Northern Voice
Footballguy
Bombfire.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Making A Murderer (Netflix) (Spoilers) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter The Flying Elvis
- Start date
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Wisconsinite or not, how can anyone watch that Dassey interview and not see it's a coerced confession?
The Kerminator
Footballguy
Thanks for the link. The reporter, Dan O'Donnell, is also a lawyer so it's an interesting take.Vipers said:
parasaurolophus
Footballguy
According to this a well stoked bonfire is over 2000 degrees and is just as hot once it turns to charcoal in the final stages. Even a candle is 1800 degrees. So it would seem that it would be very possible.According to wikipedia cremation is done at 1600-1800 degrees Glass melts at about 1600.This is true. But the fact that it is coming from Strang led me to give weight it.
I wish we could get the full court transcripts. Although I can't think of many less productive things I could do with my time.
Das Boot
Footballguy
It's funny, considering the author is trying to denounce the documentary for being slanted, his piece strikes me as even more slanted than the documentary.
Right off the bat, his attempts to defend the handling of Avery's first conviction for rape are telling.
But I get it... if he's honest about how badly the first non-investigation and subsequent prosecution was handled, it directly leads a reasonable person into serious questions about the Sheriff's department's ability to both competently and in an unbiased manner handle Avery's later murder investigation.
Mors Venit
Footballguy
If he was screwed then you would have to immediately reexamine the case to see if he was framed.
At the very least.
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Mors Venit
Footballguy
No wonder he seems like such a slimeball.
My favorite part of his rebuttal is when he's doing ep 3 and asks how people know how much blood there was or would be... asks like 5 questions about it in a paragraph then starts his next with, "Dassey says....".
Either he's a moron or intellectually dishonest.
Last edited by a moderator:
IDK if you watched more than that one video... but that homless kid is now in jail for killing some guy at his home. It appears he met with some old guy in Times Square who took him home to NJ and drugged and raped him. Dude woke up in the morn and basically beat him to death. He became a bit of a celeb after the vid I posted (was even on Jimmy Kimmel) and was interviewed by the same news team again. He went into depth about his story how he had been sexually abused a lot living on the street.
I don't think he was framed. But if you wake up and you can tell you've been Cosby'd you have carte blanche in getting your justice right there. Especially if you've been victimized like that before. So, another raggity person who doesn't really fit in with mainstream society is sitting behind bars when, IMO, they should not be. So that's sort of the connection there. But also the weird rabbit hole of discovery that I had to go down in both stories where you're going from side to side not sure what to think and there's twists and turns in the journey.
The Kerminator
Footballguy
Of course you think he is either a moron or intellectually dishonest. He doesn't support the narrative you believe. Believe him or not, I thought it was an interesting take.
What about the 3rd burn location and the bones found there? He addresses that
Many wondered why Avery would put Halbach's body back in the vehicle when the burn sites were close by? He addresses that
Why wasn't the bullet found earlier? He addresses that
Sabertooth
Footballguy
He addresses Avery's alibi by stating they were discounted because they were family. Then says Chuck and Earl were sexual criminals because "Charles was charged and acquitted" of assaulting his wife. 
I recall reading that Steven had 22 alibis in 1985. What about the other 20.
I recall reading that Steven had 22 alibis in 1985. What about the other 20.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sabertooth
Footballguy
In his episode two rebuttal he goes right back to the straw man that there is a widespread conspiracy.
I like this one top "Is that wrong? Of course it is. Did they deserve to be punished for it? Without question they did."
Were they punished? He doesn't ask that question, does he?
I like this one top "Is that wrong? Of course it is. Did they deserve to be punished for it? Without question they did."
Were they punished? He doesn't ask that question, does he?
derek245583
Footballguy
Statorama
Footballguy
It's also interesting that he's connected to "angry conservative radio" AM1130, whose hosts never seem to have an issue with trying to lead the audience to certain conclusions. For instance, I've never heard them have any significant segments on their radio shows devoted to people that Obamacare has helped, but I have heard them pound away at what's wrong with the law for hours on end. It's really hypocritical of this guy to point at the documentary as "only showing you one side of the story".
And I absolutely get why reporters who covered this get really defensive and stick to their guns about Avery's guilt. This documentary basically says they didn't do their jobs. They sat back and swallowed what the prosecution gave them and never really investigated the things this documentary does.
