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

[Karinna]

Good post!

To expound...
The reason I feel it's a good post, is because it addresses the dilemma we have, in any real discussion, in a thread where everyone is required to have the same opinion.

BBM, Thats exactly what it is. But it must be remembered IMO that there are people here that are not 100% convinced one way or the other and are just looking for some factual information that would be helpful for them to decide.
And this especially for people new to the case:
WS Rules
To preserve the integrity of the factual information contained herein, Websleuths does not participate in rumor mongering. When claiming something as a “fact,” you must prove it. Be able to provide links to information from approved third party sources; for instance, mainstream media (MSM), law enforcement (LE), and admin-verified case insiders.

 

[Safeguard]

Everyone knows (or should know) the hole in the vial was normal and they should inquire why a "documentary" manufactured a lie.

Notice how the lies are stacking up. Further, notice the silence and denial.

Respectfully, May I ask a question?

Are you saying that the defense attorneys themselves, never questioned that hole? That somehow the producers of MaM, used their superpowers to make it look like that question was raised in court? Buting & Strang never actually looked at that vial and thought it looked suspiciously like it had been tampered with? It was somehow spliced and diced into the documentary, but didn't really happen?

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Everyone knows (or should know) the hole in the vial was normal and they should inquire why a "documentary" manufactured a lie.

Notice how the lies are stacking up. Further, notice the silence and denial.

.
I didn't know that when I first came here. I think the same respect should be shown to all posters that come here as well.

I'm not sure why you are so obsessed with the documentary, there are so many documents to reference outside of the documentary that I'm not sure why the documentary is a matter of contention for you. At this point, I don't know anyone who is relying on the documentary and if they are, they are coming here to find factual information to confirm their suspicions. I don't see how posting incorrect information is helpful.

Lastly, if it was your opinion, a simple and kind IMHO would suffice. You seem to post things as fact when in fact they are not. That causes confusion to others.

 

[Karinna]

.
I didn't know that when I first came here. I think the same respect should be shown to all posters that come here as well.

I'm not sure why you are so obsessed with the documentary, there are so many documents to reference outside of the documentary that I'm not sure why the documentary is a matter of contention for you. At this point, I don't know anyone who is relying on the documentary and if they are, they are coming here to find factual information to confirm their suspicions. I don't see how posting incorrect information is helpful.

Lastly, if it was your opinion, a simple and kind IMHO would suffice. You seem to post things as fact when in fact they are not. That causes confusion to others.

I have never watched MAM, but there are factors in the case i am very suspicious about that i have read. It still needs to be proven that SA was indeed set up, otherwise he will remain where he is, and as time goes along we will see. All IMO.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

.
While I may have pointed out one particular mention of un-truth in a prior posting and not commented on the entire posting which is laden with un-truth's~~it certainly wasn't my intention to "nit-pick". I don't see any benefit in spreading false information. It has always been my understanding you were here seeking the TRUTH.

Sorry to interrupt, carry on.

I'm just pointing out that you're taking a very minor discrepancy and making it sound like Madeleine is trying to purposely lie to other members. I have no idea why you feel it's so important to castigate her.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Everyone knows (or should know) the hole in the vial was normal and they should inquire why a "documentary" manufactured a lie.

Notice how the lies are stacking up. Further, notice the silence and denial.

I agree 100%. This sub-forum is titled Netflix Series: Making A Murderer. It's the reason why all of this going on so it's very important to see what the creators of this "documentary" did to reach their goal. JMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Too bad no one told Zellner about the importance of details because that brief she filed months ago happened to contain several errors, and not just spelling errors.

Isn't it interesting, RANCH, how instead of demanding proof of malfeasance in a murder investigation, all it takes is a rumor, speculation, or a perceived feeling of a red flag, and that's used to accuse people ranging from family, friends, detectives, or anyone who crossed paths with Avery, of perpetuating some of the worst crimes imagined (everything from planting evidence, to formulating a conspiracy, all the way up to the murder of TH). No evidence and no proof required--just a feeling and a belief and denial, a manufactured fictional film, and someone else (anyone else, as long as it isn't the convicted killer) is guilty of something nefarious. Imagine if that was the standard used in the court system.

That does seem to be the argument. Everyone is lying but Steven Avery. They were all out to get him I suppose. But the truth is no one has a more vested interest in lying than Steven Avery.

As an aside, I thought I read Zneller isn't testing the items she believes has EDTA in them. If so, does anyone else find that strange? It seems those items she suspects were tainted with EDTA would be the first ones she would want retested.

