I agree.
Making Of A Murderer (Netflix)
- Thread starter Cheesebeef
- Start date
I agree.
Chaplin
Better off silent
Steven Avery's lawyer, Kathleen Zellner, has filed her latest motion, a 599-page document that suggests Brendan Dassey's brother is a viable suspect in Teresa Halbach's murder
https://www.rollingstone.com/cultur...ches-implicate-dasseys-brother-murder-697336/
Fascinating read.
https://www.rollingstone.com/cultur...ches-implicate-dasseys-brother-murder-697336/
Fascinating read.
Last edited:
Krangodnzr
Captain of Team Murray
I think Avery was guilty. I think it's completely far-fetched to say he didn't murder Theresa Halbach. So much was omitted from the documentary that makes the conviction of Avery obvious.
How could someone sneak the car onto his property without him noticing? The car would've had to passed his dwelling to get to that part of the lot.
Every bone of Theresa's body was accounted for...so the concept that all 270 bones to include tiny wrist bones could be burned elsewhere and brought there is ludicrous.
The bullet fragment found on the property had her DNA AND matched a firearm in his house.
His DNA was found in the car AND underneath the hood of her car (sweat DNA which would be nigh impossible to "plant").
There are literally dozens of other things that are beyond ridiculous to claim his innocence. I mean, even his cellmates in prison stated that he talked about elaborate schemes to capture, rape, and murder women once he was released from prison. The reason he was in a photo line up during his first conviction was because he ran a woman off the road and pulled a gun on her. Avery was all known to be a domestic abuser....just so much evidence that he was a deranged, sadist and for the documentary crew to completely avoid putting in obvious holes in their story was completely inexcusable.
Apparently the crew also remove large portions of the police interview with Dassey where he said many things that corroborated physical evidence, which would mean that he was there when it happened. During those portions that were kept out, he gave a narrative that was uncoached/not led that fit quite a bit of the forensic evidence at the scene.
How could someone sneak the car onto his property without him noticing? The car would've had to passed his dwelling to get to that part of the lot.
Every bone of Theresa's body was accounted for...so the concept that all 270 bones to include tiny wrist bones could be burned elsewhere and brought there is ludicrous.
The bullet fragment found on the property had her DNA AND matched a firearm in his house.
His DNA was found in the car AND underneath the hood of her car (sweat DNA which would be nigh impossible to "plant").
There are literally dozens of other things that are beyond ridiculous to claim his innocence. I mean, even his cellmates in prison stated that he talked about elaborate schemes to capture, rape, and murder women once he was released from prison. The reason he was in a photo line up during his first conviction was because he ran a woman off the road and pulled a gun on her. Avery was all known to be a domestic abuser....just so much evidence that he was a deranged, sadist and for the documentary crew to completely avoid putting in obvious holes in their story was completely inexcusable.
Apparently the crew also remove large portions of the police interview with Dassey where he said many things that corroborated physical evidence, which would mean that he was there when it happened. During those portions that were kept out, he gave a narrative that was uncoached/not led that fit quite a bit of the forensic evidence at the scene.
Krangodnzr
Captain of Team Murray
"October 31st, 2005. Avery has also signed an affidavit explaining why he believes that Bobby Dassey planted his blood inside Halbach’s RAV-4, a key piece of evidence in the prosecution’s case. Avery’s defense has always claimed that Avery’s blood had to have been planted in the car, but this is the first time they’re arguing Bobby Dassey was the one responsible. Avery states in this new affidavit that his nephew was aware that he had sustained a serious cut on his finger in the days before Halbach’s car was discovered in the Avery’s salvage yard. Bobby Dassey had access to his trailer and his bathroom, where, Avery says, the wound had bled onto the sink counter, and he didn’t clean it up right away. Avery says he now believes Bobby took some of the blood from the sink and planted it in Halbach’s car to frame him."
That sounds like bullcrap to me. Some idiot country bumpkin went into his bathroom and scooped up some blood and placed in the Rav-4? Not buying that at all.
Chaplin
Better off silent
Just one of many things about this case that are unbelievable.
Krangodnzr
Captain of Team Murray
It's an interesting case for sure, but after reading all of the stuff left out of the documentary, it was clearly omitted to tell the story of innocence not of guilt.
I always think it's ridiculous when people spin these stories about police DEPARTMENTS working in concert to plant evidence. I didn't buy it with OJ and I don't buy it here either.
Rivercard
Too much good stuff
You sure it would have to pass the dwelling (it's a large salvage yard)? Even so, it would not be that difficult.
Here's a link to the full motion for the law nerds here. Pages 27 & 28 are particularly interesting
"Most importantly, Bobby's brother Blaine has provided an affidavit in which he describes seeing Bobby at 3:45 p.m. driving a greenish-blue vehicle, the same color as Ms. Halbach's, in the area Mr. Rahmlow described seeing the RAV-4 parked on Nov 3 & Nov 4, 2005. Another witness has come forward and identified Ms. Halbach's vehicle as being parked at the old dam at the identical spot as Mr. Rahmlow on Oct 31, 2005"...
