Where the Avery Conspiracy Theory Falls Apart

[dexter75]

I have thought this same thought. For QUITE some time now.

Two words...sodium pentothal. Especially for Brendan. Sorry if that offends anyone.

 

[dexter75]

EXACTLY.
We have a MEDIOCRE pair of JEANS, most likely with cheap " rivets " that just " happen to be " found in that ole pit, yet NO trace of a bullet??

Not even fragments??
Thank you Sinsaint, for that info.
I'm waiting for SOMETHING from Branden, that is CONSISTENT & STRAIGHT OUT OF HIS MOUTH.
Initiated by/from BRANDEN.

Fact: Dassey mentioned the clothing after the investigators suggested numerous times that SOMETHING was put in that fire. Yep, he came up with clothing on his own, unfortunately the clothing he described was not what she was wearing.

And since we are on the topic of Dassey's confession lining up with evidence, he claimed Halbach was shot ten or eleven times. Just as with the rivets, shouldn't nine or ten bullets have been recovered from that pit as well? As far as bullets go, hubby insists that a .22 most likely would not have enough enough power to go through both sides of a skull. As testimony indicated, she had at least two bullet wounds to the head so, at a minimum, at least two of those bullets would be stuck in her skull and should have been found in that pit.

 

[MaxManning]

Not assumption: TH was absolutely with SA that very day somewhere around 2:40pm
Not assumption: The last activity on TH cell phone was 2:41pm Oct 30, 2005
Not assumption: TH completed the transaction and gave SA a receipt and a copy of the current Auto Trader
Not assumption: SA is the last known person to interact with TH that day.
Not assumption: No one who is a friend or family member of TH ever heard from TH again
Not assumption: TH was murdered and her body was burned into charred bits and those bones were found on the Avery property
Not assumption: SA started a bonfire in his fire pit, approximately 2 to 3 hours after the last time TH was seen alive.
Not assumption: SA kept the fire going in the fire pit, for several hours and well after the 10pm curfew BD had.
Not assumption: TH's SUV was found, partially obscured, on the Avery property.
Not assumption: Inside the SUV was blood and hair, which was DNA tested and came from TH
Not assumption: 5 of 6 rivets from the "Daisy Fuentes" jeans TH was wearing that day were found in the fire pit, where her bones were also found
Not assumption: TH's camera, cell phone, and PDA were found burned inside the burn barrel between SA and BD's trailers
Not assumption: SA's nephew, BD made statements that might indicate what happened to TH
Not assumption: BD was at the fire and was with his uncle at some point that afternoon.
Not assumption: Pants BD was wearing that day in Oct 2005 had some stains from chlorine bleach on them. BD handed those pants to the police.

Occam's Razor: No assumptions needed at all to opine that something happened to TH while she was on the Avery Salvage yard property and that she never left there alive and that whatever happened to her was done around 3pm or so and her body was likely being burned in the known large firepit fire that went for several hours and her belongings were being burned in the burn barrel nearby.

1. Why does bus driver say teresa halbach was taking photos of van at 3:45-ish ? Propane guy sees suv LEAVING around that time period 3:45-4:00.
2. Avery was given no receipt. It's a bill of sale for when/if the car is sold - FACT
3. Bones were found in 3 locations - FACT Consistent with movement of bones TO the avery pit - FACT
4. If 3 is fact, pda, cell phone, and camera being never moved is assumption
5. BD interviews are highly questionable and widely seen as coerced and tainted - anything in them is assumption.

Remove those and you lose quite a few of the others that are critical to connecting SA only.

For example, how does he SUV on the property point any more to SA than CA or SD ?
Given that CA, EA, SD , BD knew teresa was on property and some knew she was coming, since SA told them, why does that link only SA ?

Lastly you are misrepresenting what Occam's Razor is, and how it should be applied.



The propane guy said that he saw an suv LEAVE the property at 3:45-ish , which jives with her taking her photos when bus driver saw her.

So explain to me how ANY of the evidence here, is anything other than assumption in regards to teresa and her vehicle being on the property again UNTIL the rav4 is found on 11/5.

FACT - There is no non assumptive evidence that shows the vehicle or teresa halback was on the property after a propane guy sees her leave, until 11/5 -- think about that.

If you are honest, you'll admit that the only non assumption you can make in regards to vehicle/teresa after propane guy sees her leave, is that they were both found on Avery property on 11/5.

But, go ahead and try to prove otherwise.