Hasnt it been months since some of the evidence has been sent out for testing? Has she tweeted she has results back on any of them? tia

 

[Safeguard]

That does seem to be the argument. Everyone is lying but Steven Avery. They were all out to get him I suppose. But the truth is no one has a more vested interest in lying than Steven Avery.

As an aside, I thought I read Zneller isn't testing the items she believes has EDTA in them. If so, does anyone else find that strange? It seems those items she suspects were tainted with EDTA would be the first ones she would want retested.

Hasnt it been months since some of the evidence has been sent out for testing? Has she tweeted she has results back on any of them? tia

Yes. She has:

January 17, 2017

"Not 1 but 8 plants:bullets, bones, blood, camera, cellphone PDA, key, car + false confession. World's best experts on it. #MakingAMurderer"

Just awaiting the slow wheels of court procedure to be able to present her facts.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?301710-Zellner-Tweets

 

[oceanblueeyes]

bbm...
The the prosecution used, "alternative facts" to win convictions in this case and ruin people's lives.

Time and time again, actual case records support the accusations of corruption against LE that are currently being reviewed in the court system.

Shady, unscrupulous, devient, illegal, unethical, corrupt behaviors by the officials investigating and Prosecuting this case.

Perhaps MCSO and crew, should get an award for, "creative investigating".

But I'd settle for 20 to life...

(Interesting that you seem irate over a film which is supposed to be allowed creative licence, but not over the deliberate malfiance of our elected officials).
JMO

I have so much respect for you Safeguard that it makes me uncomfortable to even disagree with you. I respect you that much and always have.

I could buy that if either of the appellate courts had said there is evidence of planting and unethical behavior by LE or/and the DA but this has gone through three courts now. The trial itself presided by the trial Judge, then the two appelate courts since then with both upholding the verdict.

Wasn't his defense back in the trial the same as it is now and he was framed and evidence was planted? If so, his lawyers on the two appeals would clearly also state those same arguments citing evidence to support it.

Why do you think his case has been denied twice by two different appellate courts if there was actual evidence of framing and planting? I ask this because in the end whether he gets a new trial will also be up to a higher court and so far none of them have been convinced he even deserves a new trial.

I never watch these kind of documentaries anymore because I find them to be agenda driven and biased. I watched one on Guy Heinz Jr and that was enough for me.

IMO

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Yes. She has:

January 17, 2017

"Not 1 but 8 plants:bullets, bones, blood, camera, cellphone PDA, key, car + false confession. World's best experts on it. #MakingAMurderer"

Just awaiting the slow wheels of court procedure to be able to present her facts.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?301710-Zellner-Tweets

Thank you but I am not sure I would consider that viable evidence or prove of anything. If she truly had all this now and could prove it nothing would stop her from going to the Governor's office immediately demanding his release.

I think that is simply what she is working on and her opinion. If the results were positive in all categories the media would be blasting it everywhere.

JMO though

 

[Safeguard]

I have so much respect for you Safeguard that it makes me uncomfortable to even disagree with you. I respect you that much and always have.

I could buy that if either of the appellate courts had said there is evidence of planting and unethical behavior by LE or/and the DA but this has gone through three courts now. The trial itself presided by the trial Judge, then the two appelate courts since then with both upholding the verdict.

Wasn't his defense back in the trial the same as it is now and he was framed and evidence was planted? If so, his lawyers on the two appeals would clearly also state those same arguments citing evidence to support it.

Why do you think his case has been denied twice by two different appellate courts if there was actual evidence of framing and planting? I ask this because in the end whether he gets a new trial will also be up to a higher court and so far none of them have been convinced he even deserves a new trial.

I never watch these kind of documentaries anymore because I find them to be agenda driven and biased. I watched one on Guy Heinz Jr and that was enough for me.

IMO

Likewise OBE. Thanks...

SA's apeals were doomed in that jurisdiction.

I'm not as savvy about the legal processes as some here, but I know a rat when I smell one.

His lawyers back then did not have access to the sophisticated level of testing available to Zellner.

KZ is not asking for a new trial she's going for complete exoneration.

She has noted many times the similarities in this case and other wrongful convictions.

I have no doubt she's going to win this case. She's not into wasting her time and resources. ( not to mention letting other innocent people die in prison, waiting for representation!) She's into Justice for wrongfully convicted people... that's her thing.

Oh also she can't just present her evidence, and free people just like that. She has to go through the exoneration process in court... just like she did all the many cases she won before this one.

