MaM a Year Later - Reconstruct the Crime

[oceanblueeyes]

Seriously? Not even the fact that the juror knew this information going into the trial ? That this is what he/she, in part , based his decision on? OKayyyy.....

How do we know that is even where he got his theory? He doesn't mention he got it from the confession. If he had the writer wouldn't have left that out. Maybe this is what he believes happened.

Jurors are allowed to have their own theory about what they think happened or what they believe the motive was for the murder and jurors don't have to agree with each other on what they believe happened nor do they have to agree on the motive. I would suspect at the time he was convicted all 12 jurors believed his motive was to rape the victim and then he murdered her to render her voiceless like so many other suspects do to their victim/s.

It doesn't take much to think TH was tortured and raped and she WAS shot in the head. He did have a charge against him for mutilating her body even though he was found not guilty on that particular charge iirc. That could lead someone to believe she had been dismembered. Mutilations are very often dismembering the victim's body so I really don't see anything odd about his theory of what he thinks happened to the victim. Some may have compromised on the mutilation charge if they weren't unanimous and agreed to find him NG on that charge. Yet some could have certainly thought he did dismember her body but may have thought the DA didn't put forth enough evidence to render a guilty on that charge.

Also someone said the jury didn't give the *67 any weight when convicting Avery. I didn't see anything stating they disregarded the blocked calls in the linked article. The article pretty much was the written words of the one who wrote the article along with three short quotes by only three of the people who were on the jury.

 

[dexter75]

:wave: Hi Karinna! I was just thinking about you the other day, you have not posted in awhile Hope you had a nice Christmas!

So, no one has any thoughts on why Teresa would go to SA's door instead of Barb's, since that is the address she was given?

I have no explanation for why Teresa would go to Steve Averys door..

Hi missy, Thankyou for thinking of me. Hope you & yours had a lovely Christmas too. We had a nice one thanks. I have been reading on here a bit on and off, following some of the other cases but not posting, so i'm still around . And good question you asked too about TH.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

Thankyou IDK, and agree with what you say, that definitely time will tell as it does.

Hi Karinna❤😘

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

RSBM. Thanks for posting the call log.

My thoughts on SA calling her number at 2:25 and again at 2:35 is that she was late and calling someone repeatedly within a short amount of time is annoying, and even that fact that she was only 30 minutes behind what she said she would be, so he used *67 to disguise his number. Do we know if the first 7 second call was answered or did he get her machine and hang up? I think it's possible that the second call lasted 0 second because she drove up as he dialed it so he hung up. That seems reasonable to me if you're waiting for someone. You call, don't get them so try again in a couple of minutes and, low and behold, they drive up your road. This is consistent with the ETA she gave Auto Trader when they called her at 2:27 pm and BoD saying he saw her there between 2:30-2:45. Yet, not consistent with the bus driver who should have an accurate account of timing. I believe SA's explanation that the 4:45 call was to take pictures of another item.






I don't think TH went to anyone's door. I believe SA when he said he met her outside. This is likely if my above theory is right and consistent with what he said in his statement (except for the timing of it).

I believe this story because my dad and my husband behave this way. If they are expecting me (late or not) they will call to tell me they're puttering about in the garage, or down the yard so I don't go looking all over the house/yard for them. They are impatient and will not sit tight in the house even when they know I'm on my way. My husband fixes and sells equipment and when a buyer is coming, he goes outside to wait for them. This is typical man behaviour to me.

Thanks for your input ILoveDateline
( I love it too )
Your explanation for the *67 is 100% LOGICAL & the BEST I have heard to date😊

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

One more thing
My brother in law is slow. Sweet as can be but kinda slow. Not very confident or good looking. His interpersonal skills SUCK, he was in special education classes growing up and even had some anger issues as a teenager.
He has friends now, a great job an active member in his church and is 30 years old.
I can absolutely 100% guarantee you that he #67 his calls to girls..especially girls he finds attractive or he might get red in the face around. I'd bet on it & just might ask him😉 I'm honest & in your face that way😀❤😉
It isn't uncommon
Especially when you have zero social skills, etiquette, etc.
JMO
Thanks, for being so polite btw
You're very considerate and respectful.
Thank you❤

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

***
*67
I have a terrible way of hitting #. I apologize, still catching up.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[Safeguard]

Thanks for your input ILoveDateline
( I love it too )
Your explanation for the *67 is 100% LOGICAL & the BEST I have heard to date��

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

I concur! ILoveDateline's explanation is simply the best.

