What's new
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)

Factoid: trial transcripts says it was a Marlin .22 rifle, which is indeed one of the longest-produced, most popular .22. rifles ever made

just adding that info to the burn pit
I dont know much about ballistics, but does this mean that every rifle that is a marlin .22 would be interchangeable? I thought it was much more unique than that.
Apparently they could match the shell casings to the specific gun with pretty good confidence, but because the bullet was flattened, it could be matched only to the class of guns (make and model) rather than an individual gun.

There's a bit about that here: http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/news/making-a-murderer-steven-averys-lawyer-on-the-evidence-left-out-20160115
Bobby owned his own .22 Marlin the same model that was allegedly used to kill Teresa. A coworker of Scott's says that Scott tried to sell him a .22 rifle belonging to one of the Dassey boys.
Hmmmm.
If only ANY of the other potential suspects were truly investigated...
Say, like, two other guys with Avery property acces who had actually been charged with violent crimes against women? Nah, no need to check into them guys.

 
So Colburn called in TH license plates from his cell phone, how come the defense didn't check with the cell phone company tower and they could have matched the location of her vehicle and being called in as the same place? Just wondering if anyone else came across this.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is an anti-Avery article that I think makes a good point about a very suspicious interview Avery gave Nov 4th:

http://www.statementanalysis.com/steven-avery/

The part comes up about halfway through ep 2.

Very strange way to answer the question IMO.
Thanks for the link, I'm very interested in reading any credible info against Avery, since in general there is more being written about what was wrong with the process, evidence, and trial, than what was right about it.

But this piece came across as armchair syntax analysis by the author.

Just one example of many:

While being escorted from a van to the courthouse a reporter asked Avery, "What do you want to say today?" Avery responded, "I'm innocent."

This is a very weak denial. :confused: A serial killer with blood on his hands can honestly say, "I'm innocent." This is because in our society one is innocent until proven guilty. :rolleyes: The best denial is to deny the act itself by saying, "I didn't do it" or "I didn't kill her." There was only one time throughout this entire 10-part documentary that I heard Avery deny the act itself. At one of the hearings, Avery told the judge "Teresa Halbach I didn't kill." All the other times in the documentary he proclaimed his innocence. Even in his somewhat good denial the order is off. Most people would say, "I didn't kill Teresa Halbach." Based on the order, the emphasis is on what the person did not do. In Avery's denial, the emphasis is on Teresa Halbach first and himself second.

 
So Colburn called in TH license plates from his cell phone, how come the defense didn't check with the cell phone company tower and they could have matched the location of her vehicle and being called in as the same place? Just wondering if anyone else came across this.
Great question. It would be awesome if those records still existed.

I'm not sure how accurately they could have pinpointed his location via his cell call, especially back then, but at least it would be a ballpark.

 
So Colburn called in TH license plates from his cell phone, how come the defense didn't check with the cell phone company tower and they could have matched the location of her vehicle and being called in as the same place? Just wondering if anyone else came across this.
What could the defense do with that info? There's no proven point where the Rav7 ever was except for on the Avery property when it was discovered. Besides, I don't think that's something they could narrow down to the foot back then (no GPS)... stuff like that would be based on triangulating cell towers his phone pinged. And in a rural area like that? Prob couldn't be very accurate.

 
Here is an anti-Avery article that I think makes a good point about a very suspicious interview Avery gave Nov 4th:

http://www.statementanalysis.com/steven-avery/

The part comes up about halfway through ep 2.

Very strange way to answer the question IMO.
Thanks for the link, I'm very interested in reading any credible info against Avery, since in general there is more being written about what was wrong with the process, evidence, and trial, than what was right about it.

But this piece came across as armchair syntax analysis by the author.
The first example is the only one I give any weight. Avery is being interviewed by a reporter and is asked if Halbach said anything about any other appointments. His response:

"No, I don't think so cause most of the time she takes a picture. Then she writes down the serial number. Then she comes and collects the money and that's about it."

If someone is talking to me like I'm the last one to see someone alive I'm not talking about "most of the time"... I'm being very specific about this particular time that's important, not what usually happens.

 
So Colburn called in TH license plates from his cell phone, how come the defense didn't check with the cell phone company tower and they could have matched the location of her vehicle and being called in as the same place? Just wondering if anyone else came across this.
What could the defense do with that info? There's no proven point where the Rav7 ever was except for on the Avery property when it was discovered. Besides, I don't think that's something they could narrow down to the foot back then (no GPS)... stuff like that would be based on triangulating cell towers his phone pinged. And in a rural area like that? Prob couldn't be very accurate.
I think we learned from Serial it's not that conclusive.
Even if it was... if we knew right where Colburn was when he made that call... and it was some back road sort of near the Avery property, what would that prove? Or if he was on the Avery property. We can all draw our suspicions... but nothing conclusive IMO.

