Making a Murderer updates

[Handyman]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

Oh regurgitating your post works just fine, since it made zero sense. My original post with links is exactly the same way Solo is presenting the defense arguments. The difference is it takes the side of a young woman who lost her life to these murderers.

So it's OK for Solo to present one side, but your too lazy to present and too lazy to listen to a podcast. You just like to criticize. That's fine. Stick your head back in the ground.

Quoting Kathleen Zellner, is quoting a one sided argument. It's ok for Solo to post links, but not me to post links that sink every argument that the defense has presented. That is adding to thread, even if you don't believe it.

Or you could just give us the highlights and we can then decide based on that whether it is worth listening to. I know that is way too logical for your Paint Thinner Infused Brain but if you give us a reason to believe you we just might. The problem is all of you True Believers say lots of vague stuff, tell us Avery is scum and that we are idiots to believe it. You dont tell us why, you dont prove anything, you just say it and expect we will believe you because...well...reasons. That may fly in Bumphuck, WI but in the rest of the world facts are helpful. But no you guys always find a way to bud into the discussion, insult everyone and then play victim when no one listens to you or takes you seriously.

So please, tell us why the podcast is right and the series is wrong. We are all interested and I think we would all rather believe the right guy is in jail so convince us.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

Try it. Cut your finger, open a car door with it bleeding and try not to leave fingerprints. See how that works out for you.

The cut was on a finger on Avery's right hand, iirc, hence the state's "theory" that he smeared blood next to the key ignition.

I don't know of anyone who, absent unusual circumstances, would open a driver's side car door with their right hand. Two awkward. Passenger side door, yes.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

I watched it and listened to rebuttals. Doesn't change my belief that Avery and Dassey were the killers.

I stand for Theresa.

Avery pulled a gun a lady after running her off the road, he killed animals, he drew up torture chambers in prison before being release, he called her over to his house using *67 to block his identity, he stoked the fire where her bones were intertangled with steel belts, he threatened to kill his ex-girlfriend.

But he is clean as the driven snow. He couldn't have done this murder. He was framed by the real murderers, and 3 different law enforcement agencies.

You do realize Avery can be scum AND not have killed her right? Or is Bobby Dassey her killer as well because he had a massive torture porn and rape fetish?

 

[Handyman]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

After watching the original series my impression is that the lawyers, judges, and cops of that area should all be dropped into the middle of the ocean. Avery could still be guilty, sure. He's obviously about as moral as the average Dumpy. But the backwoods Joe Six Packs of this country are supposed to be like that. The people in positions of authority in that series are the ones who freak me out. They belong in ISIS, not the US.

Bingo!

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

I stand for Theresa.

That's a really well thought out argument and signals the strength of your position, and not at all the exact opposite.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

The cut was on a finger on Avery's right hand, iirc, hence the state's "theory" that he smeared blood next to the key ignition.

I don't know of anyone who, absent unusual circumstances, would open a driver's side car door with their right hand. Two awkward. Passenger side door, yes.

I unlock the doors on my MDX on the driver's side with my right hand. Both rear and sometimes front. This involves grabbing the door handle since the sensor is on the back of the handle. Obviously that's not the case here, but just wanted to point that out. But yeah, ignore my other post on this that I deleted.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

I have read, and listened to many sources that supposedly refute MAM. None of them explain the massive holes in the case, that amount to, at minimum, reasonable doubt. Realistically, what I've seen for rebuttals doesn't come close to convincing me Avery and Dassey did it. The actual physical evidence, facts, with no bias, do not add up to Avery and Dassey killing her. Is it possible they did? Sure, it is. But the evidence presented does not paint that picture. Anyone that thinks it does, is looking at it emotionally, and with bias.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

That's a really well thought out argument and signals the strength of your position, and not at all the exact opposite.

Yeah I love when people try to say that thinking Avery and sassed were railroaded by the state means you’re crapping on Theresa.

That’s the kind of logic I expect from a Wisconsinite so it makes sense

 

[solovsfett]

The cut was on a finger on Avery's right hand, iirc, hence the state's "theory" that he smeared blood next to the key ignition.

I don't know of anyone who, absent unusual circumstances, would open a driver's side car door with their right hand. Two awkward. Passenger side door, yes.

I’m not saying he opened the door with his right hand. I’m saying Wisconsin can’t have it both ways here. He gets blood in the car somehow but no finger prints of any kind on the door handle, steering wheel or shifter? If he wore gloves there’d be no blood so the theory of wearing gloves and wiping sweat that found it’s way onto the hood latch does not fly with me either.