Das Boot
Footballguy
I'm surprised by this story, I'll be curious to hear what she has to say in her interview:
‘Making a Murderer': Steven Avery’s Ex-Fiancee Calls Him a ‘Monster’
The Wrap
Beatrice Verhoeven
The Wrap
January 13, 2016
Jodi Stachowski, the ex-fiancee of “Making a Murderer” subject Steven Avery, says he is a “monster” and that “he’s not innocent” in the murder of Teresa Halbach.
In an interview with HLN’s Nancy Grace, Stachowski was asked why she decided to comment, given that the murder trial happened 10 years ago.
“The truth,” Stachowski said when asked about what she wanted people to know, “what a monster he is. He’s not innocent.”
See Photos: 'Making a Murderer': 9 Updates in Steven Avery's Case Since the Premiere
She also claimed she was never in love with Avery, whom she dated for two years, and admitted that she “ate two boxes of rat poison just so I could go to the hospital to get away from him and ask them to get the police to help me.”
According to Nancy Grace’s senior producer Natisha Lance, this has been Stachowski’s truth all along, and Stachowski cited a long history of physical abuse by Avery’s hand, which police reports confirmed.
Stachowski also told her that Avery sent her a letter from prison, threatening to report her to the police and asking her for money. But the fact that hundreds of thousands of people are signing petitions to get Avery a retrial made her want to speak out now, saying that the “documentary is full of a bunch of lies.”
See Video: 'Making a Murderer': Brendan Dassey's Brother Raps About Steven Avery's Innocence
In fact, Stachowski said that Avery gave her directions to make him look good in the documentary, and that she wasn’t sure whether the filmmakers, Moira Demos and Laura Ricciardi, knew what was actually going on in the relationship while they filmed “Making a Murderer.” She also allegedly asked them not to be in the documentary.
“Making a Murderer” follows the trial and conviction of Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey in the murder of Teresa Halbach, which both Avery and Dassey say they didn’t commit. However, on Mar. 1, 2006, Dassey confessed in a lengthy interview that he was part of the brutal rape, torture and killing of Halbach, only to retract those statements over the intervening months.
On Tuesday, Avery filed new appeal papers asking for his conviction in the murder of photographer Teresa Halbach to be thrown out. Avery — who submitted the filing on his behalf — claims a number of grievances, including an improper warrant, inadequate legal representation and a juror who tainted the rest of the jury with claims of Avery’s guilt.
The full interview with Stachowski will air Jan. 13 at 8 p.m. ET.
‘Making a Murderer': Steven Avery’s Ex-Fiancee Calls Him a ‘Monster’
The Wrap
Beatrice Verhoeven
The Wrap
January 13, 2016
Jodi Stachowski, the ex-fiancee of “Making a Murderer” subject Steven Avery, says he is a “monster” and that “he’s not innocent” in the murder of Teresa Halbach.
In an interview with HLN’s Nancy Grace, Stachowski was asked why she decided to comment, given that the murder trial happened 10 years ago.
“The truth,” Stachowski said when asked about what she wanted people to know, “what a monster he is. He’s not innocent.”
See Photos: 'Making a Murderer': 9 Updates in Steven Avery's Case Since the Premiere
She also claimed she was never in love with Avery, whom she dated for two years, and admitted that she “ate two boxes of rat poison just so I could go to the hospital to get away from him and ask them to get the police to help me.”
According to Nancy Grace’s senior producer Natisha Lance, this has been Stachowski’s truth all along, and Stachowski cited a long history of physical abuse by Avery’s hand, which police reports confirmed.
Stachowski also told her that Avery sent her a letter from prison, threatening to report her to the police and asking her for money. But the fact that hundreds of thousands of people are signing petitions to get Avery a retrial made her want to speak out now, saying that the “documentary is full of a bunch of lies.”
See Video: 'Making a Murderer': Brendan Dassey's Brother Raps About Steven Avery's Innocence
In fact, Stachowski said that Avery gave her directions to make him look good in the documentary, and that she wasn’t sure whether the filmmakers, Moira Demos and Laura Ricciardi, knew what was actually going on in the relationship while they filmed “Making a Murderer.” She also allegedly asked them not to be in the documentary.
“Making a Murderer” follows the trial and conviction of Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey in the murder of Teresa Halbach, which both Avery and Dassey say they didn’t commit. However, on Mar. 1, 2006, Dassey confessed in a lengthy interview that he was part of the brutal rape, torture and killing of Halbach, only to retract those statements over the intervening months.
