Current Trial Steven Avery - Making a Murderer

[Michaels]

The 2nd series of this has just dropped, I've only watched episode 1 and I still cant believe how this hasn't been retrialled and overturned.

 

[X_box_X]

Personal opinion:

• Avery is guilty
• Cops planted some evidence to ensure conviction

It's quite possible.

One thing that seems almost certain is that police planted evidence. There is almost no doubt in my mind that that happened.

Avery's new lawyer Kathleen Zellner reminds me of someone, but I can't get my heard around who. I'm almost certain it's an American actress who she reminds me of.

 

[Duritz]

It's quite possible.

One thing that seems almost certain is that police planted evidence. There is almost no doubt in my mind that that happened.

Avery's new lawyer Kathleen Zellner reminds me of someone, but I can't get my heard around who. I'm almost certain it's an American actress who she reminds me of.

She's got a really good rack, check them out in some of those scenes on hotter days when she's less heavily dressed.

 

[X_box_X]

I'm watching the sixth episode of series two.

47 minutes in to this episode, Doctor Karl Reich (a forensic DNA expert) mentions that in the forensic world, there are only four bodily fluids where DNA can be extracted from: saliva, blood, urine and semen.

Now I don't want to discredit a forensic DNA expert, but surely you can get DNA from sweat and tears too. Or would the DNA contained in those two bodily fluids not result in an accurate I.D.?

 

[Johnny Karate]

I watched the first season, found it very compelling and thought that Steven Avery was innocent. However, after doing my own research I’ve come to the conclusion that Making a Murderer is pro-Avery rather than an objective piece. I also think he is guilty.

In hindsight all the evidence is there in the documentary anyway. He abused an animal (trademark for future murderers), beat his wife and threatened his cousin (wife of a police officer) when her child was with her with a shotgun. The first case against him was a sham and the consequences for him and other victims of the real perpetrator were tragic. However, his initial incarceration appears to be due to his previous criminal behaviour making him a good suspect and some garden variety incompetence on the part of the Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Dept.

With regard to Teresa Halbach, he was the last appointment on her list, her vehicle was seen there that afternoon, Steven Avery says she was there, she was not seen by anyone afterwards and her car, personal belongings and cremains are found on said property.

If the documentary presented the information in that way he looks guilty but they cleverly framed it as he and his family being quirky hillbillies who are spat on by the middle class hobby farmers and local law enforcement in their community to the point where they framed him once and will do it again at all costs because lawsuit.

Finally, I haven’t made up my mind about Brendan Dassey and whether he is guilty but he has clearly suffered a miscarriage of justice. He had nobody in his corner and seems to have thrown in jail on the basis of what looks like a coerced confession.

 

[Kurve]

He abused an animal

Doused a cat in petrol and threw it in a fire. Right there is the point where he could be up for any act of cruelty and extreme violence.

 

[Michaels]

I watched the first season, found it very compelling and thought that Steven Avery was innocent. However, after doing my own research I’ve come to the conclusion that Making a Murderer is pro-Avery rather than an objective piece. I also think he is guilty.

In hindsight all the evidence is there in the documentary anyway. He abused an animal (trademark for future murderers), beat his wife and threatened his cousin (wife of a police officer) when her child was with her with a shotgun. The first case against him was a sham and the consequences for him and other victims of the real perpetrator were tragic. However, his initial incarceration appears to be due to his previous criminal behaviour making him a good suspect and some garden variety incompetence on the part of the Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Dept.

With regard to Teresa Halbach, he was the last appointment on her list, her vehicle was seen there that afternoon, Steven Avery says she was there, she was not seen by anyone afterwards and her car, personal belongings and cremains are found on said property.

If the documentary presented the information in that way he looks guilty but they cleverly framed it as he and his family being quirky hillbillies who are spat on by the middle class hobby farmers and local law enforcement in their community to the point where they framed him once and will do it again at all costs because lawsuit.

Finally, I haven’t made up my mind about Brendan Dassey and whether he is guilty but he has clearly suffered a miscarriage of justice. He had nobody in his corner and seems to have thrown in jail on the basis of what looks like a coerced confession.

out of interest have you watched series 2 yet?

It's as close to being confirmed as possible that Teresa Halbach left the Avery property after her scheduled visit. Why would Steven let her leave his property to then follow her to kill her? would be much easier to do it while she was there.

Kathleen Zellner and her team tried and tested all the different bits of 'evidence' produced in the original case and long story short is most of it seems to be planted (poorly) and can't be replicated.


I don't disagree that the doco seems to be more Pro Avery than against, but after seeing both series I can't get my head around how anyone could say he and Brendan are guilty based on everything that has been made available.

 

[X_box_X]

It's as close to being confirmed as possible that Teresa Halbach's vehicle left the Avery property .

Edited for accuracy.

 

[Michaels]

Edited for accuracy.

so you reckon he killed her and then took her car for a joy ride out and about before returning it?

 

[X_box_X]

so you reckon he killed her and then took her car for a joy ride out and about before returning it?

I didn't say that.

I'm just proving a point that there is no concrete evidence to suggest she left the Avery property after she arrived.

FWIW, your theory is likely to be correct, but people are not exonerated because of something that is likely or unlikely.

 

[Johnny Karate]

out of interest have you watched series 2 yet?

It's as close to being confirmed as possible that Teresa Halbach left the Avery property after her scheduled visit. Why would Steven let her leave his property to then follow her to kill her? would be much easier to do it while she was there.

Kathleen Zellner and her team tried and tested all the different bits of 'evidence' produced in the original case and long story short is most of it seems to be planted (poorly) and can't be replicated.


I don't disagree that the doco seems to be more Pro Avery than against, but after seeing both series I can't get my head around how anyone could say he and Brendan are guilty based on everything that has been made available.

I’ve watched first episode but struggled to get into it. I do intend to pick it up again at some point. I saw Zellner doing the blood spatter test in the RAV4 and while it’s objectively interesting it made me feel a bit sick for Halbach’s family tossing about her effigy, painting it with fake blood etc. All it really proved is that her body wasn’t put into the car in exactly the way the prosecution laid out which doesn’t equate to evidence being planted in my opinion.

I weigh the scenarios up and consider what is more likely. Steven Avery is the last known person to see Teresa Halbach alive, her bones, personal belongings and vehicle are all found on his property, said personal effects have his DNA, fingerprints and blood on them. Furthermore, he has used his sister’s name (as Halbach had requested not to deal with him anymore due to his past behaviour making her uncomfortable) and specifically requested her (Halbach) to come out there. Coincidentally he decides to clean his garage using bleach and have a bonfire after her visit. Therefore I have little doubt that he killed her and attempted to hide the evidence.

I have more doubt about the capacity of his family members (if they are the alternate suspects) and/or police to lead such a coordinated, vicious and ruthless campaign to plant evidence and frame him without somebody ****ing up and speaking out of school about it.

I look at his defense team: Strang & Buting and now Zellner, they all appear to be very good criminal lawyers and yet they haven’t been able to find that conclusive smoking gun that gets him a retrial if not exonerates him.

He has a past of animal abuse and violence against women. He fits the bill of a murderer for me. I just don’t know if two police departments (Calumet and Manitowoc) would engage in such widespread criminal behaviour, betraying the laws they are supposed to uphold all for the sake of a two decade old supposed vendetta for one individual.

That’s not to say I’m not open to evidence that clearly points elsewhere but it would need to be stronger than “the cops planted that shit” or “why would he leave the car there when he has a crusher” or “why would he murder someone when he’s about to be very rich?” Each one of these points can be rebutted with counter speculation.

Moments which made me fall out of my chair in the first series re possible planting of evidence would be: the key turning up on the fifth search, the license plate call and the tampering of the blood vial. But those can be argued both ways. To me it’s equally as plausible that a key may be found after a fifth search for evidence, than it being planted, I lose my keys all the time and often they only turn up after I’ve ransacked a few rooms multiple times and that is without me consciously hiding them. The license plate call could just as easily be Colburn asleep at the wheel and asking the dispatcher to repeat the apb for him rather than him deviously rubbing his hands together because he’s found the vehicle elsewhere and now wants to steal it and hightail it over to Avery salvage. Finally, although the documentary didn’t go into it, apparently it’s very normal for blood vials to have that puncture mark in the top of them so much so that the prosecution found a nurse willing to testify under oath that she’d put it there which is why the defense dropped it.

 

[Michaels]

I’ve watched first episode but struggled to get into it. I do intend to pick it up again at some point. I saw Zellner doing the blood spatter test in the RAV4 and while it’s objectively interesting it made me feel a bit sick for Halbach’s family tossing about her effigy, painting it with fake blood etc. All it really proved is that her body wasn’t put into the car in exactly the way the prosecution laid out which doesn’t equate to evidence being planted in my opinion.

I weigh the scenarios up and consider what is more likely. Steven Avery is the last known person to see Teresa Halbach alive, her bones, personal belongings and vehicle are all found on his property, said personal effects have his DNA, fingerprints and blood on them. Furthermore, he has used his sister’s name (as Halbach had requested not to deal with him anymore due to his past behaviour making her uncomfortable) and specifically requested her (Halbach) to come out there. Coincidentally he decides to clean his garage using bleach and have a bonfire after her visit. Therefore I have little doubt that he killed her and attempted to hide the evidence.

I have more doubt about the capacity of his family members (if they are the alternate suspects) and/or police to lead such a coordinated, vicious and ruthless campaign to plant evidence and frame him without somebody ******* up and speaking out of school about it.

I look at his defense team: Strang & Buting and now Zellner, they all appear to be very good criminal lawyers and yet they haven’t been able to find that conclusive smoking gun that gets him a retrial if not exonerates him.

He has a past of animal abuse and violence against women. He fits the bill of a murderer for me. I just don’t know if two police departments (Calumet and Manitowoc) would engage in such widespread criminal behaviour, betraying the laws they are supposed to uphold all for the sake of a two decade old supposed vendetta for one individual.

That’s not to say I’m not open to evidence that clearly points elsewhere but it would need to be stronger than “the cops planted that shit” or “why would he leave the car there when he has a crusher” or “why would he murder someone when he’s about to be very rich?” Each one of these points can be rebutted with counter speculation.

Moments which made me fall out of my chair in the first series re possible planting of evidence would be: the key turning up on the fifth search, the license plate call and the tampering of the blood vial. But those can be argued both ways. To me it’s equally as plausible that a key may be found after a fifth search for evidence, than it being planted, I lose my keys all the time and often they only turn up after I’ve ransacked a few rooms multiple times and that is without me consciously hiding them. The license plate call could just as easily be Colburn asleep at the wheel and asking the dispatcher to repeat the apb for him rather than him deviously rubbing his hands together because he’s found the vehicle elsewhere and now wants to steal it and hightail it over to Avery salvage. Finally, although the documentary didn’t go into it, apparently it’s very normal for blood vials to have that puncture mark in the top of them so much so that the prosecution found a nurse willing to testify under oath that she’d put it there which is why the defense dropped it.

all points taken on board.

I'll be interested to read your thoughts after you watch the rest of the 2nd series as i think a lot of what they show will change your mind about the bolded bits in your post which I think are pretty vital to the case.

I reckon Zellner has found more than enough evidence to at least get it retrialled, but there is no way anyone in Wisconsin is going to let them re trial it due to what is being covered up I reckon. And Zellner knows this and knows she just has to go through the process and those formalities to then take it higher.


With regards to the blood vial, even Zellner doesn't buy into that being used as part of the evidence planting. She explains and shows where she believes they got the blood from, makes sense once you see it.

 

[freofc1994]

Ken Kratz being a horrible bastard makes it easier for the majority of people to feel some empathy for Avery.

The issue that I have with the conspiracy theories is that based on all I've watched in regards to his family there is no way that any of them could be involved in anyway and not make a complete hash of it. In either committing the crime or trying to cover it up.

 

[Boomerfan99]

I think he's innocent.

Who did it then?

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

Who did it then?

Strong suspicion from what I viewed is 1 of the other dassy boys who is a sexual pervert with what seems like sexual violence thoughts based on what was on his computer. He was also on the property at the same time as Avery was and said he saw Teresa walking towards the Avery trailer. That's a story that can quite easily be made up to send the suspicion to Avery and set him up.

 

[ossie_21]

https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...r/news-story/fdfa474d4cca1a6a02f746f4114e1622

A retired sheriff who was featured in Netflix’s hit documentary series Making A Murderer is suing the streaming company alleging he was defamed by his portrayal in the story.

According to WBAY-TV, former Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Detective Andrew Colborn filed the lawsuit yesterday against Netflix and the filmmakers Laura Ricciardi and Moira Demos.

Colborn was part of the team that helped convict Steven Avery for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach.

The 2015 documentary, which streamed Season 2 earlier this year, called the state’s evidence into question and left many viewers wondering if Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey, were truly guilty of the crime.

Colborn contends the series was edited to make viewers think he and others planted evidence to frame Avery.

“His reputation and that of Manitowoc County, itself, has been severely and unjustly defamed,” Colborn’s lawyer, Michael Griesbach, said in a press release (per Variety). “He is filing this lawsuit to set the record straight and to restore his good name.”

Representatives for Netflix had no comment when reached by Fox News.

Colborn contends that the filmmakers distorted the events and left out key facts in order to make the argument that he framed Avery and Dassey for the murder.

Both Dassey and Avery remain behind bars as the debate over their guilt or innocence continues to be debated.

 

[sprockets]

https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...r/news-story/fdfa474d4cca1a6a02f746f4114e1622

Let's say it's true that Netflix defamed Colborn. That'd make them hypocrites, would it not, saying Colborn bent the rules as a means to an end when they just did the same thing? It seems to be the way of the world these days.

 

[Michaels]

Looks like this one could be getting re trialled!

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47380658


"Steven Avery is serving a life sentence for the murder of young freelance photographer Teresa Halbach in 2005.

He says he is innocent. Avery has won a motion to appeal based on possible human bones found in a gravel pit.

His lawyer says they were not tested for DNA and were given to the Halbach family, a violation of state law.

Kathleen Zellner, who filed the motion, said the return of the bones meant that potentially crucial evidence in the case had been kept from further testing."


"The case is being remanded back to the circuit court to conduct proceedings, which can include a hearing. The circuit court can grant a new trial, or if not, back to appellate court who can reverse the conviction and/or grant a new trial."

 

[Fwoy]

Notable inmate 'confesses to Making a Murderer killing'

The director of the 'Convicting a Murderer' spin-off series claims to have been given a confession to the c...

www.9news.com.au

 

[FR0GGY]

Whatever happened to his 36 million dollar lawsuit from his first stint in jail?
I’m assuming he couldn’t continue with it due to being convicted this time?

 

[Hojuman]

Just finished series 2.

Her camera ?

 

[Saints4ever]

Whatever happened to his 36 million dollar lawsuit from his first stint in jail?
I’m assuming he couldn’t continue with it due to being convicted this time?

Settled for 400k. Had to pay his lawyer 150k so he only got 250k.
I’ve only just stumbled across this documentary.
Corruption corruption corruption.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Settled for 400k. Had to pay his lawyer 150k so he only got 250k.
I’ve only just stumbled across this documentary.
Corruption corruption corruption.

Unfortunately this is quite common in parts of the USA.

 

[FIGJAM]

You should watch Convicting a Murderer for a counter view.

Sure, it's distributed by the right wing Daily Wire with Candice Owen who gives me the shits, but it's pretty well-balanced doco overall.

Easily explains away a lot of some of the more 'out there' claims from the documentary, addresses some false claims and shows that there was some editing by the Making a Murderer creators that showed Officer Colborn to provide expressions and answers that were not linked to the question at hand (not sure how they thought they'd get away with that!).

After watching the first couple of MAM seasons, I thought there was a decent chance that lightening struck Stephen Avery twice by way of being falsely accused. I now think that it's extraordinarily unlikely.