Zellner Tweets

[Safeguard]

Yes time will tell.

As of right now, this minute, there is no actual proof of any wrongdoing, framing, planting. Lots and lots of speculation that it had to have occurred. Lots of speculation pointing to anyone else killing TH. Many theories and twist & turns.

But proof?

As of right now, nothing (yet).

The supreme court will not listen to speculation or theories or whatifs. They are more binary: in essence, put up or shut up.

Yes. There is "proof of wrong doing". KK's news conference, Brendans, "confession", ect...( The list exhausting!). Lots and lots of proven "wrong doing". But yes...Time will tell.

 

[Madeleine74]

News conferences/press conferences with KK or anyone else are not part of SA's court record.

BD's 1 police interview that was thrown out (not all his interviews were thrown out, btw) are not part of SA's court record.

MaM is not part of SA's court record.

KK's sexting debacle in some later year is also not part of SA's court record.

Zellner's many tweets (those still existing and those deleted) are not part of SA's court record.

The judicial panel Zellner will face, if they choose to accept and consider her brief, will not care about any of the above.

SA has to prove his innocence to the supreme court. That's a tall hurdle and I look forward to seeing if Zellner & team can clear that hurdle.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

News conferences/press conferences with KK or anyone else are not part of SA's court record.

BD's 1 police interview that was thrown out (not all his interviews were thrown out, btw) are not part of SA's court record.

MaM is not part of SA's court record.

KK's sexting debacle in some later year is also not part of SA's court record.

Zellner's many tweets (those still existing and those deleted) are not part of SA's court record.

The judicial panel Zellner will face, if they choose to accept and consider her brief, will not care about any of the above.

SA has to prove his innocence to the supreme court. That's a tall hurdle and I look forward to seeing if Zellner & team can clear that hurdle.

While that is true, it doesn't mean we cannot discuss information that WE the public deem relevant. Last time I checked that same constitution gave us all free speech, so thank you for contributing your thoughts and opinions to the discussion. That is a sincere statement on my behalf, not being snarky.

 

[Safeguard]

While that is true, it doesn't mean we cannot discuss information that WE the public deem relevant. Last time I checked that same constitution gave us all free speech, so thank you for contributing your thoughts and opinions to the discussion. That is a sincere statement on my behalf, not being snarky.

BCA I admire your generous nature, and your ability to refrain from being "snarky" ( I will never get used to that word, I find it so fifth grade!). I am a firm believer that you get what you give, but I want to work on being more neutral about the MAM bashing posters. You set a fine example. Thank you.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

What does he have to lose, zerbert?

 

[missy1974]

I think the Kratz interview is part of SA's court record, pretty sure there were motions filed before the trial and shortly after that ridiculous press conference? I will say JMO because I'm too lazy to look atm lol

BD's involuntary confession, although it was not part of SA's trial, Zellner seems to think that it will play a part in the process, we will see. IMO Brendan's confession was based off of a theory, they got him to say what they needed him to say, and then used that theory against SA IMO And yes, only 1 of his interviews were thrown out (it was the only one played for the jury I think). I think it would be unlikely that any information obtained from Brendan during his earlier one's would be able to be used as they are even more inconsistent than what the evidence showed (example... her tied to the seat of the RAV4 and being stabbed and the knife was under the seat) And even Judge Duffin addresses the Feb 27th interview where Fassbender used a paternalistic approach, and Wiegert as well.

 

[RANCH]

News conferences/press conferences with KK or anyone else are not part of SA's court record.

BD's 1 police interview that was thrown out (not all his interviews were thrown out, btw) are not part of SA's court record.

MaM is not part of SA's court record.

KK's sexting debacle in some later year is also not part of SA's court record.

Zellner's many tweets (those still existing and those deleted) are not part of SA's court record.

The judicial panel Zellner will face, if they choose to accept and consider her brief, will not care about any of the above.

SA has to prove his innocence to the supreme court. That's a tall hurdle and I look forward to seeing if Zellner & team can clear that hurdle.

You make some excellent points. I'm waiting for Zellner to come up with some conclusive evidence showing LE planted evidence. Maybe all of the testing she wants to do will provide that evidence. We will see. JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

You make some excellent points. I'm waiting for Zellner to come up with some conclusive evidence showing LE planted evidence. Maybe all of the testing she wants to do will provide that evidence. We will see. JMO

I am anxious to see what Zellner comes up with. I admired her greatly for her work in the Ryan Ferguson case. Eye witness recants, absolutely zero forensic link between the victim & scene to either of the 2 convicted. Of course had Charles Erickson not decided that he must have been involved in the murder since he couldn't remember what he did that night after leaving the bar, none of what happened to Ryan would have happened in the first place since there really was no link except for the confession and false eyewitnesses.