On Tuesday, Avery filed new appeal papers asking for his conviction in the murder of photographer Teresa Halbach to be thrown out. Avery — who submitted the filing on his behalf — claims a number of grievances, including an improper warrant, inadequate legal representation and a juror who tainted the rest of the jury with claims of Avery’s guilt.
The full interview with Stachowski will air Jan. 13 at 8 p.m. ET.
SIDA!
Footballguy
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Anyone watching this Nancy Grace "interview" with the girlfriend. Its really just a couple of clips so far and Nancy Grace screeching.
John Bender
Footballguy
Homer J Simpson
I don't push
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
We had to turn it off. As much as I wanted to hear what the girlfriend had to say, all I could think of what how much I wanted to
My wife said she would lie for me.
ETA: after a night to sleep on it, changed to a less lethal approach
Last edited by a moderator:
Mors Venit
Footballguy
trader jake
Footballguy
Sure, she says that now but in 10 years she'll claim she ate rat poison just to get away from you. Start hiding money now.
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Lot of the Newstalk recaps are weak but this was good:
Dassey says he finds Halbach chained up on Avery’s bed. Avery had just purchased handcuffs and leg irons.
Dassey says his uncle is sweaty when he answers the door as Dassey drops off some mail. DNA that was likely from Avery’s sweat is recovered on Teresa Halbach’s car key, which is found in Avery’s bedroom. He says Avery goes under the hood of the car to remove a battery cable. DNA that was likely from Avery’s sweat was recovered from the hood latch.
Dassey says the two of them load Halbach’s body in the trunk of her car in an effort to dump it in a nearby pond. Her blood is found in the back of her car.
Dassey says his uncle shot Teresa Halbach in the head several times. Burned skull fragments found in a burn pit just outside Avery’s garage show trauma from at least two gunshot wounds.
Dassey says that shooting happened in Avery’s garage. Spent shell casings are found in the garage and so is a flattened bullet with Halbach’s DNA on it. That bullet was demonstrated to have been fired from Steven Avery’s .22 caliber rifle, which he always kept above his bed.
Incidentally, Making a Murderer never presents this very damning evidence that the bullet that killed Teresa Hallbach was fired from a gun that Steven Avery kept in a place where he would notice if it went missing.
It merely presumes that Dassey’s confession was too unreliable to use at trial—when it clearly wasn’t—and attempts to insist that somehow law enforcement planted Teresa Halbach’s DNA on the bullet which they then placed in Avery’s garage.
“OK,” says Avery attorney Jerome Buting. “What was it, five entries to his garage the week of November 5th to the 12th?”
“Correct,” answers lead investigator Tom Fassbender.
“At that time, though, none of the investigators knew that there would be evidence that suggested that perhaps...Teresa Halbach had actually been shot in the head. That information came later.”
“Correct.”
“Shortly before this March 1st and March 2nd search.”
That search, with a new search warrant, was the direct result of Dassey’s confession—which was precisely why investigators now had a reason to pore over the garage with a fine-toothed comb. The series makes a great deal out of the fact that investigators never found the bullet fragment during initial searches of Avery’s property, while at the same time trying to suggest that Avery’s garage was too dirty for Avery to clean it up after the murder.
Well if it was that dirty, wouldn’t it stand to reason that investigators might have had difficulty finding a tiny bullet fragment under the mountains of garbage in the garage—especially if they didn’t know that they were looking for evidence of a shooting?
Remember, they had no idea in November of 2005 how Halbach had been killed or where exactly on the 40-acre property she had been killed. Only when Dassey gave them information that allowed them to focus all of their search efforts on the garage did they thoroughly scour it enough to find the bullet fragment.
And yes, it is indisputable that Halbach’s DNA was on that bullet, despite what both the defense and Making a Murderer attempt to show.
“This is crime lab item designation "FL" and it is a lead bullet fragment,” testifies Wisconsin Crime Lab forensic analyst Sherry Culhane.
“And how did you process that bullet?” asks Kratz.
“In order to remove any residual DNA that might have been on the bullet, I washed it. I put it in a test tube and washed it with some buffer that we use to extract the DNA. And the liquid is what I performed the rest of my procedure on.”