A bon fire doesn't mean she's there that evening.
Cleaning of a garage doesn't mean she's there that evening.
All of SA/TH interaction before that doesn't mean she's there that evening.

Alot of assumptions can lead you to believe that.

I hate the fact that I likely feel just as strongly about SA being guilty as you, but for some reason I cannot overlook your need to overstate what is not assumption and ignore things like bus driver testimony and propane guy testimony as if it never existed.


You want to use brendan's coerced statement, but you don't want to accept the bus driver and propane guy's statements ? explain that to me.

 

[Madeleine74]

We know she was shot in the head because one of the bone scalp pieces found was xrayed and it had micro pieces of iron show up on the xray. That is the how anthropologists and M.E.s can tell that defect was from a bullet.

 

[missy1974]

Fact: Dassey mentioned the clothing after the investigators suggested numerous times that SOMETHING was put in that fire. Yep, he came up with clothing on his own, unfortunately the clothing he described was not what she was wearing.

And since we are on the topic of Dassey's confession lining up with evidence, he claimed Halbach was shot ten or eleven times. Just as with the rivets, shouldn't nine or ten bullets have been recovered from that pit as well? As far as bullets go, hubby insists that a .22 most likely would not have enough enough power to go through both sides of a skull. As testimony indicated, she had at least two bullet wounds to the head so, at a minimum, at least two of those bullets would be stuck in her skull and should have been found in that pit.

I seen your post and asked my personal gun expert, aka my hubby, he seems to feel the same way. He has been reluctantly listening to me for days and days about this case, told him I am making him watch it on the weekend LOL

 

[missy1974]

We know she was shot in the head because one of the bone scalp pieces found was xrayed and it had micro pieces of iron show up on the xray. That is the how anthropologists and M.E.s can tell that defect was from a bullet.

I don't know if that is disputed, I think it's the idea that it went in and out. And if it didn't come out, why didn't they find the bullet or bullets. JMO but it could be that if those bones were moved, the bullet or fragments were left in the original burning spot. I'm not sure how well they looked in the quarry or the other burn barrel where bone fragments were found.

 

[MaxManning]

I don't know if that is disputed, I think it's the idea that it went in and out. And if it didn't come out, why didn't they find the bullet or bullets. JMO but it could be that if those bones were moved, the bullet or fragments were left in the original burning spot. I'm not sure how well they looked in the quarry or the other burn barrel where bone fragments were found.

This is a great observation. I don't know much about guns, so I find this an excellent point I'd have never thought about. If those bullets went in, but not out. Bullets should be in the fire pit.

 

[dexter75]

THIS.

THIS MaxManning, is THE MOST LOGICAL & REFRESHING post I've read in a while, IMO.

YOU give me HOPE that there ARE people in this world, that even though they think SA could be guilty, FORCE themselves to LOOK at EVERYTHING presented.:happydance:

THIS, is what America's Judicial system is SUPPOSED to be about!

I DO hope fellow SLEUTHER'S will follow your lead;:wave:

LOOK at these cases with OPEN MINDS, HONESTY, FAIRNESS, SELFLESSNESS, and HUMILITY.

Thank you!

(You are my new bf )

1. Why does bus driver and propane guy say teresa halbach was taking photos of van at 3:45-ish ?
2. Avery was given no receipt. It's a bill of sale for when/if the car is sold - FACT
3. Bones were found in 3 locations - FACT Consistent with movement of bones from - FACT
4. If 3 is fact, pda, cell phone, and camera being never moved is assumption
5. BD interviews are highly questionable and widely seen as coerced and tainted - anything in them is assumption.

Remove those and you lose quite a few of the others that are critical to connecting SA only.

For example, how does he SUV on the property point any more to SA than CA or SD ?
Given that CA, EA, SD , BD knew teresa was on property and some knew she was coming, since SA told them, why does that link only SA ?

Lastly you are misrepresenting what Occam's Razor is, and how it should be applied.



The propane guy said that he saw an suv LEAVE the property at 3:45-ish , which jives with her taking her photos when bus driver saw her.

So explain to me how ANY of the evidence here, is anything other than assumption in regards to teresa and her vehicle being on the property again UNTIL the rav4 is found on 11/5.

FACT - There is no non assumptive evidence that shows the vehicle or teresa halback was on the property after a propane guy sees her leave, until 11/5 -- think about that.

If you are honest, you'll admit that the only non assumption you can make in regards to vehicle/teresa after propane guy sees her leave, is that they were both found on Avery property on 11/5.