This is exactly what I was thinking, but I wasn't able to articulate it. Thank you ILoveDateline! Makes perfect sense. I find If things don't add up, and are not making sense, then it is not the truth. Truth is pretty strait forward generally...The pretzels people are twisting themselves into, to view those calls as sinister, do not make sense to me.

 

[dexter75]

No one thought Culhane was a joke or accused her moral ethics and character when she ran the DNA test and was able to show, scientifically, that SA was not the known contributor of the DNA found on Penny Beerstein, the defacto test that got Avery out of prison from the wrongful rape conviction.

So in 2006, after a bullet and a bullet fragment are found in SA's garage, collected, and sent to her for testing, she runs a test on the control sample, which is the protocol. She finds some of her own DNA on the control sample (not the bullet, just the control). She then tests the bullet. She proactively discloses, in writing, her findings, both about finding her own DNA on the control sample which she had inadvertently contaminated, and then the results from testing the bullet itself, which did not contain her DNA and showed no contamination.

And for doing this, disclosing a contaminated control sample, she is described as a "disgrace to lab techs everywhere" and her "moral ethics" and "character" are questioned.

Sometimes I wonder if she exonerated him back then to save her own @$$!
I think she may have had something to do with him being convicted the first time around...

Hey doll😘
Well put!
Why is LE let off with " innocent mistakes?"
Great points, as always❤
Yep, if I were going to cuff, rape, torture my regular photographer in between my gf's phone calls and my own personal errands, I would sure as heck do it BEFORE I BECAME A MULTI MILLIONAIRE ( true or not, it's what he thought ) & not AFTER I HAD MILLIONS TO FLEE TO ANOTHER COUNTRY AND GET AWAY WITH IT FOREVER...
Another great point..go rent a bdsm ..why risk it all after being in prison that whole time??
C'mon Manitowoc County??
How did you ever think this story wouldn't be told??

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Does Buting have a history of not being truthful, Limaes?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

.
I think you have to add the context here.

The DNA did exonerate him for the PB rape, however~~that came AFTER GA admitted someone was in prison for a rape they didn't commit. You basically have 2 pieces of evidence that SA didn't commit that rape. Albeit, one was never followed up on. Had MCSD followed up on the admission of GA, there would be no reason to even test the DNA to prove his innocence.

The very fact that SC was the one who tested the DNA, you have to remember she would be on the winning side. We don't know her character, did she ALWAYS have to be on the winning side?

Now comes 2006, she gets an email from KK saying place TH in the garage. Does she do this to be on the winning side again? Perhaps and perhaps not. We don't know. We do not know what motivates her.

Let us not forget they removed .22 bullets from the garage during the first sweep of the garage. It is highly suspicious that THAT bullet wasn't found then~~only and conveniently AFTER they had TH's DNA did they find it, some 6 MONTHS later. If that doesn't scream suspicion I don't know what does.

It that happened to anyone of us~~we all would be saying W**.

Yep yep yep.
Them bullets...the blood..the DNA expert..hmmm
Hi BCA❤


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

Yes, the defense didn't have much by way of resources compared to the State (which apparently spent in excess of $2 million prosecuting this case).

Why didn't the defense hire experts to debunk every unsubstantiated claim against Steven? They did not have the luxury of billing the taxpayers for work related to the trial.

No kidding..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[oceanblueeyes]

We will never be able to read SAs mind the day he decided to call TH and blocked both of those calls only to TH. Maybe he wanted to hear her voice. Maybe he wanted to breathe heavy in the phone taunting her. Maybe he wanted her to wonder why someone would be calling her yet blocking their number. Maybe he wanted to see if she would answer if she couldn't see who was calling her. Did those two calls go to voicemail? Or did he lose his nerve both times and hang up before she could answer or before his voice could be recorded? How long did he let it ring before he hung up each time?

If both blocked calls were on the up and up why not leave a message on her voicemail asking her if she was going to make it to the junkyard that day and to please call him back to confirm and he could have even lied and said "my sister wants to know.". Why did he think he had to hide it was him who was calling TH. Its like he already knew that he really creeped her out and knew she wouldn't answer if she saw it was his number and him calling.

