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

[Limaes]

A great explanation re: blood evidence.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jICIJ7lhlSw

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Limaes]

This photo is very telling of who placed the 'camouflage'. Those boards are to hide the tyres, not the body of the vehicle.

Imo the person/s who did this had to know the routine for the salvage yard, and also know that every other vehicle in that vicinity didn't have any tyres, which would make Teresa's Rav 4 look out of place to someone who works there.

That would be the same person whose blood was found inside.

 

[BigCityAccountant]

This photo is very telling of who placed the 'camouflage'. Those boards are to hide the tyres, not the body of the vehicle.

Imo the person/s who did this had to know the routine for the salvage yard, and also know that every other vehicle in that vicinity didn't have any tyres, which would make Teresa's Rav 4 look out of place to someone who works there.

That would be the same person whose blood was found inside.

Very Good Thought Limaes--and one that I hadn't thought of. However, if you look at the flyover pictures it appears the cars in that area also have their tires. However, why were those tires hidden? What is the significance of those tires being hidden?

 

[Limaes]

When I say "vicinity" I am referring to the ridge area the Rav 4 was.

To hide it from any family members. Imo, it shows knowledge of how the Avery Salvage yard functions.

As you can see in the photo, even the branches on front of the vehicle appear to be serving the same purpose. They're both leaning on each end of the bumper bar in line with the tyres. They don't appear to be hiding the body of the vehicle.

It is midnight where I live so need to be heading off to bed but I will have a look for some close up photos of the surrounding cars tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[BigCityAccountant]

When I say "vicinity" I am referring to the ridge area the Rav 4 was.

To hide it from any family members. Imo, it shows knowledge of how the Avery Salvage yard functions.

As you can see in the photo, even the branches on front of the vehicle appear to be serving the same purpose. They're both leaning on each end of the bumper bar in line with the tyres. They don't appear to be hiding the body of the vehicle.

It is midnight where I live so need to be heading off to bed but I will have a look for some close up photos of the surrounding cars tomorrow.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Sweet dreams!! What would be the purpose to hid the tires? The other vehicles in the area also had tires. I'm not following your train of thought. Please expound on your thoughts, I'm interested because it isn't something someone has mentioned before.

 

[Limaes]

Not from the pictures I have seen BCA. With the exception of the green truck, the others had been removed, possibly ready to be crushed.

There is behavioural evidence in the way the car was covered. The boards appear, in the pics available anyway, to be the largest items used. These were definitely used to cover the wheels.

It has always struck me as odd that there was more attempt to cover the wheels than the actual body. When looking at the pics, I noticed the surrounding cars didn't have tyres and thought it possible that was the procedure for the A.S.Y and that is where vehicles to go in the crusher next, were stored.

So, I am theorising that whoever put the Rav 4 there, and attempted to camouflage, not only had knowledge of the workings of the salvage yard themselves, but camouflaged it in a way that wouldn't stand out to others who worked there. i.e Avery hiding it from E & CA. Hope that makes sense lol.

 

[Limaes]

Some may find these interesting, some may not. For me, even though they attempt to use humour to get their point across, it has made me see a few things I hadn't thought. Especially Episode 2.

https://youtu.be/V9ppOjvuC_8

https://youtu.be/Zqprthctj1c

 

[Madeleine74]

Hey Limaes!

Long time no see..

Thanks for those links. I haven't watched them yet but I will when I get some time after work.

Take care!

 

[Limaes]

Hi Madeleine, great to see you!

 

[Madeleine74]

I watched the 2 episodes last night. Short, sweet, and quite clever in their use of humor. The midwest accents they imitated were particularly humorous.

 

[Limaes]

Not real good with the different U.S accents. Although I know Reba, Fran Fine and Scarlet O'Hara all have different accents. The midwest one sounds Canadian to me lol.

 

[Madeleine74]

"Framing a Murderer"

Episode 3 & 4 are out.