This case is much different: no eyewitness to the crime (well none if you ignore everything Brendan told), forensic evidence connects SA to the victim's vehicle exists, victim's remains on his property, victim's vehicle on the property, victim's belongings burned on the property, victim had a confirmed appointment that brought her face to face with SA. Vastly different.

 

[missy1974]

The cases are different Madeleine, but the process is similar, right? Did you follow the Ferguson case from the beginning? I am just wondering how long it took. I did watch Dream Killer a few months ago, but I can't remember the time frames. I think regardless of the specifics of the case, it is a long process, and even if Zellner can finish the testing in 60 days and file a brief, it is actually way sooner than I ever thought it would be.

Although you have a differing opinion about the case as a whole, I appreciate that you understand and have a respect for her work. Does her confidence in this case at this point sway your opinion at all? Even just a tiny teeny wittle bit? LOL

 

[Karinna]

Will the appellate court or supreme court be watching MaM to decide the outcome of the appeal?

Will the appellate court or supreme court consider the sexting shenanigans of KK to determine an outcome in the appeal?

Did the appellate court find the prosecutor to be unscrupulous and overturn SA's conviction?

The answer to all those questions is: no.

What errors were made during the trial by the trial judge?

What evidence shows (not *might eventually show*) that SA is innocent? (The legal burden is on him now to prove that).

That's what matters. Not cutesy tweets and insinuations.

Show the evidence that proves planting. Show the evidence that proves framing. Show the evidence that proves innocence (since that is now the legal burden on the convicted).

Appeal? What Appeal? There isn't going to be an appeal from my understanding? All the appeals are done. What K. Zellner is doing is not an appeal. She is going to either have the whole conviction quashed or a retrial is what i have read. She has stated that she has good grounds for doing so. She even made comment outside the Manitowoc court house after her submission of her motions to stop with the speculating or something to that effect as she was walking to her vehicle to leave.

 

[shadowraiths]

Hi all, just want to remind everyone. People will have varying views, regardless of what case they may be following. This is the nature of being human. And, this is especially so in crime forums, where cases can stretch for... well... decades or more (i.e., JBR, West Memphis Three, etcetera). Importantly, it is how we grow and learn.

Also, we all communicate in different ways, and given forums such as these rely upon the written word, things can easily get lost in translation. Let's try to remember than and avoid taking other posters' comments personally.

As for the gman blog? I have been following that blog for quite some time. And while his opinion appears to be largely based upon the series, as opposed to actually reading the court docs, imho, he does shed light with regard to investigative process, which I think is invaluable in and of itself. In other words, if we can all remember that his blog is still an opinion, I think it's a great addition to this discussion.

 

[shadowraiths]

Although you have a differing opinion about the case as a whole, I appreciate that you understand and have a respect for her work. Does her confidence in this case at this point sway your opinion at all? Even just a tiny teeny wittle bit? LOL

While I realize you addressed this to Madeleine, I have a burning desire to answer, also!

For me, Zellner's taunting tweets... or rather the tweet and delete bit... as well as her interviews, and seeming over-confidence, leave a metaphorical bad taste in my mouth, so to speak. She comes across as if this is more of a PR campaign as opposed to someone who is truly seeking justice.

Add to the above, I have still yet to see anything that she's put forward thus far that categorically exonerates SA of the murder.

 

[Karinna]

You make some excellent points. I'm waiting for Zellner to come up with some conclusive evidence showing LE planted evidence. Maybe all of the testing she wants to do will provide that evidence. We will see. JMO

That's it now a waiting game until we know further.

 

[Karinna]

Hi all, just want to remind everyone. People will have varying views, regardless of what case they may be following. This is the nature of being human. And, this is especially so in crime forums, where cases can stretch for... well... decades or more (i.e., JBR, West Memphis Three, etcetera). Importantly, it is how we grow and learn.

Also, we all communicate in different ways, and given forums such as these rely upon the written word, things can easily get lost in translation. Let's try to remember than and avoid taking other posters' comments personally.