 
I've really enjoyed watching this. It's very entertaining and I've learned quite a bit. I have no idea if he's guilty or not. It amazes me that anyone can watch this and be certain whether he's guilty or not. I certainly can't.

 
Why three burn sites? Any answer is going to be odd.

Think it more likely that Avery decided to scatter the ashes/bones in an attempt to just get rid/hide them then the cops doing so. Wouldn't it be better/easier for the cops just to dump everything outside his garage? Why go through the effort/risk to dump them at three different sites?

Avery was trying to scatter them.

 
Like I said previously always felt Averys' lawyers more frustrated with the process then whether an innocent man in jail. Just the vibe I get.

 
So Colburn called in TH license plates from his cell phone, how come the defense didn't check with the cell phone company tower and they could have matched the location of her vehicle and being called in as the same place? Just wondering if anyone else came across this.
What could the defense do with that info? There's no proven point where the Rav7 ever was except for on the Avery property when it was discovered. Besides, I don't think that's something they could narrow down to the foot back then (no GPS)... stuff like that would be based on triangulating cell towers his phone pinged. And in a rural area like that? Prob couldn't be very accurate.
I think we learned from Serial it's not that conclusive.
Even if it was... if we knew right where Colburn was when he made that call... and it was some back road sort of near the Avery property, what would that prove? Or if he was on the Avery property. We can all draw our suspicions... but nothing conclusive IMO.
there was three appointments made for TH that day, the police say that SA was the last but what about if it wasn't her last, she goes to I forget their name( in the transcripts they cross examined the wife who made the appointment name ends in erer.) but the husband put a bullet in TH head for trespassing cause he was a weed grower,(by the way father and son both had police records) shoved her body in the back of a her vehicle then put it in a field somewhere, where officer Colburn then finds and calls with his cell the license plate. So they have the body they just need to frame SA which they did.

 
Why three burn sites? Any answer is going to be odd.

Think it more likely that Avery decided to scatter the ashes/bones in an attempt to just get rid/hide them then the cops doing so. Wouldn't it be better/easier for the cops just to dump everything outside his garage? Why go through the effort/risk to dump them at three different sites?

Avery was trying to scatter them.
400 acres of thousands of junk cars, where's the logic of "scattering" 85% of them in the pit next to your house? And then a couple here and there?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've really enjoyed watching this. It's very entertaining and I've learned quite a bit. I have no idea if he's guilty or not. It amazes me that anyone can watch this and be certain whether he's guilty or not. I certainly can't.
And that's all any of 95% of the thread is saying. Reasonable doubt, in the case that has been presented to us is clear IMO.

 
there was three appointments made for TH that day, the police say that SA was the last but what about if it wasn't her last, she goes to I forget their name( in the transcripts they cross examined the wife who made the appointment name ends in erer.) but the husband put a bullet in TH head for trespassing cause he was a weed grower,(by the way father and son both had police records) shoved her body in the back of a her vehicle then put it in a field somewhere, where officer Colburn then finds and calls with his cell the license plate. So they have the body they just need to frame SA which they did.
You've hit upon another very interesting Reddit theory/possibility that I just read last night regarding her order of visits, the thread in the link has more discussion regarding some of the strengths and weaknesses of this line of thinking:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/42e9ff/who_really_saw_teresa_halbach_last_evidence_that/

Who Really Saw Teresa Halbach Last? Evidence That It May Not Have Been Steven Avery self.MakingaMurderer

Submitted 1 day ago * by CarlCarpenter

I was going over a timeline for October 31st and going over official records to verify times and I noticed something.

Looking at the times, I think that Teresa went to the Avery’s BEFORE going to the Zipperer photo shoot.

Here's Why...

Teresa leaves Steven Schmitz’s residence in New Holstein around 1:40 PM (about 10 minutes after arriving at 1:30). She’s on her way to take pictures at both Geroge Zipperer’s residence and at the Avery Salvage yard. She’s taken pictures at the Avery’s many times before and is familiar with the place.

Here's A Map ==>> http://i.imgur.com/DnthYIX.png

On her way there (at 2:12 PM) she calls the Zipperer’s and leaves a message that she can’t find their house and is running late.

Steven Avery calls her at (at 2:24 PM) and leaves a 7 second message.