But, go ahead and try to prove otherwise.

A bon fire doesn't mean she's there that evening.
Cleaning of a garage doesn't mean she's there that evening.
All of SA/TH interaction before that doesn't mean she's there that evening.

Alot of assumptions can lead you to believe that.

I hate the fact that I likely feel just as strongly about SA being guilty as you, but for some reason I cannot overlook your need to overstate what is not assumption and ignore things like bus driver testimony and propane guy testimony as if it never existed.


You want to use brendan's coerced testimony, but you don't want to accept the bus driver and propane guy's testimony ? explain that to me.

 

[dexter75]

MINE too hahahaha!!!

However, we watched MAM together and read the transcripts together =)

I seen your post and asked my personal gun expert, aka my hubby, he seems to feel the same way. He has been reluctantly listening to me for days and days about this case, told him I am making him watch it on the weekend LOL

 

[missy1974]

So if we believe that her body was burned in the firepit behind SA's garage, what is a reasonable explanation for finding bone fragments in the quarry (I'm not exactly sure where in the quarry, does anyone?), and what is a reasonable explanation for finding bone fragments in a barrel behind BD's/Barbs/ST's home?

I'm seriously trying to rationalize this in my own mind and welcome any feedback. I can't think of a reason why there would be fragments elsewhere.

As I see it right now, it's reasonable TO ME that she was burned somewhere else.... the barrel (from BD's) was used to move the ashes/bones and that is why there is fragments left in there (by accident). It still doesn't explain the fragments found in the quarry though... maybe going to dump them there and then changed their mind?

ETA: I have copied this to the Bones thread.

 

[Sinsaint]

Y

Well those rivets belonged to Daisy Fuentes branded jeans and TH had Daisy Fuentes jeans that were not found in her residence. Her younger sister testified about those jeans and ID'd the rivets. The sister used to tease her about those particular jeans (also in testimony). Occam's Razor: The Daisy Fuentes rivets were from pants TH was wearing that day and their presence in the fire pit is another piece of evidence that indicates TH and at least something she wore was burned.

Whether BD really saw them or not who knows. They were indeed there among the charred remains and ashes in the fire pit.

Nice way to ignore the question. I'm not concerned about what was found in the fire since that could have transported there. I'm more concerned about what wasn't there that should have been, according to Dassey.

 

[Sinsaint]

I seen your post and asked my personal gun expert, aka my hubby, he seems to feel the same way. He has been reluctantly listening to me for days and days about this case, told him I am making him watch it on the weekend LOL

Lol... I tormented my hubby with it last weekend. He takes issue with the condition of the fragment as well. If it was a lead bullet it could have the black appearance it has. The problem is, after hitting bone or concrete it would have mushroomed to the point no ballistic test could be done. If it were jacketed it could fragment like what was described but wouldn't have the black appearance as seen in the photo, unless it was charred or something.

 

[dexter75]

I was surprised to read this too!

Not even the key?
90 percent and no explanation for why the seal was broken on the box holding the blood?

 

[Sinsaint]

I don't know if that is disputed, I think it's the idea that it went in and out. And if it didn't come out, why didn't they find the bullet or bullets. JMO but it could be that if those bones were moved, the bullet or fragments were left in the original burning spot. I'm not sure how well they looked in the quarry or the other burn barrel where bone fragments were found.

Yes. This is the point. Halbach was clearly shot in the head. That bullet (or bullets) would have still been in her head along with roughly eight more lodged in her body. If her body was burned in the fire pit, her bones along with all those bullets would have been in the pit as well.

 

[dexter75]

WOW!!!

Thanks for your input!

I never thought LE could be responsible for killing her BUT now that you mention it, and this is JUST me thinking out loud here,

WHO better than to be able to pin a crime on someone else, right?

MOTIVE? Yep, this person had motive!

A LONE police officer. hmmm.

In this crazy world, especially THIS case, anything is possible:thinking:

Glad you DID participate here!!:takeabow:

I haven't really participated in this talk, but I have to comment on the terror people feel about LE actually being the ones to have killed her. It may be that I come from a neighborhood (East New York Brooklyn) where police were not friendly, nice, honest or law abiding, so I have a very open mind and I know first more than anything that LE are HUMAN BEINGS, with anger, fear and evil inside of them.