Tick tock manitowoc.

 

[Spartanforlife4]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

Yeah I love when people try to say that thinking Avery and sassed were railroaded by the state means you’re crapping on Theresa.

That’s the kind of logic I expect from a Wisconsinite so it makes sense

I could be wrong, but it seems the only ones who are outright in denial about anything pro-Avery in this case, be it this thread or the original, are from Wisconsin. Is there some weird state pride in the court system there?

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

Just some of the questions that need to be answered:

How was she killed in the trailer or the garage, with not a shred of evidence that Theresa was in either? No blood, no DNA, no fingerprints.

Why was Theresa's blood in the back of the RAV4 if she was killed at Avery's and disposed of in the fire pit?

How did they get a fire pit hot enough to cremate a body? (Hint, its scientifically impossible)

How was there none of Theresa's DNA on her key, yet there was Avery's?

How did Theresa's day planner, that she had with her that day, end up back at her home?

 

[trixR4kids]

I could be wrong, but it seems the only ones who are outright in denial about anything pro-Avery in this case, be it this thread or the original, are from Wisconsin. Is there some weird state pride in the court system there?

The area where he is from is pretty conservative and you have people in the area who’ve heard every rumor/gossip and are convinced of his guilt. My buddy had a roommate from the area who I’m pretty certain didn’t watch the doc but was saying how it’s total BS and knows he’s guilty. I remember messaging someone on an online dating site and just sorta jokingly mentioned something about it and got a reply about how “MAM is full of **** and it really ****es me off!”. My dad is more conservative and convinced of his guilt because obviously it couldn’t be planted etc.

So it’s some combo of certain people who are too close to the situation and others who clearly bought all of Kratz press releases and followed the local coverage closely and are unwilling to change their mind or even think about it any further.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

The area where he is from is pretty conservative and you have people in the area who’ve heard every rumor/gossip and are convinced of his guilt. My buddy had a roommate from the area who I’m pretty certain didn’t watch the doc but was saying how it’s total BS and knows he’s guilty. I remember messaging someone on an online dating site and just sorta jokingly mentioned something about it and got a reply about how “MAM is full of **** and it really ****es me off!”. My dad is more conservative and convinced of his guilt because obviously it couldn’t be planted etc.

So it’s some combo of certain people who are too close to the situation and others who clearly bought all of Kratz press releases and followed the local coverage closely and are unwilling to change their mind or even think about it any further.

Yeah, the people that are vehemently against Avery and Dassey are usually way too close to the area, and are not able to get around their pre-determined biases. If they were able to put that aside and look at the facts, they'd see it much more clearly.

 

[solovsfett]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

Zellner’s response to Wisconsin due April 15.

https://t.co/laATfXflnA

 

[Kepler]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

The area where he is from is pretty conservative and you have people in the area who’ve heard every rumor/gossip and are convinced of his guilt. My buddy had a roommate from the area who I’m pretty certain didn’t watch the doc but was saying how it’s total BS and knows he’s guilty. I remember messaging someone on an online dating site and just sorta jokingly mentioned something about it and got a reply about how “MAM is full of **** and it really ****es me off!”. My dad is more conservative and convinced of his guilt because obviously it couldn’t be planted etc.

So it’s some combo of certain people who are too close to the situation and others who clearly bought all of Kratz press releases and followed the local coverage closely and are unwilling to change their mind or even think about it any further.

I assume this comes from the reflexive deference to coercive conservative authority (the father, the football coach, the pastor, the cops, the army, Jehovah) that is typical of white, rural, uneducated America. It's the same wall you hit when Our Brave Boys (sniff) murder a few sandy brown locals for jollies. Well, of course they would never do that because PAT TILLMAN!!!11!

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

Just some of the questions that need to be answered:

How was she killed in the trailer or the garage, with not a shred of evidence that Theresa was in either? No blood, no DNA, no fingerprints.

Why was Theresa's blood in the back of the RAV4 if she was killed at Avery's and disposed of in the fire pit?

How did they get a fire pit hot enough to cremate a body? (Hint, its scientifically impossible)

How was there none of Theresa's DNA on her key, yet there was Avery's?

How did Theresa's day planner, that she had with her that day, end up back at her home?

First, I'd take issue with your statement that all of your questions "need" to be answered. That's technically not true. It might be true to convince you one way or the other as to what happened, but it certainly isn't legally true. Sometimes questions just can't be answered in a case, but that doesn't mean you can't convict or acquit someone, and it doesn't mean your decision was wrong.