“And were you able to develop a DNA profile from that washing on item FL, the bullet?”
“Yes.”
“Do you have an opinion to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty whether Teresa Halbach is the source of the DNA on item FL, the bullet?”
“Yes. I believe she is the source of the DNA on the bullet.”
To determine this, DNA analysts match the evidence in question with a control sample. Unfortunately, during the course of her testing, Culhane inadvertently contaminated this control sample with her own DNA. She had been instructing a couple of students and believes that as she was talking to them, some of her saliva got into the control sample.
It never got into the bullet sample. The defense never even alleged that it did. This means that the defense conceded the fact that the evidentiary sample was not at all contaminated. That was the sample with Halbach’s DNA on it, and it was uncontaminated.
Hence, the defense could not claim that Culhane had contaminated the actual evidence, only the control sample against which it was measured. This would have been easily corrected with a second test, but because the bullet fragment was so tiny, it was entirely used up in the first test.
The series depicts this as highly suspect, but in fact it is quite common for a sample as small as the bullet to only be tested once. The small size of the bullet is also a reason why it wasn’t spotted until a second series of searches of Avery’s garage.
“I say where is the blood?” asks Avery’s father Allan during a mid-trial meeting with his son’s lawyers.
“There's about five quarts of blood in the human body and, you know, there's no evidence of that, but we certainly can argue and we are going to argue ‘where is the blood?’” Strang answers.
Well, for one, Halbach’s blood was on the bullet and it was in the back of her RAV 4—a forensic analyst even testified that the pattern of it is consistent with bloody hair streaking the sides of the trunk. But here Strang means “Where is the blood in the garage?”
“High velocity spatter, you standing over somebody, it goes all over and it's tiny, tiny little... it’s tiny, it's fat, it spreads, it's just gonna, like, cover all the junk,” Buting says later. “The more cluttered it is, the harder it is going to be to clean up high velocity spatter.”
“Yeah,” Strang adds. “I mean, it's real small droplets. You will not be able to find every bit of it.”
Oh really? Can he say that with absolute certainty? What if, in fact, there wasn’t nearly as much blood as he presumes there to be? What if most of the blood is actually soaked up in Halbach’s hair and clothes and never spatters as far away as Strang suggests that it does?
And, more tellingly, why does the defense never have a blood spatter expert testify to this effect? Seriously, if a lack of blood was as important as Making a Murderer makes it seem, then why didn’t the defense ever try to show definitively that a lack of blood made it impossible for Halbach to have in fact been shot in Avery’s garage?
Instead, they go back to the old tactic of claiming that their client is too stupid to know how to clean up blood stains.
“I don’t believe Steven was capable of sanitizing that house,” says Pete Baetz, an investigative expert for...Steven.
The defense continues to presume that because Avery is stupid, he doesn’t know how to get rid of evidence. Only he does. He burns it. Just as Brendan Dassey says he does in his supposedly coerced confession.
In yet another example of Dassey’s confession matching up perfectly with the physical evidence, Halbach’s blood is found in the trunk of her RAV 4. Specifically, a forensic investigator testifies, blood that had stained her hair streaked the sides of that trunk.
Why, the defense claims, would Avery load her body into the car to take it to the burn barrel right outside his garage? Well, because Making a Murderer completely omits a part of Dassey’s confession in which he says that he and Avery drove the body to a nearby pond in an effort to dump it there, but found that the pond had dried up, so they took it back to the burn pit and set it on fire.
Making a Murderer also omits the fact that found alongside Halbach’s charred bones in that burn pit was a rivet from a pair of Daisy Fuentes brand jeans. Halbach’s younger sister Katie testified that she knew Teresa had a pair of Daisy Fuentes jeans because she used to tease Teresa about how lame they were.
When the family searched Teresa’s closet after the rivet was found, her Daisy Fuentes jeans were missing.
So a rivet from jeans belonging to the victim was found alongside her bone fragments in a burn pit just outside of Avery’s house—precisely where Dassey said he and Avery burned Halbach’s body—but that’s not all: Making a Murderer never shows that investigators also found a tooth in that burn pit as well as a charred cell phone, camera, and personal digital assistant, all of which belonged to Teresa Halbach.
To combat this incredibly damning evidence against their client, the defense attempts to claim that Halbach’s body was actually burned in a quarry off of the Avery property and then her charred remains were dumped in Avery’s burn pit in an attempt to frame him.