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Krangodnzr
Captain of Team Murray
So he burned the body RIGHT IN FRONT OF Avery's house without him knowing? Burning a body is a laborious task, it's not like burning a few logs.
Why did Avery attempt to hide his identity when calling Theresa Hallbach? Why did he lie about the timeline that she was there?
There are so many holes in his defense it's laughable.
Also pointing out that Bobby like violent pornography doesn't make him a murderer. There is a huge burgeoning **** community out there where sexual dominance and sadism are a normal part of sex. That doesn't make someone a murderer, it makes them kinky. Avery's defense is grasping at straws.
Rivercard
Too much good stuff
"Sweat DNA" was a Ken Kratz theatrical term. It is well established that sweat contains no DNA. However, people can slough off skin cells containing DNA when they sweat. Thus, DNA is often present on articles of clothing where sweat occurs, including hats.
Rivercard
Too much good stuff
Burn barrels as found at the Avery property aren't capable of burning a human body to the degree as the evidence presented. Theory is it was done at an offsite location that could handle the job (local smelter perhaps?) then transferred to the property. Or the conspiracy theory that it is not even Teresa's remains.
Chaplin
Better off silent
You obviously are on the side that Avery is guilty. Got it.
But for just a moment, consider if he is NOT guilty. Just consider it. What other recourse would you have sitting in jail as an innocent man? And you defending violent pornography is just a bit disturbing.
Rivercard
Too much good stuff
Wasn't expecting Part 2 to drop in 2018, but.....
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Chaplin
Better off silent
Just watched the first 2 episodes. Still fascinating. And Avery's new lawyer (that I quoted about above) is amazing. Some pretty compelling things already in the first 2 episodes--basically destroying the prosecutor's case about the blood in the car and Avery taking a new-fangled lie detector test that I can't tell is science or science-fiction. But he has a lot of people on his side right now.
Krangodnzr
Captain of Team Murray
I'm on the anticonspiracy theory side.
You don't think it's strange that he called her and lied about who he was and hid his number? Creepy.
Krangodnzr
Captain of Team Murray
Actually the evidence shows the body was burned with tires. Her remains were intermixed and burned with tires....which is another indicator she was burned at the auto salvage yard.
A bullet with her DNA fired from Avery's gun was found at the scene.
Avery detailed a fantasy of raping and murdering women to his fellow inmates in prison.
I mean, this Netflix docushow didn't give ANY of this information. I walked away thinking "WOW, this Avery guy was set up! This is an injustice!" And then I read the OTHER side....you know, the evidence that was NOT shown in the show that makes him looking really guilty. The guy tricked her in to coming using *67. Called her twice that way. She DIDN'T want to deal with Avery because the last time she came, he answered the door in just a towel. He really creeped her out and she told Autotrader she didn't want to go there again.
Yes, Avery was once wrongly convicted. But you have to remember the reason that he was in the line up in the first place was because he pulled a gun on a sheriff deputies wife not too long before the line up, and he had multiple other run ins with the law.
I'm all for exoneration of innocent people, but there is a mountain of evidence both physical and circumstantial that points to Avery and the Netflix show was so blatantly one-sidedly supporting Avery that the show blew away all credibility.
Rivercard
Too much good stuff
Have you watched season 2 yet? The bullet and other physical evidence you mention is meticulously examined and discussed.
Krangodnzr
Captain of Team Murray
I'll watch with as much of an open mind as I can. The problem is that the first season was so epically biased to Avery's innocence that it will be hard for me to take it seriously.
Chaplin
Better off silent
The very first thing you see in season 2 is a montage of all the criticisms of season 1, including complaints about the "missing" evidence from season 1. It's actually pretty fascinating and a great way of starting the new season.
Rivercard
Too much good stuff
Also, at the end of each episode they very wisely show a list of all the people that were asked to participate in the film but declined. It's quite interesting who is on that very long list. It's hard to strongly support the State's POV when almost nobody will speak to it.
Passepartout
July 4th Fireworks
Wished there were shows about the point of view of the victims and their families. And really hope one day that could be seen one day on Netflix or what have you.
Folster
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Posts
- 15,951
- Reaction score
- 6,149
I imagine people employed by the state are advised not to conduct interviews or discuss any cases past or present with the media
Why would anybody on the opposing side of the case participate in a TV show that has proven to be biased and pushing an agenda? There were a lot of people who participated or were featured in the previous series who were harrassed, and threatened as a result of the way the case was presented.
There's a reason why most liberals will not go on Fox News and most conservatives steer clear of MSNBC.