When I watched this and thought about LE I didn't think the entire LE all the way to the top killed her, I thought of a lone police officer who shall remain nameless, who happened to come upon her as she drove off the property. Tailed her car pulled her over and then thought real hard. These officers were about to be shamed, the insurance that cover the county decided they were not going to cover the monitory damage, they were all deposed and about to be in the hole for $36 million, what would that mean? loss of your pension? Your job? your home? loss of respect? To THE AVERY's?

This kind of pressure could have absolutely put pressure on one officer to do this and work on getting him framed. To say this is ridiculous because they are LE is just not thinking with the mind of a human pushed in a corner. It wasn't just to frame him so he goes to jail, but to save themselves the future of the department.

From the physical evidence it sounds like she was shot in the head and then placed in her trunk (the bloody hair mark in the trunk) is telling this story, so to me it is really easy to imagine this all happened off property once she left and then she was taken back.

Now is this s stretch? Maybe, but possible.

 

[dexter75]

Thanks for this Soulmagnet
UGH, I welcome ALL ideas, theories, even leaps of imagination! ( Many of us do, we ARE Sleuthing, right? )

Mendara stated her post could be a stretch, and didn't talk on this topic much. No need for snark.

MANY sleuthers ( some more than others ) have had moments of posting what they feel is a pretty darn great post, tip, etc., only later to stop and think, maybe that wasn't so great?!
Some stop posting altogether.

Maybe if everyone could remember we do not ALL think the SAME ( Thank GOD ) and again, shouldn't ASSUME what
" these leaps of imagination take into consideration "

Whoever was planting the evidence would know where to direct the investigation... the Doh! ,,part of your post is really pointless.As if there is no murder they would know there is no other evidence.Even if there was a murder and is was'nt SA nor on his property or the property of Avery's salvage yard.

 

[dexter75]

HONEST & OBJECTIVE.
Is why you are the greatest Max!

So, if the bullet is found 6 months later in a garage that was searched already, are you at all suspicious ?

They weren't still investigating/searching that garage, they were done searching that garage for many months.

So if there was a bullet there, would competent people find that bullet and fragment that are laying out on the floor ? And casings that are out in the open.

be honest.

that's all.

If there is information that explains it all, then why wouldn't we all accept that ? But where is it ? I don't see it.

So, I'm suspicious still

 

[dexter75]

It is suspicious, absolutely.

I am closer to 90/10 on Avery being guilty at the moment. Still have reasonable doubt.

But I don't understand how people can't see the reason for suspicion in this case.

The police department even voluntarily gave another police department the lead , because they understood the conflict.

So when they go about finding all the key evidence in an investigation they wanted the public to think they weren't leading -- why wouldn't people be suspicious?

it is suspicious!

Doesn't mean Steve's innocent, but it does mean they made this bed of suspicion by not stepping aside and getting involved to the point of finding key evidence -- some of it 6 months later!

 

[dexter75]

Thank you so much Soulmagnet!

Pretty sure I thought that was the answer, but didn't feel like being critiqued tonight.

So, is it REALLY too far fetched that LE would jump through such hoops for" nothing? ":gaah:

This suit could potentially ONLY affect the ENTIRE COUNTY!:doh:

It would effect county budgets , not the LE officers directly . Programs like head start ,raises of county employee's benefit packages ,funding to additional programs at a county level. The whole overall county budget would be affected by any payout. No matter if it was 400,000 or 35 million.

It could trickle down to say ,bus drivers for example..

 

[dexter75]

Nailed it, Duchess!

I think this is an excellent question and the answer is unequivocally NO, because for me at least, that is the main reason WHY I believe there is not a level of reasonable doubt that has been made in this case. If he hadn't wrongfully convicted the first time, we really wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. Bottom line to me, is that from the very very beginning NONE of the same key players should have been anywhere NEAR this investigation, yet you have the very same people finding the evidence and processing the evidence in this case. If they all made mistakes the first time (likely due to their pre-conceived notions of SAs innocence,) then it is quite likely they would repeat the same behavior the 2nd time.

Add to that the fact that there is so much blood evidence that SHOULD be there that ISN'T there, and the fact that they took advantage of a learning delayed 16 year old kid, and the fact that the prosecutor in the case was a drug-addicted sexual predator of the very worst kind, who abused his authority to sexually harass the very people he was charged with protecting?

Yeah - I have a LOT of doubts. And so do a lot of people. And nothing can take away all of the very reasonable and logical DOUBTS that exist in this case, even if you add in all of the crud Kratz is trying to throw in recently. He needs to shut his big fat mouth.