 

[Madeleine74]

Finally finished listening to the interview conducted by Jim Norton & Sam Roberts that Limaes posted about (including a link to that show) several days ago. I took notes as I listened, so I'm sharing what I captured:

Interesting bits that were left out of the docu-drama:

Timeline-related items

4:30pm Oct 31, 2005 - Chuck Avery sees SA outside and yells over to him, “hey did that girl ever show up?” SA says no, she never did.

4:35pm Oct 31, 2005 - SA calls the TH cell phone which by that point can no longer connect to any tower (that phone is likely in the burn barrel at this point) and doesn’t use *67. This is considered “an alibi call” where SA can claim TH never showed up.

Nov 3, 2005 (earlier in the day) - SA calls Auto Trader, claiming TH never showed up & he’ll have to reschedule the appointment.

Nov 3, 2005 (later that day) - SA finds out Bobby Dassey saw TH on Oct 31 & then changes his story to yes TH did show up but he never spoke to her, only saw her, then changes the story again.


Brendan Dassey:

KK opinion: on this own BD would never have raped or hurt or killed TH. It was all coercion by SA that BD was involved.

- (Allegedly) SA told BD a day or 2 before Mon 10/31 he (SA) “intends to get her there on Monday” (i.e. get TH to come to the salvage yard). The docudrama never showed this. So, when BD got off the school bus, he already knew TH would probably be there since that was his uncle’s plan. LE learned this from BD telling them.

- The grandfather (Alan Avery) told BD not to take the plea bargain (which was 15 yrs) and instead go to trial because if BD took the plea deal it would hurt Steven. KK claims SA was calling the shots from jail, telling his family what to do, not allow BD to take a plea, etc.

- BD gave a total of 6 separate interviews to LE and MaM only showed parts of 1 of them and cut out statements BD made. Jury saw all of the interview, but the viewing audience did not.

- The confession was not coerced according to KK. According to KK the docudrma didn't show the full sequence of questions, particularly the ones where Weigart or Fassbender merely asked, “so what happened then" and BD would disclose something they didn't know. An example, “Uncle Steven used his 22 and shot her.”

 

[Madeleine74]

More from the interview with Jim Norton & Sam Roberts:

SA cleanup of trailer (Oct 31 - Nov 3 & 4)

- SA rearranged furniture in his bedroom
- SA cleaned the carpets in his trailer.
- SA used bleach and other cleaning agents on some surfaces.
- On Nov 4th when SA allowed LE to come into his trailer they noticed smell of cleaning chemicals.
- Nov 1 phone call to Jodi in jail - SA talks about the cleaning of the rugs. Jodi mentions the inside of the carpet cleaning machine can be cleaned too; SA said he never thought about that. Instead, SA returns the carpet cleaner (for a new one).


What About No Blood Found in Trailer?

- KK believes most of the violence, the kind that would cause bleeding, occurred in the garage.
- BD said that TH was wrapped in something and put in back of her SUV. Her hair was sticking out which left the blood and hair pattern in the rear cargo as BD and SA flung her in.
- KK confirmed that grommets (plural) were found in the burn pit.


Why was SUV not put in car crusher?

- KK believes SA intended to, but didn’t have time and needed to wait until no one was around because crushing a car takes time and makes a lot of noise and his brothers and customers were around.
- KK mentioned that SA was intending to come back from Crivitz early (might be something he believes).
- KK mentioned the SUV's wheels were covered by boards placed in front of them, the majority of cars around that SUV did not have wheels and someone who is very familiar with the operation of a salvage yard would know that wheels are often removed, battery disconnected, and would pay attention to those details.

What About Colburn & Calling In the License Plate Number?
- Just before Colburn calls Dispatch Colburn gets a call from Wiegart to go do a “knock & talk” with the missing person case, as they are trying to track TH’s movements. At this point TH is only a missing person case, they don’t know TH is dead, don’t know a homicide occurred, don't know what happened to TH.
- Splicing was done on Colburn testimony at trial (spliced with partial phone call) to make Colburn's actions look suspicious.

 

[Madeleine74]

KK’s thoughts on Zellner:

- Thinks Zellner is a very talented attorney. Noted that when Zellner first took the case in January 2016 she promised within 30 days she was going to present evidence that would show SA is innocent. Still waiting for that evidence that proves it.


SA letters to KK:

- SA wrote a total of 6 letters to KK.
- SA asked KK to be his appellate attorney (copy of actual letter is in the book).
- KK corresponded with SA after all appeals were exhausted, asking SA if he wanted to talk. SA wrote back and said yes, then invited KK to come talk to him, but the prison warden refused this visit.
- KK inquired whether SA was going to tell the truth and come clean, and SA refused so KK cut off all communication after that.