Some posters have said using *67 is normal phone activity and say there are several legitimate reasons for doing so. Could someone please give me a rational explanation as to the common sense reason why THIS suspect, SA would block two calls to TH? She didn't owe him money? He wasn't a harassing boyfriend or ex. He wasn't selling her illegal drugs. He had no dealings with TH at all other than through business. What was HIS legitimate reason specifically for doing so?

Also it seems some believe he has used the *67 function often which blocks the receiver from knowing who is calling. I haven't seen any evidence this was normal practice for him to do. Had he done it before during the multiple other times she was summoned to the ASY or was it only the day she was murdered and later on found on his property?

If he was known to do this his DT would have entered that into evidence in a nanosecond trying to diminish the weight of the blocked calls he made to the murder victim. What stand out the most is she is the only one where he blocks her number and is later found murdered on his property. He had very good representation with his DT. They were given phone records in discovery and they could have asked the Judge to subpoena any additional phone records.

How did it even come out that he hit the *67 regularly? Did that come out in the document dump? If so, did they say who he did this to when blocking his number and why and how close in time was it to TH murder? If these people exist the DT could have had them testify in the defense CIC backed up by the blocked call record supporting the claim.

As far as the Prosecutor entering the phone records showing his activity around the time of the murder is what they are suppose to do. They aren't required to do the work for the defense. The DT decides what they are going to present including any of the evidence that was turned over by the state before trial. The DA entered the phone activity which had relevancy to the murder case itself. Nothing was preventing the DT from getting additional phone records of SA if it helped their case nor were they stopped from showing where he had done this before to others. Since they didn't offer any evidence that I am aware of that he had a habit of hiding his number when calling people there must not be any evidence to support he did this frequently. . If they truly existed they would have been entered by the DT at trial. imo.

 

[dexter75]

He was suing them hoping to get 36 million. Sounds like it was about the money for him imo.

And how many laws & bills were going to be rewritten and/or changed, Limaes?
When it suited you & others, it was referenced many times " just because he was suing for 36million didn't mean that's what he was going to get "
🙄

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

Absolutely. You can see this effect in the first forum topic for TH when she went missing (2005). Before KK went public with his gruesome fable, that thread had a number of people who were not convinced SA killed her.

Right after the "news" conference, there was a huge shift to "Villagers With Torches Lit" on that thread. It's a spectacular and breathtaking view of how anyone could be set up, to be viewed as a monster if that's what LE wants out there.

If I have learned anything from being a member here, it is to never believe I am getting the whole true story from the press. Ever.

The original Teresa Halbach missing thread is worth reading again imo:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...anitowoc-31-Oct-2005&highlight=Teresa+halbach

It really is.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[IDK]

How do we know that is even where he got his theory? He doesn't mention he got it from the confession. If he had the writer wouldn't have left that out. Maybe this is what he believes happened.

Jurors are allowed to have their own theory about what they think happened or what they believe the motive was for the murder and jurors don't have to agree with each other on what they believe happened nor do they have to agree on the motive. I would suspect at the time he was convicted all 12 jurors believed his motive was to rape the victim and then he murdered her to render her voiceless like so many other suspects do to their victim/s.

It doesn't take much to think TH was tortured and raped and she WAS shot in the head. He did have a charge against him for mutilating her body even though he was found not guilty on that particular charge iirc. That could lead someone to believe she had been dismembered. Mutilations are very often dismembering the victim's body so I really don't see anything odd about his theory of what he thinks happened to the victim. Some may have compromised on the mutilation charge if they weren't unanimous and agreed to find him NG on that charge. Yet some could have certainly thought he did dismember her body but may have thought the DA didn't put forth enough evidence to render a guilty on that charge.

Also someone said the jury didn't give the *67 any weight when convicting Avery. I didn't see anything stating they disregarded the blocked calls in the linked article. The article pretty much was the written words of the one who wrote the article along with three short quotes by only three of the people who were on the jury.

At this point, all we can do is speculate what the jurors thought about the evidence presented. There is no way to know what evidence carried greater weight with them, whether it was the blood evidence, use of *67 (doubtful in my mind, but of course others disagree), or conclusions based on information they were not supposed to consider.(KK's press conference) No way to know, unfortunately.
As far as the bolded above, what evidence would the jurors have used to come to that conclusion? I am not aware of any physical evidence that was presented at the trial that a rape occurred.