Probably the only thing that I'm pretty confident about in the case is that Halbach was at Avery's right before she was killed and had some sort of interaction with Avery. We really don't have any sort of credible evidence of her interaction with anyone else after Avery.

Her car was found in their lot. Her bones were found in their fire pit. Her key was found in her house. His blood and her blood were found in the Rav4.

Beyond that, it's hard to say. I have no idea why her DNA isn't on the key. It seems to be undisputed as to it being her key. But what does that prove to us?

I have no idea how her day planner ended up in her home. But again, I'm not sure what that proves for us either. As I said, some puzzling questions almost always go unanswered in cases like this one.

The one problem that I've had is that people will take facts like the day planner location and come up with a theory that the fiance moved it or the cops moved it or something like that. But then when you try to tie it in with the murder, it never fits. It's just random conspiracy theories.

Personally, I don't think the State properly presented this case, and pretty much every theory they've had about how and where Avery may have committed the murder has been debunked. But I certainly wouldn't want to bet my life that Avery is innocent. For all I know he whacked her in the head with a wrench while she was standing at the back of her Rav, threw her body in the back and transported it to a barrel somewhere where he burned her remains, chucked the bones in the firepit hoping they would burn up over time, wiped off the key to remove blood from it, thus removing her prints and DNA but leaving his. Who knows. I certainly don't. If proving the state's theory is wrong as to how it occurred is sufficient to grant a new trial, then I think he's entitled to a new trial.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

Personally, I don't think the State properly presented this case, and pretty much every theory they've had about how and where Avery may have committed the murder has been debunked. But I certainly wouldn't want to bet my life that Avery is innocent. For all I know he whacked her in the head with a wrench while she was standing at the back of her Rav, threw her body in the back and transported it to a barrel somewhere where he burned her remains, chucked the bones in the firepit hoping they would burn up over time, wiped off the key to remove blood from it, thus removing her prints and DNA but leaving his. Who knows. I certainly don't. If proving the state's theory is wrong as to how it occurred is sufficient to grant a new trial, then I think he's entitled to a new trial.

agree

 

[solovsfett]

First, I'd take issue with your statement that all of your questions "need" to be answered. That's technically not true. It might be true to convince you one way or the other as to what happened, but it certainly isn't legally true. Sometimes questions just can't be answered in a case, but that doesn't mean you can't convict or acquit someone, and it doesn't mean your decision was wrong.

Probably the only thing that I'm pretty confident about in the case is that Halbach was at Avery's right before she was killed and had some sort of interaction with Avery. We really don't have any sort of credible evidence of her interaction with anyone else after Avery.

Her car was found in their lot. Her bones were found in their fire pit. Her key was found in her house. His blood and her blood were found in the Rav4.

Beyond that, it's hard to say. I have no idea why her DNA isn't on the key. It seems to be undisputed as to it being her key. But what does that prove to us?

I have no idea how her day planner ended up in her home. But again, I'm not sure what that proves for us either. As I said, some puzzling questions almost always go unanswered in cases like this one.

The one problem that I've had is that people will take facts like the day planner location and come up with a theory that the fiance moved it or the cops moved it or something like that. But then when you try to tie it in with the murder, it never fits. It's just random conspiracy theories.

Personally, I don't think the State properly presented this case, and pretty much every theory they've had about how and where Avery may have committed the murder has been debunked. But I certainly wouldn't want to bet my life that Avery is innocent. For all I know he whacked her in the head with a wrench while she was standing at the back of her Rav, threw her body in the back and transported it to a barrel somewhere where he burned her remains, chucked the bones in the firepit hoping they would burn up over time, wiped off the key to remove blood from it, thus removing her prints and DNA but leaving his. Who knows. I certainly don't. If proving the state's theory is wrong as to how it occurred is sufficient to grant a new trial, then I think he's entitled to a new trial.

Her RAV4 was found off site up the road from Scott tadych’s house on sr147 about 2 days prior to Pam storm hearing the voice of god tell her it was at avery’s Lot. Andy Colburn called it in AND you hear a woman’s voice in the background confirm “it’s hers”

Bones were found in at least 3 separate locations but the state laser focused on one to tailor the narrative.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

I think the planner fact does prove something. If her planner was at her house, that is proof that she either met with someone else that had access to her house, or she herself went to her house. No Avery or Dassey had access to her house to put the planner back there. It had to get there somehow.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Making a Murderer updates

I think the planner fact does prove something. If her planner was at her house, that is proof that she either met with someone else that had access to her house, or she herself went to her house. No Avery or Dassey had access to her house to put the planner back there. It had to get there somehow.

to be fair, if they had her keys they had access right?