Teresa would probably be going North on Highway B at this time around 10 minutes away from the Avery’s. She probably makes the decision to by-pass the Zipperer’s home and head straight for the Avery’s.

She knows exactly where it is and knows she can knock the photo out fast because the Avery’s know the procedure. And the Zipperer’s house is on her way back home.

Plus, the Avery’s are bigger clients and they have started calling because she’s late. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

She’s already told the Zipperer’s that she’s running late so a few extra minutes won’t matter much.

She calls the Auto Trader (at 2:27 PM) and tells them that she’s going to the Avery’s. This is just 3 minutes after Steve has called her.

Steven calls Teresa again (at 2:35 PM) but she doesn’t pick up. In fact it doesn’t even go to voicemail probably because she’s pulling in the driveway at that time.

Since Steve has been calling her every 10 minutes, why would he have stopped unless she showed up? If she had gone to the Zipperer’s first then Steven would have kept calling.

Bobby Dassey also says he woke up between 2:00 and 2:30 and when he looked out his window before taking a shower he saw Teresa taking pictures.

Teresa spends 10 to 15 minutes taking pictures, and leaves. This would place her at the Zipperer’s around 3:00 PM, which is the time JoEllen Zipperer testifies she thinks Teresa arrives. She does say that it was mid-afternoon and 3:00 is her best guess but it could even be as late as 3:30 “or even a little later”.

This means that a witness places Teresa at the Avery’s home at just after 2:35 PM and then another witness places her at her next assignment at around 3:00 PM. This makes you wonder… Was Steven Avery the Last Known Person To See Teresa Alive?

Kratz did a good job on re-cross and got JoEllen Zipperer to say maybe 2:00 to 2:30.

To make this timeline even more interesting…

JoEllen Zipperer testified that she never saw Teresa leave.

Her adult grandson lives with her.

Corporal Lemieux from Calumet County Sheriff's Department called George Zipperer (JoEllen Zipperer’s Husband) at 5:00 PM on 11/3/05 and he became "belligerent".

Investigator John Dedering of the Calumet County Sheriff's Department called George Zipperer at 9:4:00 PM on 11/3/05 and George was "extremely belligerent".

And then in the court transcripts Strang says”

George Zipperer told, first, Corporal Lemieux and, then, Investigator Dedering, a series of lies about his own activities; about Jason's activities; about whether the Auto Trader photographer was a trespasser on the property. Threatened to have the dog eat anyone who would come on the property; wanting Teresa Halbach arrested even after being told that she was a missing person; denying that he had contacted Auto Trader or arranged for photographs of the car.

And yet this was NEVER investigated.

To Summerize:

Bobby Dassey Testifies Teresa arrived at Avery Salvage at a little after 2:30 PM

JoEllen Zipperer Testifies Teresa Was At Her Home Around 3:00 PM

JoEllen Testifies She Never Saw Teresa Leave

George Zipperer Says He Never Asked AutoTrader To Send A Photographer

George Zipperer Becomes Beligereint With Police When Asked About Teresa

George Zipperer Lied To Police About Circumstances Around The Time Teresa Disappears

 
did they find her camera if they did that would have pictures in a certain order and they might have clues to when she was where just spitballin over here brohans take that ot the bank

 
‘Making A Murderer’: This Letter Ken Kratz Sent Steven Avery Will Leave You Dumbfounded

Dear Mr Avery:
I got your letter dated August 28 2015, wherein you tell me your visitor list is full, and ask if I checked out other fingerprints found on Teresa Halbach’s car, telling me that these people could have “set you up” for this.
I apologise for misunderstanding your letters from a couple years ago, as I thought you were interested in being honest about what happened and finally telling the whole story to someone. Since I’m the person who probably knows more about your case that anyone else, I hoped that you would chose me to tell your story to.
Unfortunately, you only want to continue your nonsense about being set you. That’s too bad, because you had ONE opportunity to finally tell all the details, but now that will never happen.
By the way, the difference between you and famous convicted murderers from the past is that they told their whole truthful story to someone, who then wrote a book about what actually happened and people got to understand both sides. I was willing to do that for you… but if you are going to continue to lie about what happened between you and Ms Halbach, I am not interested.
If you change your mind, and want to tell your story someday, please contact me.
Sincerely yours,
Kenneth R Kratz
 
‘Making A Murderer’: This Letter Ken Kratz Sent Steven Avery Will Leave You Dumbfounded