Rivercard
Too much good stuff
First off, nothing of the sort has been "proven". Avery was not portrayed as a saint in Season 1 by any means. And the other side has been more than encouraged to participate for balance. There is plenty of Ken Kratz presenting his POV in Season 2.
Season 2 is really just about lawyering (if that is a word, lol), evidence testing, and the appeals process. All of that speaks for itself. Are you saying the film's presentation of the evidence result conclusions are biased?
The obvious reason the opposing side is completely silent has nothing to do with a biased "TV show", it's that they know they would be giving more fodder for Zellner to rip the State's story to shreds along with each participant's involvement.
Rivercard
Too much good stuff
Let's address this bias claim. The documentary is sympathetic to the the Avery's but it does not lie about any of the FACTS in the case.
First off, those who declined to participate in MaM play a part of the perceived bias from critics. You can't point to your own omission/refusal to participate as evidence of the documentary makers' intention to exclude you.
Secondly, evidence and fact is not bias. To not take facts seriously because of a perceived bias is akin to putting fingers in your ears and yelling lalalalalala real loud. Here's just a few of the non-biased facts in this case:
Coroner prevented from attending the scene: FACT
Coroner prevented from giving evidence at trial: FACT
Extreme sexually violent and deviant pornography found on Bobby Dassey computer: FACT
Conflicting statements of Bobby & Scott: FACT
Most victims are murdered by someone close to them, yet no investigation into Teresa's Ex-boyfriend or any other potential suspects: FACT
No photographs of body part/bone locations: FACT
Conflicted officers involved in finding evidence: FACT
Evidence being refused to post conviction counsel: FACT
Not a single trace of evidence to support Brenden's confession: FACT
Tracker dogs prevented by police from searching areas they were indicating had scent: FACT
Teresa's key found in plain-sight location that had previously been searched several times. FACT
Loose items on top of the "vigorously shaken" table remained unmoved in photographs: FACT
No DNA traces of Teresa in Avery's bedroom/trailer: FACT
Two different crime scenarios presented at two trials for the same crime: FACT
Ken Kratz's damaging, unfounded and biased pre-trial allegations at press conferences: FACT
Widespread, prejudicial media reports of same: FACT
Kachinsky's abandonment of his vulnerable, child-client to self-incriminating, coercive interrogation: FACT
Last edited:
Krangodnzr
Captain of Team Murray
No one disagrees that Manitowic (sp?) County completely mishandled the case
Avery murdered a cat by dousing it in gasoline and throwing it in a FIRE. Avery was being investigated for sexually assaulting a teenage relative before he was caught for murdering Halbach. Brendan Dassey accused him of molesting him. His inmates in prison testified that Avery wanted to build a torture/murder chamber to kill women. If the porn is relevant, then I think all of this is even more so relevant and more damning than someone who watches violent porn.
Eyewitness testimony is often conflicting, but Dassey's statements also corroborated a few key details of the case. 1) he mentioned the use of restraints, which were found in Avery's room. I doubt Dassey would have known about the restraints if he wasn't involved. 2) He stated that when the vehicle was moved, that Avery lifted the hood and disconnected the battery. This fact is corroborated by the evidence and demonstrates that Dassey was in fact present for the car being moved.
Police follow evidence. There was very little reason to investigate either person.
Incompetence. Doesn't take away much from all the other corroborating evidence.
Evidence pointing to Avery as the culprit was also found by non-conflicted parties.
Mishandling of the case...doesn't point to innocence
There were a few pieces of evidence that did. The bullet with Theresa's DNA matched what Brenden said. The **** equipment. The DNA found on the car like I earlier stated. You have to remember that Brenden has a sub-90 IQ. He isn't too bright.
I don't know about this one. Haven't heard this piece yet.
Suspicious sure, but doesn't mean any wrongdoing per se. It definitely points to incompetence.
I haven't heard this piece of evidence yet...
And there were bleach stains on Dassey's clothes, which he told his mother he got from helping Avery clean....bleach kills DNA....kind of circumstantial evidence for the prosecution...
And this hurts the case of physical evidence how? There was enough evidence between the bones, the bullet, the DNA evidence on the car to easily convict Avery.
This only matters if the jury is tainted really, but sure more incompetence.
This only matters if the jury is tainted really, but sure more incompetence.
I had an issue this but it was reviewed by higher courts, and apparently it is ok in the state of Wisconsin.
gmabel830
It's football season!!
I thought it would have been brilliant to have season 2 be the re-telling of season 1 from the other perspective, but that wasn't happening for obvious reasons.
I am kind of with krang that I constantly reminded myself while watching that I was only getting one side of the story and there is probably just as much to tell on the other side.. but damn, very hard to look at the one side and not conclude there is at least reasonable doubt here.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
I am kind of with krang that I constantly reminded myself while watching that I was only getting one side of the story and there is probably just as much to tell on the other side.. but damn, very hard to look at the one side and not conclude there is at least reasonable doubt here.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
