For Those Who Do Not Think Avery was Framed & Evidence Planted - Discuss

[CoolJ]

Limaes,

The other item I didn't comment on, because I forgot, is the revelation that SA not only cleaned his carpets, he said he did this cleaning on or about Oct 31, he and Jodi discussed cleaning the carpet cleaning machine(!?) and then SA took back the machine and got (purchased/rented/exchanged?) that machine he used to clean his carpets for a new carpet cleaning machine, before anyone even reported that TH was missing? And SA spoke of this himself on a phone call to Jodi (Jodi in jail) which was recorded because all jails record phone calls.

Wow.

That, IMHO, is huge.

Now how did police manage to get SA to coincidentally clean his carpets around the time TH disappeared and talk on the phone to his jailed girlfriend about cleaning the carpets, before police were ever notified there was a missing person, TH?

Wow, huge! Cause we all know carpet cleaner will make dna and blood undetectable. Don't think so. None of this is furthering the Kratz narrative. Only making it less believable. I am interested in ideas and evidence that could disprove the planting and framing narrative but haven't seen or read anything in 440 posts. That leads me to believe there isnt anything. JMO

 

[Limaes]

Limaes,

The other item I didn't comment on, because I forgot, is the revelation that SA not only cleaned his carpets, he said he did this cleaning on or about Oct 31, he and Jodi discussed cleaning the carpet cleaning machine(!?) and then SA took back the machine and got (purchased/rented/exchanged?) that machine he used to clean his carpets for a new carpet cleaning machine, before anyone even reported that TH was missing? And SA spoke of this himself on a phone call to Jodi (Jodi in jail) which was recorded because all jails record phone calls.

Wow.

That, IMHO, is huge.

Now how did police manage to get SA to coincidentally clean his carpets around the time TH disappeared and talk on the phone to his jailed girlfriend about cleaning the carpets, before police were ever notified there was a missing person, TH?

It is huge. I think if the recording ever becomes publically available, his more open-minded supporters will desert him.

One of the radio announcers makes a sensible point about people listening, or reading, to the other side of the story. If one is really after the truth, they would do so. We've had to put up with SA's side for over a year now.

At the end of the day, most of the info coming out now was either not needed at trial, was considered prejudicial, or investigators didn't have it at the time and SA's supporters all over the internet are getting into a huff. The most important pieces of evidence have always been known. SA actively bled in Teresa's vehicle. This is a fact and it is bizarre that anyone could believe any different without seeing even a miniscule piece of proof.

JMO

BTW...the hacksaw blade brings a sickening thought and he also said that SA had rearranged the furniture in his room when cleaning the carpet.

 

[Madeleine74]

One of the radio announcers makes a sensible point about people listening, or reading, to the other side of the story. If one is really after the truth, they would do so. We've had to put up with SA's side for over a year now.

At the end of the day, most of the info coming out now was either not needed at trial, was considered prejudicial, or investigators didn't have it at the time and SA's supporters all over the internet are getting into a huff. The most important pieces of evidence have always been known. SA actively bled in Teresa's vehicle. This is a fact and it is bizarre that anyone could believe any different without seeing even a miniscule piece of proof.

Rational objectivity and a search for and interest in the truth means that all evidence is considered even when or if evidence emerges that is contrary to what one wants or believes. Someone irrational is incapable of objectivity.

There should be a demand for objective proof of criminal activity of those being accused of planting, framing, conspiracy, falsifying evidence. But that hasn't happened, and a willful disregard for requiring evidence and proof illustrates the truth is not really wanted.

In that fire pit, under a layer of ash, dirt, and fire remnants was found several tools, including a hammer, shovel, hacksaw blade. Metal items were found (piece of zipper, Daisy Fuentes rivet, possible grommet), small pieces human bones were found entwined in the remnants of steel belt tires. There's nothing innocent about that.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Rational objectivity and a search for and interest in the truth means that all evidence is considered even when or if evidence emerges that is contrary to what one wants or believes. Someone irrational is incapable of objectivity.