As supposed evidence of this, they present what appears to be part of a pelvic bone found in that quarry.
This is it, right? This is airtight proof that someone besides Steven Avery burned Teresa Halbach’s body, right?
Wrong, because that pelvic bone is never proven to be Teresa Halbach’s. Indeed, it’s never even proven to have been a human bone. Moreover, it was found with a number of other bones that were proven to be from animals, meaning that it too very well could have been an animal bone.
But, as expected, Making a Murderer never presents this. It merely lets its audience assume that the bone in the quarry is Halbach’s when, in fact, it might not have been anyone’s at all.
It is, yet again, not a real piece of evidence, but just another unsubstantiated presumption.
Dassey says he finds Halbach chained up on Avery’s bed. Avery had just purchased handcuffs and leg irons.
Dassey says his uncle is sweaty when he answers the door as Dassey drops off some mail. DNA that was likely from Avery’s sweat is recovered on Teresa Halbach’s car key, which is found in Avery’s bedroom. He says Avery goes under the hood of the car to remove a battery cable. DNA that was likely from Avery’s sweat was recovered from the hood latch.
Dassey says the two of them load Halbach’s body in the trunk of her car in an effort to dump it in a nearby pond. Her blood is found in the back of her car.
Dassey says his uncle shot Teresa Halbach in the head several times. Burned skull fragments found in a burn pit just outside Avery’s garage show trauma from at least two gunshot wounds.
Dassey says that shooting happened in Avery’s garage. Spent shell casings are found in the garage and so is a flattened bullet with Halbach’s DNA on it. That bullet was demonstrated to have been fired from Steven Avery’s .22 caliber rifle, which he always kept above his bed.
Incidentally, Making a Murderer never presents this very damning evidence that the bullet that killed Teresa Hallbach was fired from a gun that Steven Avery kept in a place where he would notice if it went missing.
It merely presumes that Dassey’s confession was too unreliable to use at trial—when it clearly wasn’t—and attempts to insist that somehow law enforcement planted Teresa Halbach’s DNA on the bullet which they then placed in Avery’s garage.
“OK,” says Avery attorney Jerome Buting. “What was it, five entries to his garage the week of November 5th to the 12th?”
“Correct,” answers lead investigator Tom Fassbender.
“At that time, though, none of the investigators knew that there would be evidence that suggested that perhaps...Teresa Halbach had actually been shot in the head. That information came later.”
“Correct.”
“Shortly before this March 1st and March 2nd search.”
That search, with a new search warrant, was the direct result of Dassey’s confession—which was precisely why investigators now had a reason to pore over the garage with a fine-toothed comb. The series makes a great deal out of the fact that investigators never found the bullet fragment during initial searches of Avery’s property, while at the same time trying to suggest that Avery’s garage was too dirty for Avery to clean it up after the murder.
Well if it was that dirty, wouldn’t it stand to reason that investigators might have had difficulty finding a tiny bullet fragment under the mountains of garbage in the garage—especially if they didn’t know that they were looking for evidence of a shooting?
Remember, they had no idea in November of 2005 how Halbach had been killed or where exactly on the 40-acre property she had been killed. Only when Dassey gave them information that allowed them to focus all of their search efforts on the garage did they thoroughly scour it enough to find the bullet fragment.
And yes, it is indisputable that Halbach’s DNA was on that bullet, despite what both the defense and Making a Murderer attempt to show.
“This is crime lab item designation "FL" and it is a lead bullet fragment,” testifies Wisconsin Crime Lab forensic analyst Sherry Culhane.
“And how did you process that bullet?” asks Kratz.
“In order to remove any residual DNA that might have been on the bullet, I washed it. I put it in a test tube and washed it with some buffer that we use to extract the DNA. And the liquid is what I performed the rest of my procedure on.”
“And were you able to develop a DNA profile from that washing on item FL, the bullet?”
“Yes.”
“Do you have an opinion to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty whether Teresa Halbach is the source of the DNA on item FL, the bullet?”
“Yes. I believe she is the source of the DNA on the bullet.”
To determine this, DNA analysts match the evidence in question with a control sample. Unfortunately, during the course of her testing, Culhane inadvertently contaminated this control sample with her own DNA. She had been instructing a couple of students and believes that as she was talking to them, some of her saliva got into the control sample.