KK’s Sex Addiction & Drug Addiction:

- KK’s sexting and sex addiction was occurring in 2009.
- KK freely admits he was/is a narcissist, was a sexual addict and drug abuser, and started engaging in high risk behaviors, culminating in texting a crime victim.
- KK said he self-reported his violation to the Lawyer Office of Regulation. (LOR)
- KK said the LOR dismissed the case. Six months later (Aug 2010) the media got wind of this and the report was leaked to the press, it made front page news, and within 48 hrs KK lost his job and everything else (he was already going thru a divorce).
- KK said he felt suicidal and went into rehab/hospitalization, got clean, got off the drugs and started daily therapy for his addictions.
- Like any addict, KK has to stay vigilant for his recovery.
- KK said he has no problem discussing any of this, but points out all of this was years after the Avery case and was not a part of the Avery case.
- KK said he's thankful because he was in a place of pain, addiction, and self-destruction.

 

[Madeleine74]

KK's Other Comments:

- As of Dec 2015 when the docu-drama was released KK knew he would be the lightening rod.

- KK said he regrets holding the press conference.

- When asked if he was afraid of the defense or worried about the jury and reasonable doubt KK emphasized, “in a case you go with the evidence and focus on that."

- KK mentions that in the opening of his book that no one should feel they have to believe what he says based on his word or trusting him, but what he wrote is corroborated, be it from a form, a document, testimony, investigative notes, interviews, items in the case file, (as examples given) and that’s where the attention should focus -- on the evidence.

 

[Limaes]

KK’s thoughts on Zellner:

- Thinks Zellner is a very talented attorney. Noted that when Zellner first took the case in January 2016 she promised within 30 days she was going to present evidence that would show SA is innocent. Still waiting for that evidence that proves it.


SA letters to KK:

- SA wrote a total of 6 letters to KK.
- SA asked KK to be his appellate attorney (copy of actual letter is in the book).
- KK corresponded with SA after all appeals were exhausted, asking SA if he wanted to talk. SA wrote back and said yes, then invited KK to come talk to him, but the prison warden refused this visit.
- KK inquired whether SA was going to tell the truth and come clean, and SA refused so KK cut off all communication after that.

KK’s Sex Addiction & Drug Addiction:

- KK’s sexting and sex addiction was occurring in 2009.
- KK freely admits he was/is a narcissist, was a sexual addict and drug abuser, and started engaging in high risk behaviors, culminating in texting a crime victim.
- KK said he self-reported his violation to the Lawyer Office of Regulation. (LOR)
- KK said the LOR dismissed the case. Six months later (Aug 2010) the media got wind of this and the report was leaked to the press, it made front page news, and within 48 hrs KK lost his job and everything else (he was already going thru a divorce).
- KK said he felt suicidal and went into rehab/hospitalization, got clean, got off the drugs and started daily therapy for his addictions.
- Like any addict, KK has to stay vigilant for his recovery.
- KK said he has no problem discussing any of this, but points out all of this was years after the Avery case and was not a part of the Avery case.
- KK said he's thankful because he was in a place of pain, addiction, and self-destruction.

The sexting thing, as far as I have seen, has never been disputed by anyone, just like the previous wrongful conviction. Even by KK. The only reason it has been made part of Teresa's case is because MaM made it that way. SA's fans all over the internet repeatedly latch on to it when discussing this case as a deflection technique, more so since KK has started spilling the beans via interviews and his book, and anyone who doesn't blight on about it adnauseam becomes a target for these people.

I prefer to discuss the case evidence and at this point, regardless of what his Defense Attorney says from behind her keyboard, all the evidence leads down one road, Avery rd, straight to SA's door.

JMO

 

[Limaes]

Finally finished listening to the interview conducted by Jim Norton & Sam Roberts that Limaes posted about (including a link to that show) several days ago. I took notes as I listened, so I'm sharing what I captured:

Interesting bits that were left out of the docu-drama:

Timeline-related items

4:30pm Oct 31, 2005 - Chuck Avery sees SA outside and yells over to him, “hey did that girl ever show up?” SA says no, she never did.

4:35pm Oct 31, 2005 - SA calls the TH cell phone which by that point can no longer connect to any tower (that phone is likely in the burn barrel at this point) and doesn’t use *67. This is considered “an alibi call” where SA can claim TH never showed up.

Nov 3, 2005 (earlier in the day) - SA calls Auto Trader, claiming TH never showed up & he’ll have to reschedule the appointment.

Nov 3, 2005 (later that day) - SA finds out Bobby Dassey saw TH on Oct 31 & then changes his story to yes TH did show up but he never spoke to her, only saw her, then changes the story again.