Dear Mr Avery:
I got your letter dated August 28 2015, wherein you tell me your visitor list is full, and ask if I checked out other fingerprints found on Teresa Halbach’s car, telling me that these people could have “set you up” for this.
I apologise for misunderstanding your letters from a couple years ago, as I thought you were interested in being honest about what happened and finally telling the whole story to someone. Since I’m the person who probably knows more about your case that anyone else, I hoped that you would chose me to tell your story to.
Unfortunately, you only want to continue your nonsense about being set you. That’s too bad, because you had ONE opportunity to finally tell all the details, but now that will never happen.
By the way, the difference between you and famous convicted murderers from the past is that they told their whole truthful story to someone, who then wrote a book about what actually happened and people got to understand both sides. I was willing to do that for you… but if you are going to continue to lie about what happened between you and Ms Halbach, I am not interested.
If you change your mind, and want to tell your story someday, please contact me.
Sincerely yours,
Kenneth R Kratz
That's a prize right there!

 
Here is an anti-Avery article that I think makes a good point about a very suspicious interview Avery gave Nov 4th:

http://www.statementanalysis.com/steven-avery/

The part comes up about halfway through ep 2.

Very strange way to answer the question IMO.
Thanks for the link, I'm very interested in reading any credible info against Avery, since in general there is more being written about what was wrong with the process, evidence, and trial, than what was right about it.

But this piece came across as armchair syntax analysis by the author.

Just one example of many:

While being escorted from a van to the courthouse a reporter asked Avery, "What do you want to say today?" Avery responded, "I'm innocent."

This is a very weak denial. :confused: A serial killer with blood on his hands can honestly say, "I'm innocent." This is because in our society one is innocent until proven guilty. :rolleyes: The best denial is to deny the act itself by saying, "I didn't do it" or "I didn't kill her." There was only one time throughout this entire 10-part documentary that I heard Avery deny the act itself. At one of the hearings, Avery told the judge "Teresa Halbach I didn't kill." All the other times in the documentary he proclaimed his innocence. Even in his somewhat good denial the order is off. Most people would say, "I didn't kill Teresa Halbach." Based on the order, the emphasis is on what the person did not do. In Avery's denial, the emphasis is on Teresa Halbach first and himself second.
I'm pretty sure Avery did it but that article was horrible.

 
Never bothered the the last couple episodes after Avery's trial concluded. I think as the series played out I shifted more towards a "he's guilty" belief than anything else.

 
Why three burn sites? Any answer is going to be odd.

Think it more likely that Avery decided to scatter the ashes/bones in an attempt to just get rid/hide them then the cops doing so. Wouldn't it be better/easier for the cops just to dump everything outside his garage? Why go through the effort/risk to dump them at three different sites?

Avery was trying to scatter them.
The answer that doesn't seem odd is that she was burned at the quarry pile, then the burn barrel was used to transport the cremains to the fire pit. That's how you end up with the majority of the cremains in the fire pit with just a few remnants at the quarry pile and in the burn barrel.

It's pretty obvious that the bones were moved after they were burned (not burned separately in three locations). It doesn't make sense to move just a few. It makes sense to try to move all of them, but to goof a little and leave some behind. That makes it pretty likely that they were moved to -- not from -- the fire pit. It kind of makes sense that the burn barrel would be used to move them, which leaves the quarry as the most likely place of burning. (That's also consistent, I believe, with the fact that you wouldn't be able to sustain high heat long enough at a "bombfire" in the fire pit to explain the level of charring.)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why three burn sites? Any answer is going to be odd.

Think it more likely that Avery decided to scatter the ashes/bones in an attempt to just get rid/hide them then the cops doing so. Wouldn't it be better/easier for the cops just to dump everything outside his garage? Why go through the effort/risk to dump them at three different sites?

Avery was trying to scatter them.
The answer that doesn't seem odd is that she was burned at the quarry pile, then the burn barrel was used to transport the cremains to the fire pit. That's how you end up with the majority of the cremains in the fire pit with just a few remnants at the quarry pile and in the burn barrel.

It's pretty obvious that the bones were moved after they were burned (not burned separately in three locations). It doesn't make sense to move just a few. It makes sense to try to move all of them, but to goof a little and leave some behind. That makes it pretty likely that they were moved to -- not from -- the fire pit. It kind of makes sense that the burn barrel would be used to move them, which leaves the quarry as the most likely place of burning. (That's also consistent, I believe, with the fact that you wouldn't be able to sustain high heat long enough at a "bombfire" in the fire pit to explain the level of charring.)
Keep in mind that the bone fragments found at the quarry were never confirmed to be Theresa's.

Why do you think a fire at the quarry would be able to achieve a higher temperature than on the Avery property?