It never got into the bullet sample. The defense never even alleged that it did. This means that the defense conceded the fact that the evidentiary sample was not at all contaminated. That was the sample with Halbach’s DNA on it, and it was uncontaminated.
Hence, the defense could not claim that Culhane had contaminated the actual evidence, only the control sample against which it was measured. This would have been easily corrected with a second test, but because the bullet fragment was so tiny, it was entirely used up in the first test.
The series depicts this as highly suspect, but in fact it is quite common for a sample as small as the bullet to only be tested once. The small size of the bullet is also a reason why it wasn’t spotted until a second series of searches of Avery’s garage.
“I say where is the blood?” asks Avery’s father Allan during a mid-trial meeting with his son’s lawyers.
“There's about five quarts of blood in the human body and, you know, there's no evidence of that, but we certainly can argue and we are going to argue ‘where is the blood?’” Strang answers.
Well, for one, Halbach’s blood was on the bullet and it was in the back of her RAV 4—a forensic analyst even testified that the pattern of it is consistent with bloody hair streaking the sides of the trunk. But here Strang means “Where is the blood in the garage?”
“High velocity spatter, you standing over somebody, it goes all over and it's tiny, tiny little... it’s tiny, it's fat, it spreads, it's just gonna, like, cover all the junk,” Buting says later. “The more cluttered it is, the harder it is going to be to clean up high velocity spatter.”
“Yeah,” Strang adds. “I mean, it's real small droplets. You will not be able to find every bit of it.”
Oh really? Can he say that with absolute certainty? What if, in fact, there wasn’t nearly as much blood as he presumes there to be? What if most of the blood is actually soaked up in Halbach’s hair and clothes and never spatters as far away as Strang suggests that it does?
And, more tellingly, why does the defense never have a blood spatter expert testify to this effect? Seriously, if a lack of blood was as important as Making a Murderer makes it seem, then why didn’t the defense ever try to show definitively that a lack of blood made it impossible for Halbach to have in fact been shot in Avery’s garage?
Instead, they go back to the old tactic of claiming that their client is too stupid to know how to clean up blood stains.
“I don’t believe Steven was capable of sanitizing that house,” says Pete Baetz, an investigative expert for...Steven.
The defense continues to presume that because Avery is stupid, he doesn’t know how to get rid of evidence. Only he does. He burns it. Just as Brendan Dassey says he does in his supposedly coerced confession.
In yet another example of Dassey’s confession matching up perfectly with the physical evidence, Halbach’s blood is found in the trunk of her RAV 4. Specifically, a forensic investigator testifies, blood that had stained her hair streaked the sides of that trunk.
Why, the defense claims, would Avery load her body into the car to take it to the burn barrel right outside his garage? Well, because Making a Murderer completely omits a part of Dassey’s confession in which he says that he and Avery drove the body to a nearby pond in an effort to dump it there, but found that the pond had dried up, so they took it back to the burn pit and set it on fire.
Making a Murderer also omits the fact that found alongside Halbach’s charred bones in that burn pit was a rivet from a pair of Daisy Fuentes brand jeans. Halbach’s younger sister Katie testified that she knew Teresa had a pair of Daisy Fuentes jeans because she used to tease Teresa about how lame they were.
When the family searched Teresa’s closet after the rivet was found, her Daisy Fuentes jeans were missing.
So a rivet from jeans belonging to the victim was found alongside her bone fragments in a burn pit just outside of Avery’s house—precisely where Dassey said he and Avery burned Halbach’s body—but that’s not all: Making a Murderer never shows that investigators also found a tooth in that burn pit as well as a charred cell phone, camera, and personal digital assistant, all of which belonged to Teresa Halbach.
To combat this incredibly damning evidence against their client, the defense attempts to claim that Halbach’s body was actually burned in a quarry off of the Avery property and then her charred remains were dumped in Avery’s burn pit in an attempt to frame him.
As supposed evidence of this, they present what appears to be part of a pelvic bone found in that quarry.
This is it, right? This is airtight proof that someone besides Steven Avery burned Teresa Halbach’s body, right?
Wrong, because that pelvic bone is never proven to be Teresa Halbach’s. Indeed, it’s never even proven to have been a human bone. Moreover, it was found with a number of other bones that were proven to be from animals, meaning that it too very well could have been an animal bone.
