prove the context of his voice mail message.

IMO, Avery initially thought he could use this 4:35 call as a way of distancing himself from Teresa. For whatever reason, he decided not to mention the 4:35 call to investigators and he went with the following narrative... She came to my property, she took pictures of the van, she give me an Auto Trader magazine/bill of sale, and then she drove away a little while later. Avery had to think fast because he had no idea when Teresa would be reported missing. Ergo, the destruction of her body/personal belongings, cleaning the garage with bleach, and moving/obscuring her vehicle in a matter of hours.

To believe your theory, you have to believe BoD's statements to police. Both Blaine and Brendan said that BoD was sleeping when they arrived home @ 3:45 or so. So then you'd have to believe that he showered and went back to bed for awhile and not hunting as he said.

Also, where did Blaine come up with the 3:46 PM time ? I find it hard to believe he was that precise unless prompted by investigators.

As for the 4:35 call, SA said that his mom brought the mail down thatday and she may have reminded him about the loader. IIRC, Blaine testified that he and Brendan did not get the mail that day. That might have prompted the return call to TH ...

 

[HelpingHeart]

Doesn't make sense, sorry. Read my post above. The bus driver saw her at 3:30. Barb was home by 5pm. Doesn't add up.

 

[Sinsaint]

From everything I've read, the alibi theory/narrative is predicated on the prosecution's timeline. Bobby Dassey sees Teresa taking pictures at his uncle's residence at 2:30 PM, he takes a shower, and then sees Teresa and his uncle walking towards his uncle's residence between 2:40-2:45 PM. Phone records demonstrate that after 2:41 PM, Teresa's phone is never used again. Blaine Dassey sees his uncle place a plastic bag into a burn barrel, he subsquently sees fire coming from inside the barrel at 3:46 PM, and he doesn't see Teresa's vehicle on the premises. Avery then calls Teresa's cell phone at 4:35 PM.

The prosecution postulates that if Teresa was alive between the hours of 2:42 PM and 3:46 PM, she would have had her cell phone with her and she would have used it in some form or fashion. The fact she had not used her phone by 4:34 PM raises the question as to Avery's rationale for leaving a 13 second voice mail message? If Avery wanted to schedule another appointment, why not broach the subject with Teresa when she was on his property? I believe he felt safe calling her cell phone two hours after she arrived at his property. Avery had already destroyed the cell phone in his burn barrel, so he knew that law enforcement could never prove the context of his voice mail message.

IMO, Avery initially thought he could use this 4:35 call as a way of distancing himself from Teresa. For whatever reason, he decided not to mention the 4:35 call to investigators and he went with the following narrative... She came to my property, she took pictures of the van, she give me an Auto Trader magazine/bill of sale, and then she drove away a little while later. Avery had to think fast because he had no idea when Teresa would be reported missing. Ergo, the destruction of her body/personal belongings, cleaning the garage with bleach, and moving/obscuring her vehicle in a matter of hours.

I keep coming back to the same question... How did Avery leave any voicemail message on Halbach's phone when his phone bill reflects his call lasted 0 seconds?

 

[Sinsaint]

Yes I believe your right on he money about this I share the same opinion! How do you feel about the phone call made at around 430? Something just came to me about it, I think he called to hear her voice on the answering machine ! He was obsessed with her and I quite think he fantasized about his possible relationship with her, and although she was dead at this point I truly feel he called to hear her voice the less horrific voice he just finished hearing! Rejection was why SA killed TH

It was a 0 second phone call on his end which means that theory isn't based on fact.

 

[Safeguard]

There is no evidence, at all, that SA was "obsessed" with TH. He couldn't even remember her name, when he called to scedual that apointment.