There should be a demand for objective proof of criminal activity of those being accused of planting, framing, conspiracy, falsifying evidence. But that hasn't happened, and a willful disregard for requiring evidence and proof illustrates the truth is not really wanted.

In that fire pit, under a layer of ash, dirt, and fire remnants was found several tools, including a hammer, shovel, hacksaw blade. Metal items were found (piece of zipper, Daisy Fuentes rivet, possible grommet), small pieces human bones were found entwined in the remnants of steel belt tires. There's nothing innocent about that.

I wonder why someone would put metal tools in a fire. It wouldn't destroy them. Besides, if you didn't need them anymore and wanted to get rid of them you scrap the metal out for recycling.

What it would do is destroy any forensic evidence that may have been on them. JMO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Not sure that "And I think I found....some other metal grommets" is hardly compelling proof of anything, IMO. Actual evidence would have been presented at trial. The prosecution team doesn't get to go back and make stuff up after the fact, IMO.

Actual evidence. Yes.

That's what I'm waiting to see. Actual evidence that Avery was framed and evidence planted.

Tweets about having evidence is not actual evidence. JMO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I have a question.

If LE collects evidence during an investigation of a crime and the prosecution doesn't present every single bit of it to the jury at trial, does that mean the evidence that wasn't presented to the jury is not valid evidence simply because the jury never saw it?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Limaes,

The other item I didn't comment on, because I forgot, is the revelation that SA not only cleaned his carpets, he said he did this cleaning on or about Oct 31, he and Jodi discussed cleaning the carpet cleaning machine(!?) and then SA took back the machine and got (purchased/rented/exchanged?) that machine he used to clean his carpets for a new carpet cleaning machine, before anyone even reported that TH was missing? And SA spoke of this himself on a phone call to Jodi (Jodi in jail) which was recorded because all jails record phone calls.

Wow.

That, IMHO, is huge.

Now how did police manage to get SA to coincidentally clean his carpets around the time TH disappeared and talk on the phone to his jailed girlfriend about cleaning the carpets, before police were ever notified there was a missing person, TH?

I think the most important thing to consider when someone takes measures to clean a crime scene is the obvious fact that they are trying to conceal evidence of their wrong doing.

The fact that those measures are not the best or even if it's impossible to completely erase evidence doesn't mean that attempts to do so by the defendant are meaningless.

The exchanging of the carpet cleaning machine reinforces the notion that Avery was trying to remove evidence from his property.
JMO

 

[CoolJ]

I think the most important thing to consider when someone takes measures to clean a crime scene is the obvious fact that they are trying to conceal evidence of their wrong doing.

The fact that those measures are not the best or even if it's impossible to completely erase evidence doesn't mean that attempts to do so by the defendant are meaningless.

The exchanging of the carpet cleaning machine reinforces the notion that Avery was trying to remove evidence from his property.
JMO

Has anybody's ever heard this recorded phone call?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Nobody is being bullied. That is silly. And this thread isn't about Avery's innocence it is about whether he was framed and evidence planted according to the OP.

I am here to consider both sides. When doing that sometimes you have to point out what doesn't make sense. IMO, that is how you get to the truth.

Why is this the thread to consider both sides when it's for those who have taken the position that Avery was not framed and evidence was not planted?

 

[dexter75]

Has anybody's ever heard this recorded phone call?

That is HUGE! Cleaning your carpets! And then saying " yes, I cleaned my carpets " on whichever day it was he cleaned them.
I'd be swayed if I heard that phone call.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

" Someone irrational is incapable of objectivity "
Yes! I agree😊

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

Actual evidence. Yes.

That's what I'm waiting to see. Actual evidence that Avery was framed and evidence planted.