Episode 3: https://youtu.be/BeEmIEVd1ww

Episode 4: https://youtu.be/vQ1khk0fh0E

 

[Limaes]

"Framing a Murderer"

Episode 3 & 4 are out.


Episode 3: https://youtu.be/BeEmIEVd1ww

Episode 4: https://youtu.be/vQ1khk0fh0E

Wondering if they're going to make any more. Have quiet enjoyed them.

 

[Limaes]

Although this thread is about SA, I'm putting this here because I don't believe there was any framing of BD either. The coercion of BD, in my opinion, came from his own family. They were protecting SA at all costs.

Allen Avery: "Say nothing happened."
Brendan: "Yeah."
Allen Avery: "This is, they made me say all of this. Tell 'em that. And stick to your guns. Don't go for a plea bargain or this and that"
Brendan: "Yeah."
Allen Avery: "Because you do that, then you're hurting both of you guys."
Brendan: "Yeah.


https://youtu.be/RuMZAXbyYEw

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

Let's say "what IF"
What IF the test results come back inconclusive, or, dare I say, with the same results as LE got? What then? Will Zellner accept that she got hoodwinked by Avery and drop it? Will she NOT accept the results and claim that THOSE results were planted or manipulated in some way? Not processed correctly? No proper chain of command? Will she then say the samples are way too old to "really" be proof? OR, will this continue on and on with people believing there is still a conspiracy against Avery?

This is a post by me in the "Zellner" thread. Obviously, didn't belong there. My fault. Should have deleted or asked for it to be deleted, if I couldn't do so. Forgot about this thread.

Now, IMO, Zellner appears to be backpedaling ALREADY and saying the blood was planted, but, in a "different" way than previously thought. AND, those bones...they, too, were planted.

I have to admit, I questioned in the "Bones" thread about just that. The mutilation of a corpse charges were dropped, but, in fact, that should have been one of the major charges, IMO. If the corpse wasn't in pieces, how did parts supposedly get in the diff places? Sorry for being so blunt.

ETA: When I'm referring to "same results as LE got", I'm saying that even though the items have no "results", to speak of, due to new testing, theoretically, they are being done to refute evidence of some sort. They can't refute something without having something to compare it to, or, support a theory. They believe the blood was planted, LE says it wasn't, and Zellner is out to disprove that fact. Hope this makes sense.

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

For all the reasons already given, I'm somewhere around 70/30 towards SA's guilt.
What's missing for me, and what would tilt my opinion all the way over to guilty is a cohesive narrative and timeline that ties all the evidence in together to give a credible account of what actually happened.

The framing theory just doesn't do it for me. Too complex, the logistics of it don't make sense nor does the motivation. And it relies on too many coincidences - something had to have happened to TH on a day when she'd been to visit SA, when he just happened to be having a bonfire and conveniently decided to clean up an area of floor in his garage. Having said that, I cannot discount the possibility that some evidence may have been tampered with in order to strengthen the case against SA.

The story put forward in BD's confession doesn't work for me either though. I'm undecided about the extent of his involvement, but there's no doubt in my mind that he was fed a particular narrative and that version of events just doesn't make sense to me. In particular I struggle with the stabbing and slashing taking place on the bed not being backed up with at least some blood evidence.

The one thing I'd love to know is whether there's any evidence of how recent the damage to the front of TH's RAV4 was.
There's a particular line of thought that I just can't help my mind from going down at the moment and some more information on that would help me to either dismiss it altogether or decide it's worth further thought.

If that damage to her car was recent, I can't help wondering whether perhaps the job want as normal, but she had a minor accident on leaving the junk yard.
Not enough to disable the car, but sufficient that she didn't want to continue her journey without it being checked out.
If phone reception was patchy, what would be more logical than returning to a nearby place where they work on cars to seek assistance from somebody she knows?

A routine photography job, followed by a return visit would tie up a lot of loose ends for me and present a more logical version of what may have happened.