As for the gman blog? I have been following that blog for quite some time. And while his opinion appears to be largely based upon the series, as opposed to actually reading the court docs, imho, he does shed light with regard to investigative process, which I think is invaluable in and of itself. In other words, if we can all remember that his blog is still an opinion, I think it's a great addition to this discussion.

Totally agree. None of us can know everything in a case because we don't have access to all that info., only what is released to the public.
Everyone on a forum such as this brings something to the table, and there are lots of great sleuthers here with tons of research on any given case.
And thanks to whom posted the link to that blog you mention. I started reading it and find his take on things very interesting with his expertise in the investigative process.

 

[Madeleine74]

My admiration for Zellner's work in the Ferguson case doesn't tell me anything about the evidence in the Avery case. Without looking at anything Zellner did, I could see there was no evidence linking Ryan Ferguson to that murder and it was clear Charles Erickson's strange dreams and compulsion to confess to committing that murder was at the heart of the case.

If there is evidence that proves SA's innocence I'm ready to see it. If Zellner can prove that to the court then more power to her! Reading the trial transcripts and looking at the evidence in the Avery case, I would have voted the same way the jury did. I won't predict in advance whether Zellner will or will not succeed, because I certainly don't and can't know.

 

[RANCH]

My admiration for Zellner's work in the Ferguson case doesn't tell me anything about the evidence in the Avery case. Without looking at anything Zellner did, I could see there was no evidence linking Ryan Ferguson to that murder and it was clear Charles Erickson's strange dreams and compulsion to confess to committing that murder was at the heart of the case.

If there is evidence that proves SA's innocence I'm ready to see it. If Zellner can prove that to the court then more power to her! Reading the trial transcripts and looking at the evidence in the Avery case, I would have voted the same way the jury did. I won't predict in advance whether Zellner will or will not succeed, because I certainly don't and can't know.

It seems like some feel that Zellner already has enough evidence to succeed. I'm not so sure about that. JMO

 

[CoolJ]

While I realize you addressed this to Madeleine, I have a burning desire to answer, also!

For me, Zellner's taunting tweets... or rather the tweet and delete bit... as well as her interviews, and seeming over-confidence, leave a metaphorical bad taste in my mouth, so to speak. She comes across as if this is more of a PR campaign as opposed to someone who is truly seeking justice.

Add to the above, I have still yet to see anything that she's put forward thus far that categorically exonerates SA of the murder.

It would appear from following this case and the cases of of others wrongfully convicted, that the only way someone with minimal resources can create enough interest in their cause is through a PR type campaign. Otherwise nobody will listen and you will rot away in a cell for a crime you did not commit. Zellner knows what she is doing. JMO

 

[dexter75]

Yes. There is "proof of wrong doing". KK's news conference, Brendans, "confession", ect...( The list exhausting!). Lots and lots of proven "wrong doing". But yes...Time will tell.

:goodpost:

 

[dexter75]

News conferences/press conferences with KK or anyone else are not part of SA's court record.

BD's 1 police interview that was thrown out (not all his interviews were thrown out, btw) are not part of SA's court record.

MaM is not part of SA's court record.

KK's sexting debacle in some later year is also not part of SA's court record.

Zellner's many tweets (those still existing and those deleted) are not part of SA's court record.

The judicial panel Zellner will face, if they choose to accept and consider her brief, will not care about any of the above.

SA has to prove his innocence to the supreme court. That's a tall hurdle and I look forward to seeing if Zellner & team can clear that hurdle.

I look forward to seeing if they can, too

 

[missy1974]

While I realize you addressed this to Madeleine, I have a burning desire to answer, also!

For me, Zellner's taunting tweets... or rather the tweet and delete bit... as well as her interviews, and seeming over-confidence, leave a metaphorical bad taste in my mouth, so to speak. She comes across as if this is more of a PR campaign as opposed to someone who is truly seeking justice.

Add to the above, I have still yet to see anything that she's put forward thus far that categorically exonerates SA of the murder.

I get the PR thing, and I can understand your thinking, but only to a point. With her history, I think it's pretty harsh to say that is the only reason she is doing it. She is putting her reputation on the line, and her track record on the line.... for SA? JMO but I don't buy that. After the show was released, it was nuts on social media back in January and for a few months following.... I think she just fed the masses, and the masses were on social media discussing the case. This story didn't really gain much steam on a national level.... I wonder if it had, would we have heard more interviews on tv from her? This story is really only playing out online... unless I'm online too much to notice it on the national media stations LOL