 

[IDK]

Absolutely. You can see this effect in the first forum topic for TH when she went missing (2005). Before KK went public with his gruesome fable, that thread had a number of people who were not convinced SA killed her.

Right after the "news" conference, there was a huge shift to "Villagers With Torches Lit" on that thread. It's a spectacular and breathtaking view of how anyone could be set up, to be viewed as a monster if that's what LE wants out there.

If I have learned anything from being a member here, it is to never believe I am getting the whole true story from the press. Ever.

The original Teresa Halbach missing thread is worth reading again imo:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...anitowoc-31-Oct-2005&highlight=Teresa+halbach

Thanks for the suggestion to read this previous thread. It sounds very eye-opening.

 

[dexter75]

I concur! ILoveDateline's explanation is simply the best.

This is exactly what I was thinking, but I wasn't able to articulate it. Thank you ILoveDateline! Makes perfect sense. I find If things don't add up, and are not making sense, then it is not the truth. Truth is pretty strait forward generally...The pretzels people are twisting themselves into, to view those calls as sinister, do not make sense to me.

Well, those calls..MUST go with those bones ( no photos, no proof they were even burned there tbh ) AND that RAV that was found within minutes ( by the grace of God in a search led by the EX) AND the PLATES ( found by LE breaking protocol) AND the SEX TOYS ( ordered weeks prior), AND the BULLETS ( found MONTHS later again by which officers&#128521, AND the KEY ( found how many searches later again, by who?&#129300 , AND the SWEAT DNA, ( as stated by Ken Kratz ) , AND the bleach spot on the garage floor, ( was this the ONLY piece of evidence not found by LE or "suspicious" ..help!! ) those blocked calls IMO
Don't go with any of this
This^^^ doesn't go with Avery..
Rapist women haters in all of my research and reading don't do what Avery did.
They don't get engaged, call their regular photographers work to let them know they want her to come out, then kill her only to leave clue after clue. Leaving a handful of " certain " evidence..blood, but no prints..her vehicle, but no body..her " locked" vehicle🙄 really?






Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

Thanks for the suggestion to read this previous thread. It sounds very eye-opening.

It'll blow your mind

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

If we're going to speculate about how people might feel - do you think the depositions with more and more evidence of malfeasance by the police made the cops angrier and angrier at Steven, whom they falsely convicted?

Surely this had an effect on them.

There it is😉
Cyber hug from Michigan! Great question😊

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

...other than cell phone pings and witnesses.

Beat me to it..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[dexter75]

When the State has millions to spend, and the defense only a fraction of that, of course the resources are going to come into play.

At the time of the trial, there is no reliable test for EDTA - and there still isn't.

It's outrageous that the State made use of a non-scientific test as part of their 'expert' testimony'.

Outrageous and quite frankly, the citizens of Wisconsin should be terrified that the system was allowed to " work " this way😟
IMO

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

 

[BigCityAccountant]

Well, those calls..MUST go with those bones ( no photos, no proof they were even burned there tbh ) AND that RAV that was found within minutes ( by the grace of God in a search led by the EX) AND the PLATES ( found by LE breaking protocol) AND the SEX TOYS ( ordered weeks prior), AND the BULLETS ( found MONTHS later again by which officers&#128521, AND the KEY ( found how many searches later again, by who?&#129300 , AND the SWEAT DNA, ( as stated by Ken Kratz ) , AND the bleach spot on the garage floor, ( was this the ONLY piece of evidence not found by LE or "suspicious" ..help!! ) those blocked calls IMO
Don't go with any of this
This^^^ doesn't go with Avery..
Rapist women haters in all of my research and reading don't do what Avery did.
They don't get engaged, call their regular photographers work to let them know they want her to come out, then kill her only to leave clue after clue. Leaving a handful of " certain " evidence..blood, but no prints..her vehicle, but no body..her " locked" vehicle really?






Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

.
Hi Dex!!!

You make a very good point. Why set it up for her to come to his place? Familiarity, perhaps. But that just brings LE to your doorstep. Why not follow her home? Why not follow her for days and then make your move? Why summons her to your place, knowing full well LE will be at your doorstep in minutes~~because of the $36m lawsuit.