Tweets about having evidence is not actual evidence. JMO

Agree
It's a " wait and see what happens " kind of situation right now.
Until then it seems we all are just discussing everything in between & as things pop up😊

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

It is Ken Kratz' interpretation 12 yrs later that sounds desperate. MAYBE a grommet in the burn pit turns into definitely grommet in the burn pit which was part of a tarp which was used to shield the crime scene (actually 2 different crime scenes according to Kratz) from all the blood and dna that was washed up with , get this, CARPET CLEANER LOL

Yikes
When you put it like that..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Limaes]

I think the most important thing to consider when someone takes measures to clean a crime scene is the obvious fact that they are trying to conceal evidence of their wrong doing.

The fact that those measures are not the best or even if it's impossible to completely erase evidence doesn't mean that attempts to do so by the defendant are meaningless.

The exchanging of the carpet cleaning machine reinforces the notion that Avery was trying to remove evidence from his property.
JMO

Agreed, it's the intention imo.

 

[Limaes]

I have a question.

If LE collects evidence during an investigation of a crime and the prosecution doesn't present every single bit of it to the jury at trial, does that mean the evidence that wasn't presented to the jury is not valid evidence simply because the jury never saw it?

Not all evidence they collect is allowed into the trial. Some of what has come out could be classed as prejudicial and some of it didn't come to light until after the trial. Doesn't mean it can't be taken into account though, especially for the family of the victim and wanting to know as much information as they can.

The judge didn't allow his violent history into the trial, but it is certainly a testament to his character as far as I'm concerned.

JMO

 

[Madeleine74]

The 'ole "if a tree falls in the forest but no one was there in person to witness it did it really fall and did it make noise when it fell."

A phone call that is recorded is a piece of potential evidence. It doesn't disappear into the ether just because it's not used at trial. It's just not something the jury knows about or considers.

Not every single bit of evidence is necessarily used at trial. It depends on when the evidence was discovered and if it's needed to help prove charges and other factors.

I agree Ranch and Limaes, that the fact that Avery took some pains to not only clean his carpets the day of or the day after TH was murdered, but that he then returned the machine to get a new/clean carpet cleaner is hinky. It's another coincidence in a short period of time where a lot of "coincidences" occurred.

 

[Madeleine74]

Why is this the thread to consider both sides when it's for those who have taken the position that Avery was not framed and evidence was not planted?

It's a thread specifically for those who do not think Avery was framed or evidence planted or a conspiracy occurred.

It was stated and reiterated quite clearly by 2 different admins in the first pages of this thread.

Anyone choosing to post here, knowing the purpose and focus of this thread, and seeing the prior warnings of the admins, must now believe no planting or framing occurred, because why else would someone want to be in this thread? :drumroll::wink:

 

[Limaes]

Ranch, Madeleine

If Teresa was to write down the VIN #, where would she get that from? Is it the law in the U.S that it has to be displayed?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Ranch, Madeleine

If Teresa was to write down the VIN #, where would she get that from? Is it the law in the U.S that it has to be displayed?

The VIN number is on a couple of places where someone could read it. One place is the driver's side (left) upper dash so it can be read from outside of the vehicle as long as nothing is blocking it like a dash cover.

The other spot would be the driver's side door, above or below the latch or possibly on the driver's side "B" pillar.

VIN numbers are also placed in hidden locations like on the frame. JMO

 

[Limaes]

The VIN number is on a couple of places where someone could read it. One place is the driver's side (left) upper dash so it can be read from outside of the vehicle as long as nothing is blocking it like a dash cover.

The other spot would be the driver's side door, above or below the latch or possibly on the driver's side "B" pillar.

VIN numbers are also placed in hidden locations like on the frame. JMO

I see, thanks. So, if she wrote it down, it's more probable that she seen it on the dash? There doesn't look to be a dash cover. I don't recall them finding any paperwork that she wrote it on, either in the Rav or the trailer. Will have to go look when I have time.