> It fits with the propane guy's potential sighting of the car leaving and the bus driver seeing her performing the job.

> It would make SA's actions opportunist rather than pre-planned - which IMO fits better with his personality and IQ.
I'll willingly accept that he may have been obsessing over Teresa or at the very least had a bit of a 'thing' for her - there's enough out there to suggest that he had a history of that sort of behaviour and I see no reason to doubt the 'towel' story.
However, the idea that he'd planned all of this out or would be stupid enough to attack somebody on his own property when plenty of people knew that she'd be there has never sat right with me.
An unexpected return would give him the opportunity to act on impulse and perhaps even foster the belief that she'd checked in to say she'd left the junkyard and nobody knew she had gone back.

> The lack of blood evidence in the garage becomes less of an issue for me if he'd perhaps lured her in there under the pretext of working on her car.
I'm convinced that a clean up occurred in the garage, but what if the clean up was to cover evidence that a car had recently been worked on in there and not to get rid of blood at all?
(This version of events kind of leads me to him lulling her into a false sense of security while he worked on the car and then restraining her or coercing her back into the car with the killing itself occurring somewhere other than on his immediate property - perhaps elsewhere on the junkyard???)

The bold parts are what have me stymied, especially the bedroom stuff. Just way over the top and like from some movie, or book,or story he heard.
The planned out thing doesn't work, either. I can go with him getting really aggressive and turned down by her. He does NOT want to have her go to LE and file a report.
The garage idea is great, IMO. There could have been some blood, if he hit her over the head with a tool, etc.
ITA with your concerns/questions.

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

I'm completely convinced of his guilt. I too feel that he thought he was untouchable when he committed this murder. He was meeting all these powerful people and having a bill named after him. Some say that's why he wouldn't do this because he had so much going for him. I on the other hand feel it's just who he is. He knew he would be able to claim they framed him, only it didn't work. There is nothing normal about dousing a cat in gas and throwing it on a fire. That IMO is a show of true colors and just plain sick.

While I can not nail down exactly what happened, I can say the totality of evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt. Is it beyond all doubt? Absolutely not. What I've noticed while reading opinions on this case is that people try and single out each piece of evidence and explain it away. That is wrong IMO, in every case excuses and reasons can be made for single pieces of evidence. What does the whole picture look like though? That's what matters.

It's much more reasonable for me to conclude that AC was checking his info on her car when he called about the plate than to say he stumbled on a vehicle of a girl that had been missing 3 days, hours after she was reported missing and before anyone else. That a perfect situation to frame SA landed in his lap. The same explanation is also more reasonable IMO than her ex or brother having ACs number and calling him personally about finding the car, rather than the guys actually working THs missing person report.

The bones in the burn pile is what does it completely for me. I believe he pulled a couple of the larger bones out of the pile and left the fragments that weren't clearly identifiable as bones. Why else would someone else have gathered all the tiny fragments enough that there was a piece of every bone in her skeleton from the neck down (teeth and jean rivets included) and left or placed the larger ones elsewhere? A long bone and collarbone were in the burn barrel and the pelvic bone was at the quarry. I mean it's clear that it wasn't obvious bones were in the pit, it went unnoticed for days during searches. Even looking at pictures, most people would never know those fragments were bones. Not to mention her personal belongings were burned in his burn barrel.

The bleach used in that garage is a huge one too. Its hard to believe looking at the pictures that bleach had ever been used to clean anything in that filthy garage, besides that night.

There is just an over whelming amount of coincidences that had to occur during this time frame to prove SAs innocence.
He just happened to have a bonfire burning tires the night TH went missing and her body was burned.
He just happened to spill something on the floor of his garage that needed to be cleaned with bleach.
He just happened to get a large cut capable of bleeding a lot on his hand.
He just happened to be unlucky enough to be framed by the police and the real killer?

Those are a few of my thoughts.