Brendan Dassey:

KK opinion: on this own BD would never have raped or hurt or killed TH. It was all coercion by SA that BD was involved.

- (Allegedly) SA told BD a day or 2 before Mon 10/31 he (SA) “intends to get her there on Monday” (i.e. get TH to come to the salvage yard). The docudrama never showed this. So, when BD got off the school bus, he already knew TH would probably be there since that was his uncle’s plan. LE learned this from BD telling them.

- The grandfather (Alan Avery) told BD not to take the plea bargain (which was 15 yrs) and instead go to trial because if BD took the plea deal it would hurt Steven. KK claims SA was calling the shots from jail, telling his family what to do, not allow BD to take a plea, etc.

- BD gave a total of 6 separate interviews to LE and MaM only showed parts of 1 of them and cut out statements BD made. Jury saw all of the interview, but the viewing audience did not.

- The confession was not coerced according to KK. According to KK the docudrma didn't show the full sequence of questions, particularly the ones where Weigart or Fassbender merely asked, “so what happened then" and BD would disclose something they didn't know. An example, “Uncle Steven used his 22 and shot her.”

I have always felt that BD knew of his Uncle's plans before he left for school that morning. Whether he truely believed SA could successfully pull off that plan may be another thing.

Imo he lied about going to the trailer to deliver mail, he went to the trailer to see if she was there. I may be alone on this but it is my belief that it was no coincidence that the timing of her abduction, and sexual assault, coincided with BD turning 16 on October 19th. Under Wisconsin Law, he was now considered old enough for a sexual relationship (only if the other person consented). BD told investigators that after having his turn with Teresa, they sat down and had a [celebratory] drink and SA acknowledges BD's first time by saying "that's how it's done". So, that is what I feel was the real motive.

JMO

 

[Safeguard]

I have always felt that BD knew of his Uncle's plans before he left for school that morning. Whether he truely believed SA could successfully pull off that plan may be another thing.

Imo he lied about going to the trailer to deliver mail, he went to the trailer to see if she was there. I may be alone on this but it is my belief that it was no coincidence that the timing of her abduction, and sexual assault, coincided with BD turning 16 on October 19th. Under Wisconsin Law, he was now considered old enough for a sexual relationship (only if the other person consented). BD told investigators that after having his turn with Teresa, they sat down and had a [celebratory] drink and SA acknowledges BD's first time by saying "that's how it's done". So, that is what I feel was the real motive.

JMO

This is the kind of post I like to see. It gives others a nice opportunity to examine your thought processes concerning this case.

 

[Limaes]

This is one of SA's many interviews before he was arrested. Towards the end of the video, when they're at his property, you can see his dog Bear already chained up in the background guarding his hideous secret and after hearing him barking at them as well, I can totally understand why LEOs would not attempt to go near him, I wouldn't.

JMO

ETA: This was Nov 4th

http://wbay.com/2016/01/07/video-nov-4-2005-interviews-with-the-halbach-family-steven-avery/

 

[Madeleine74]

The sexting thing, as far as I have seen, has never been disputed by anyone, just like the previous wrongful conviction. Even by KK. The only reason it has been made part of Teresa's case is because MaM made it that way. SA's fans all over the internet repeatedly latch on to it when discussing this case as a deflection technique, more so since KK has started spilling the beans via interviews and his book, and anyone who doesn't blight on about it adnauseam becomes a target for these people.

I prefer to discuss the case evidence and at this point, regardless of what his Defense Attorney says from behind her keyboard, all the evidence leads down one road, Avery rd, straight to SA's door.

JMO

Speaking of sexting: how about SA sexting an underage (teenage) female friend of his nephew's on or around Oct 30, 2005, suggesting she come over so they could have rough sex? That information is in the case file. How about SA having sex with his underage (teenage) niece in the summer of 2004? She's the one who filed a criminal complaint, which is in the case file. That case file contains a number of things that were kept from the viewing public for many years, certainly never discussed by filmmakers, who couldn't even manage to include evidence from the trial itself that implicated Stevie.

KK's behaviors were years after Avery's conviction, which makes those behaviors unconnected and ultimately irrelevant to the Avery case. Two appeals in and no overturned conviction for SA.

IMO, I believe even if a squeaky clean boy or girlscout-type prosecutor who never did anything wrong, never held a press conference, never ever got in trouble in his/her life, for the rest of their lives... that prosecutor, if assigned to prosecute Steven Avery, regardless of what WI county they were from, would have still been hated and blasted, because they would have dared prosecute the poster boy.