But, as expected, Making a Murderer never presents this. It merely lets its audience assume that the bone in the quarry is Halbach’s when, in fact, it might not have been anyone’s at all.
It is, yet again, not a real piece of evidence, but just another unsubstantiated presumption.
Ned
Footballguy
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Girlfriend basically said he used to abuse her and everything she said on the DOC was a lie. Said she requested to not be on the documentary but they didn't honor her wishes. Said she once drank Rat Poison so she could get to a hospital to get protection from him because she had no phone.
Nancy Grace is a real piece of work. Everytime she had somebody on the show that was even the slightest bit skeptical she cut them off midsentence and didn't go back to them. What a #### show. Ooff\
derek245583
Footballguy
So she didn't want to be on the doc and they put her on their anyway?
Is that legal?
gianmarco
Footballguy
Watching it now, and I've never seen an interview where they show the interviewer just sitting there nodding so much while the interviewee is speaking. Odd
ETA: I thought she seemed sincere for the most part. But not very believable in her reasons for changing her story. Toward the end when asked why she finally left Avery, she basically confirmed that they told her she needs to get out of dodge or they'll keep harassing her.
Last edited by a moderator:
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Wow, I thought this was legit until I clicked the link.
simey
Footballguy
I just saw an interview with Strang and Buting, and they were asked a few questions about the case. They were asked about Avery blocking a couple calls, and they said it is on record that Avery called the Auto Trader office and asked for Teresa, and she told her coworkers that she was going to see the Avery brothers to take a picture of the sister's van. She has been out there multiple times before to take pictures of cars they had for sale.This is true. But the fact that it is coming from Strang led me to give weight it.
I wish we could get the full court transcripts. Although I can't think of many less productive things I could do with my time.
They were also asked if they were convinced Avery was innocent, and Strang said he wasn't convinced he was guilty. Strang was asked if there was some doubt in his mind, and Strang said "sure." Strang then said you don't convict someone on maybes. He said he wouldn't be worried about it if that were the case.
They were then asked about the planted evidence, and Bunting said there is no such thing as sweat dna. He also talked about the planted key, and said her burned bones were also found at Bobby Dassey's burn barrel, and at a rock quarry. He said that he has been contacted by over 100 scientist in the recent weeks saying there are better ways now to detect EDTA, and if the blood came from an actively bleeding cut. Strang said Avery's best hope is for newly discovered evidence.
SWC
Bromigo
one thing that i think is interesting is that the times sure have changed nationally i do not think the average individual believes that the cops are automatically all good guys anymore but let me say that i do think that most cops are in fact really good guys and do a job that i sure would not want to do but there have been to many thing in the news like shootings and other horrible things caught on tape that the air of infalability is gone i wonder if a jury now would accept as much of the prosecutors case as they seem to have done back then man the times they are a changin like my main man old bobbby dillan said take that to the bank bromigos
parrot
Footballguy
I watched most of that but left before this last bit. Did he actually say that it was Halbach's bones at the quarry? Because I don't believe that was ever really established scientifically.
matttyl
Footballguy
Would these new tests be considered new evidence? If they wanted to retest the blood in the vile, RAV4, and from Avery himself, would the state have to allow the first two?
Sabertooth
Footballguy
The line between good guys and bad guys is often a matter of perspective. I think we should just leave it alone. Because we can't see eye to eye. There ain't no good guys. There aint' no bad guys. There's just you and me and we just disagree.
simey
Footballguy
He was talking about her bones, and said they had clearly been moved, and part were found in a burn barrel behind Bobby Dassey's residence about 200 yards away, and some more found in a quarry. The states own Forensic Anthropologist testified that two fragments from Halbach's pelvis were found at the quarry.
Mors Venit
Footballguy
Didnt the police present the bones at the quarry?
The defense certainly didnt dig them up.
Looks to me like someone oitside the loop found and reported the bones before the fix was in place.
Naturally they test as nonnhuman. Im sure that sample wasnt tainted.
The defense certainly didnt dig them up.
Looks to me like someone oitside the loop found and reported the bones before the fix was in place.
Naturally they test as nonnhuman. Im sure that sample wasnt tainted.
Officer Pete Malloy
Footballguy
Binky The Doormat
Footballguy
Unbelievable. I had only seen her show in very small bits as a result of channel surfing. I have never seen someone do that (cut someone off and not go back to them).
What a #### show.
Similar threads