OK, there ya go!! I wondered about the bones in diff places. That thought didn't even cross my mind.
The bonfire was a point for me, too. Didn't he deny or not mention it at first? I wouldn't forget a big 'ol honkin fire I had in my back yard.
The bleach! I chuckle at the Clorox commercial when it says it's used to clean crime scenes. Or, when Blanche Devereaux on the Golden Girls says "we need more "blee-ock"" (two syllables). BUT, you're right about why use it to clean a garage.

 

[dexter75]

OK, there ya go!! I wondered about the bones in diff places. That thought didn't even cross my mind.
The bonfire was a point for me, too. Didn't he deny or not mention it at first? I wouldn't forget a big 'ol honkin fire I had in my back yard.
The bleach! I chuckle at the Clorox commercial when it says it's used to clean crime scenes. Or, when Blanche Devereaux on the Golden Girls says "we need more "blee-ock"" (two syllables). BUT, you're right about why use it to clean a garage.

Cops had many " coincidences " as well.
Too many.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

Cops had many " coincidences " as well.
Too many.


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Yep, coincidences happen every day, for every person. SA had way too many, IMO.

No offense, but, I'm not at all into the back and forth of posts or tag teaming and being frustrated with having to justify my position and my own evaluation of the evidence as on the other SA is innocent threads. The same evidence, presented in a court of law, which led a jury, of his peers, to find SA guilty. I'm not one of the planted evidence and cops railroaded this person theorists.
Life is frustrating enough. I'm old and I'm tired. No, I am not going to go back and reread every inch of this case. I'm not going to pick apart each and every word or whatever else there appears to be picked apart. That's kinda why I chose to post here. This thread is an "agree with the evidence/guilt of SA" thread. When I'm gonna discuss evidence, I'll go back and get supporting facts. When I'm gonna express my opinion or theory, I'll express it, without the frustration of continuously defending it.
Yes, I'm a boring wuss and want a discussion that's argument free, with people who don't tell me to "go back and reacquaint myself" with all the case documents so I can pick apart every little wrong word or phrase.
I posted one comment on the Zellner Tweets thread and chose not to continue because, basically, (my words, not those told to me) it was an agree with Zellner, no "what ifs", don't insult her, this is a "defense" type of thread. I accept that and totally understand and respect the fact that people, who believe contrary to myself and LE, are fighting, for what they believe, is an innocent man sitting in prison for a crime, they feel, he did not commit. Good for all of you. That's what the system is based on. Keep on keepin' on!

 

[dexter75]

No offense, but, I'm not at all into the back and forth of posts or tag teaming and being frustrated with having to justify my position and my own evaluation of the evidence as on the other SA is innocent threads. The same evidence, presented in a court of law, which led a jury, of his peers, to find SA guilty. I'm not one of the planted evidence and cops railroaded this person theorists.
Life is frustrating enough. I'm old and I'm tired. No, I am not going to go back and reread every inch of this case. I'm not going to pick apart each and every word or whatever else there appears to be picked apart. That's kinda why I chose to post here. This thread is an "agree with the evidence/guilt of SA" thread. When I'm gonna discuss evidence, I'll go back and get supporting facts. When I'm gonna express my opinion or theory, I'll express it, without the frustration of continuously defending it.
Yes, I'm a boring wuss and want a discussion that's argument free, with people who don't tell me to "go back and reacquaint myself" with all the case documents so I can pick apart every little wrong word or phrase.
I posted one comment on the Zellner Tweets thread and chose not to continue because, basically, (my words, not those told to me) it was an agree with Zellner, no "what ifs", don't insult her, this is a "defense" type of thread. I accept that and totally understand and respect the fact that people, who believe contrary to myself and LE, are fighting, for what they believe, is an innocent man sitting in prison for a crime, they feel, he did not commit. Good for all of you. That's what the system is based on. Keep on keepin' on!

Hmmm..no offense, me either..and I'm not old😉
Enjoy your day and happy sleuthing❤❤❤

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk