Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

"Making A Murderer"

telephone89|1451949317|3970673 said:
Also, another thing I was thinking about, was the contaminated bullet. It shouldn't have been included, and should have been thrown out as per protocol. Making a special case to include it (likely at fassbenders request) was inappropriate.
Click to expand...

The bullet really puzzles me!

Presumably they were saying this bullet had shot TH - shouldn't it have been covered in her DNA? They should have been able to just swipe it for blood/DNA yet they had to do some retrieval process as it was only trace elements, which then removed all DNA from the bullet? That woman was as skeevy as hell. Her smug face (the hair!!!! :eek:). She was also the one who did tests that put SA away the first time, so she had a point to prove.
 
GlamMosher|1451950032|3970679 said:
telephone89|1451949317|3970673 said:
Also, another thing I was thinking about, was the contaminated bullet. It shouldn't have been included, and should have been thrown out as per protocol. Making a special case to include it (likely at fassbenders request) was inappropriate.
Click to expand...

The bullet really puzzles me!

Presumably they were saying this bullet had shot TH - shouldn't it have been covered in her DNA? They should have been able to just swipe it for blood/DNA yet they had to do some retrieval process as it was only trace elements, which then removed all DNA from the bullet? That woman was as skeevy as hell. Her smug face (the hair!!!! :eek:). She was also the one who did tests that put SA away the first time, so she had a point to prove.
Click to expand...
It was just as clean as everything else in the garage, aka none of her DNA. So however her dna got onto it, I highly doubt it was actually shot through her head. Plus, where is the other bullet? Wasn't she shot twice?

And yes. That hair, oh man. I try to remind myself it was 10 years ago, but she seemed like something out of the 80s, not 2006!
 
I sat there and watched a grown man coach a mentally incompetent teenager into confessing to a murder. I saw cops get on the stand and lie. Steven Avery is no saint, but having put myself through that experience I firmly believe he is no murderer either.
 
Found this website, and it adds some compelling evidence to the story. http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

-SA purchased handcuffs and leg irons like the ones Dassey described 3 weeks earlier (though Brendan also said there was rope involved, so not 100% match, but a lot closer).
-In Dassey's illegally obtained statement, Dassey stated that he helped Avery moved the RAV4 into the junkyard and that Avery had lifted the hood and removed the battery cable. Even if you believe that the blood in Halbach's car was planted by the cops (as I do), there was also non-blood DNA evidence on the hood latch. I don't believe the police would plant -- or know to plant -- that evidence
-SA had molested Brendan (and others)

There was a link to the full transcript on that website, but it looks like it's been temporarily disabled. Apparently the full transcript doesn't seem as coerced as the others. So perhaps (speculation), he gave a full confession illegally, and then they tried to get the same confession out of him on camera. Hence the feeding, etc. Totally no idea if that's true or not though.
 
!! JUST STARTED WATCHING LAST NIGHT WITH FI. On episode 2 now.
 
telephone89|1452015597|3971055 said:
Found this website, and it adds some compelling evidence to the story. http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

-SA purchased handcuffs and leg irons like the ones Dassey described 3 weeks earlier (though Brendan also said there was rope involved, so not 100% match, but a lot closer).
-In Dassey's illegally obtained statement, Dassey stated that he helped Avery moved the RAV4 into the junkyard and that Avery had lifted the hood and removed the battery cable. Even if you believe that the blood in Halbach's car was planted by the cops (as I do), there was also non-blood DNA evidence on the hood latch. I don't believe the police would plant -- or know to plant -- that evidence
-SA had molested Brendan (and others)

There was a link to the full transcript on that website, but it looks like it's been temporarily disabled. Apparently the full transcript doesn't seem as coerced as the others. So perhaps (speculation), he gave a full confession illegally, and then they tried to get the same confession out of him on camera. Hence the feeding, etc. Totally no idea if that's true or not though.
Click to expand...


This stuff gets posted on reddit nearly every day - to the point were regulars are saying it's like groundhog day. :lol:

I covered the DNA on the hood latch in an earlier post - it wouldn't be difficult to get sweat onto something from an item of clothing.

I read a transcript from BD that made me think twice as it didn't seem coerced and then i found it was not the first interview. When I read the first, all the info was planted then. Like did he see anything like a foot in the fire, first off he says no, no, no, then next time he knows what to say to please so says "yeah I saw a toe".

The bit about the hood was totally coerced, they just kept asking until he says "yeah".

The restraints SA bought (from what I have read, can't recall where) were a sex toy type thing, with no DNA on them and no marks on the bed.

The molested thing - no real comment on that. Some guys think that is funny to grab you by the balls I guess.
 
I guess everyone following this has already seen it but a juror has come out and said that they voted guilty as they were in fear for their own personal safety. They swapped votes thinking that if they voted not guilty to the interfering with a corpse (or whatever the second charge was), it would be grounds for an appeal.
http://www.people.com/article/steven-avery-juror-believes-he-deserves-a-new-trial (one of many links to the story)

Not sure if we have discussed this aspect but there were 2 jurors with direct links to the sheriffs office/county. http://www.people.com/article/steven-avery-juror-says-two-jurors-related-county-employees
 
telephone89|1452015597|3971055 said:
Found this website, and it adds some compelling evidence to the story. http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

-SA purchased handcuffs and leg irons like the ones Dassey described 3 weeks earlier (though Brendan also said there was rope involved, so not 100% match, but a lot closer).
-In Dassey's illegally obtained statement, Dassey stated that he helped Avery moved the RAV4 into the junkyard and that Avery had lifted the hood and removed the battery cable. Even if you believe that the blood in Halbach's car was planted by the cops (as I do), there was also non-blood DNA evidence on the hood latch. I don't believe the police would plant -- or know to plant -- that evidence
-SA had molested Brendan (and others)

There was a link to the full transcript on that website, but it looks like it's been temporarily disabled. Apparently the full transcript doesn't seem as coerced as the others. So perhaps (speculation), he gave a full confession illegally, and then they tried to get the same confession out of him on camera. Hence the feeding, etc. Totally no idea if that's true or not though.
Click to expand...
The only reputable piece of information on this blog post seems to be where he speaks of trial information left out of the documentary. I can't say that this information points to SA's guilt because it is Dassy's confession. We must remember that Dassy's confession is that of an almost mentally disabled young man who was pressured to say exactly what the police wanted him to say. Essentially, his confession means nothing.

This blog writer doesn't cite reputable sources for the rest of his post. In my mind, everything else written is opinion or internet legend until real sources prove what he has said.
 
@Housecat - that's the only part of it that I was commenting on. What he stated was in the original transcript, which looks to be back up and running now.

@Glammosher - I'd also heard that. And with what the dismissed juror said in the docu about having 3 VERY strong pro-guilty people, I'd not be surprised if they were threatened. I'd also heard of the father, not the wife though. Interesting. I watched an interview with one of the defense lawyers, and he talked about how they choose a jury - which I had no idea how it works. Basically you don't get to choose anyone, you get to veto a certain number of people. Because the public was so surprised that the Father of a deputy was allowed to sit on the jury. Guess he was the lesser of some of the other people they had =\

I'd also read on TMZ that SA was suing various people for frivolous things. ex, gas from when the police seized his car. That was after the fact and a while ago, but still interesting the things that are coming out. This docu turned a random case into a worldwide sensation!
 
telephone89|1452119626|3971849 said:
I'd also read on TMZ that SA was suing various people for frivolous things. ex, gas from when the police seized his car. That was after the fact and a while ago, but still interesting the things that are coming out. This docu turned a random case into a worldwide sensation!
Click to expand...

I hadn't seen that! Maybe he was trying for money wherever he could get it.

I did see that the woman from the first rape said he had asked if she would buy him a house after he was exonerated. Well, if you don't ask, you don't get I guess! She said that she could look at a photo of the actual rapist and feel nothing but still could not look at SA as for so long he was the one to blame.

ETA: the article was about how the sheriff's office never showed her a photo of Gregory Allen, and that from the photos to the line up, SA was the only common one, so she picked him. She said the the police had told her there was another suspect, but the sheriff told her not to speak to the police. I'll see if I can find the link.
 
GlamMosher|1452119980|3971854 said:
I hadn't seen that! Maybe he was trying for money wherever he could get it.

I did see that the woman from the first rape said he had asked if she would buy him a house after he was exonerated. Well, if you don't ask, you don't get I guess! She said that she could look at a photo of the actual rapist and feel nothing but still could not look at SA as for so long he was the one to blame.

ETA: the article was about how the sheriff's office never showed her a photo of Gregory Allen, and that from the photos to the line up, SA was the only common one, so she picked him. She said the the police had told her there was another suspect, but the sheriff told her not to speak to the police. I'll see if I can find the link.
Click to expand...
It's TMZ, so, you know. http://www.tmz.com/2016/01/04/steven-avery-sues-gas-making-a-murderer/

That's so stupid. Mostly the lady, but also SA a bit haha. But I do know grief does strange things to a person. She had probably convinced herself that it was him. For 18 years all she thought was that it was him, even though it makes no sense, I can get why she feels like that.

Just another thing that the cops in this county effed up. So terrible for everyone involved.
 
House Cat|1452194857|3972252 said:
I was watching TV last night and they said that one of the jurors for the SA case was the father to a Manitowoc Sheriff's Deputy and another juror worked for the county clerk's department. If this is true, this case gets worse by the minute.

http://www.people.com/article/steven-avery-juror-says-two-jurors-related-county-employees
Click to expand...

Even worse now - the one who was the father was actually also a volunteer for the Sheriff's Dept and had a squad car supplied! He answered all the questions that he was impartial and had no pre-conceived ideas. Riiii-iiigght.

http://onmilwaukee.com/movies/articles/makingamurdererjurorvolunteer.html

It's crazy that they were allowed on a jury, but apparently the defense had used up their 6 challenges with people convinced of guilt (I guess how could you not with the press conference given stating all the gory details?).
 
Can they declare a mistrial after the verdict has been read?

All of this new information proves a grave miscarriage of justice. Both of these men deserve new trials at the very least.
 
It sounds like the only way they can get new trials is if new evidence is found.
 
NBC's Keith Morrison is doing a follow up on Investigation Discovery set to air later this month.

And Fox News will air its own investigation, "Steven Avery: Guilty or Framed? A Justice Special" hosted by FNC's Judge Jeanine Pirro on Saturday at 8 p.m.

Very curious to see what ID has to offer in this crazy story.
 
mom2dolls|1452533734|3974249 said:
NBC's Keith Morrison is doing a follow up on Investigation Discovery set to air later this month.

And Fox News will air its own investigation, "Steven Avery: Guilty or Framed? A Justice Special" hosted by FNC's Judge Jeanine Pirro on Saturday at 8 p.m.

Very curious to see what ID has to offer in this crazy story.
Click to expand...


Dr. Phil {whom I personally loathe} I doing a show on this Thursday.

ID has done three different shows about tis case, all skewed in favor of the prosecution.

Thanks for the info about Saturday, I'm dvring it.

I just think how can someone be wrongly accused TWICE? What are the odds? From what I've seen so far I thought he was guilty, but I really want to see the Netflix special before I fully commit to an opinion.
 
Amber St. Clare|1452641951|3975023 said:
I just think how can someone be wrongly accused TWICE? What are the odds? From what I've seen so far I thought he was guilty, but I really want to see the Netflix special before I fully commit to an opinion.
Click to expand...

That's why I secretly hope he IS guilty. How horrible if he spent more then half his life in prison for crimes he did not commit. :errrr:
 
Saw on the Internet:

Making a Murderer drinking game: take a shot every time an Avery says "yeah".
 
The phone conversations:

"yeah"
"oh yeah?"
"yeah"
 
I just started watching and I'm on ep 4. They totally railroaded Brendan! He has no concept of what they were making him say and what the consequences would be. How did any of the confessions remain as evidence?

The sherriff's dept is SO corrupt. DH said we'll stay clear of Wisconsin during our travels to the states, haha.
 
GlamMosher|1452746155|3975772 said:
The phone conversations:

"yeah"
"oh yeah?"
"yeah"
Click to expand...


SO weird.
 
fYI/PSA:


Nancy Grace to join Dr. Phil {gag me} tomorrow, Friday 1/15.
 
Hasn't NG already said she thinks he's guilty? Not sure why she needs to go on another show lol. Oh nancy.
 
I just picked this back up again - I just finished Episode 5 so I made sure not to read through the thread.

Just wanted to say that the defense lawyers are doing an amazing job. I am enthralled by the details they are uncovering.
 
CJ2008|1455509921|3991201 said:
I just picked this back up again - I just finished Episode 5 so I made sure not to read through the thread.

Just wanted to say that the defense lawyers are doing an amazing job. I am enthralled by the details they are uncovering.
Click to expand...

I agree. They also seem like they really care about justice.
 
Tacori E-ring|1455583378|3991415 said:
CJ2008|1455509921|3991201 said:
I just picked this back up again - I just finished Episode 5 so I made sure not to read through the thread.

Just wanted to say that the defense lawyers are doing an amazing job. I am enthralled by the details they are uncovering.
Click to expand...

I agree. They also seem like they really care about justice.
Click to expand...

***Spoiler alert*** (not sure if there are others on this thread, but just in case...)

Yes.

They seemed genuinely upset on a broader level by Steven's verdict (saw that episode today).

And they just both seem like nice genuine men. I really like them both.

On another note, I have to say, I don't think he should have been convicted. I don't particularly "like" him and I hate that he was cruel to a cat - hard for me to get over that - but there are just too many questions and weird things going on with all the evidence.

(now that I know the first verdict is it safe to go through the thread or is Brendan's verdict revealed somewhere?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top