 
Why three burn sites? Any answer is going to be odd.

Think it more likely that Avery decided to scatter the ashes/bones in an attempt to just get rid/hide them then the cops doing so. Wouldn't it be better/easier for the cops just to dump everything outside his garage? Why go through the effort/risk to dump them at three different sites?

Avery was trying to scatter them.
The answer that doesn't seem odd is that she was burned at the quarry pile, then the burn barrel was used to transport the cremains to the fire pit. That's how you end up with the majority of the cremains in the fire pit with just a few remnants at the quarry pile and in the burn barrel.

It's pretty obvious that the bones were moved after they were burned (not burned separately in three locations). It doesn't make sense to move just a few. It makes sense to try to move all of them, but to goof a little and leave some behind. That makes it pretty likely that they were moved to -- not from -- the fire pit. It kind of makes sense that the burn barrel would be used to move them, which leaves the quarry as the most likely place of burning. (That's also consistent, I believe, with the fact that you wouldn't be able to sustain high heat long enough at a "bombfire" in the fire pit to explain the level of charring.)
Keep in mind that the bone fragments found at the quarry were never confirmed to be Theresa's.

Why do you think a fire at the quarry would be able to achieve a higher temperature than on the Avery property?
I think the theory is that someone else burned the remains at the quarry - away from the Avery property so as not to draw suspicion to the real killer(s) - and then later transported to the burn pit on the Avery property to frame Steve.

 
Why three burn sites? Any answer is going to be odd.

Think it more likely that Avery decided to scatter the ashes/bones in an attempt to just get rid/hide them then the cops doing so. Wouldn't it be better/easier for the cops just to dump everything outside his garage? Why go through the effort/risk to dump them at three different sites?

Avery was trying to scatter them.
The answer that doesn't seem odd is that she was burned at the quarry pile, then the burn barrel was used to transport the cremains to the fire pit. That's how you end up with the majority of the cremains in the fire pit with just a few remnants at the quarry pile and in the burn barrel.

It's pretty obvious that the bones were moved after they were burned (not burned separately in three locations). It doesn't make sense to move just a few. It makes sense to try to move all of them, but to goof a little and leave some behind. That makes it pretty likely that they were moved to -- not from -- the fire pit. It kind of makes sense that the burn barrel would be used to move them, which leaves the quarry as the most likely place of burning. (That's also consistent, I believe, with the fact that you wouldn't be able to sustain high heat long enough at a "bombfire" in the fire pit to explain the level of charring.)
Keep in mind that the bone fragments found at the quarry were never confirmed to be Theresa's.

Why do you think a fire at the quarry would be able to achieve a higher temperature than on the Avery property?
Right. They were human, consistent with female, same charring and calcination as the rest of the bones, and there were no other known victims to link them to. So the common thinking is that they were Halbach's. But they couldn't DNA test them for a certain match.

The charring is a function of time and temperature. The bones could have burned for days at the quarry. The bombfire in Avery's pit wasn't going that long.

 
‘Making A Murderer’: This Letter Ken Kratz Sent Steven Avery Will Leave You Dumbfounded

Dear Mr Avery:
I got your letter dated August 28 2015, wherein you tell me your visitor list is full, and ask if I checked out other fingerprints found on Teresa Halbach’s car, telling me that these people could have “set you up” for this.
I apologise for misunderstanding your letters from a couple years ago, as I thought you were interested in being honest about what happened and finally telling the whole story to someone. Since I’m the person who probably knows more about your case that anyone else, I hoped that you would chose me to tell your story to.
Unfortunately, you only want to continue your nonsense about being set you. That’s too bad, because you had ONE opportunity to finally tell all the details, but now that will never happen.
By the way, the difference between you and famous convicted murderers from the past is that they told their whole truthful story to someone, who then wrote a book about what actually happened and people got to understand both sides. I was willing to do that for you… but if you are going to continue to lie about what happened between you and Ms Halbach, I am not interested.
If you change your mind, and want to tell your story someday, please contact me.
Sincerely yours,
Kenneth R Kratz
Has to be fake.

 
I've really enjoyed watching this. It's very entertaining and I've learned quite a bit. I have no idea if he's guilty or not. It amazes me that anyone can watch this and be certain whether he's guilty or not. I certainly can't.
Most people in here are not certain 100%, even though I am about 95% confident he is not guilty. The telling thing to me is the number of people who are overly confident he is 100% guilty since a large percentage of them have not even watched it yet.

 
‘Making A Murderer’: This Letter Ken Kratz Sent Steven Avery Will Leave You Dumbfounded

Dear Mr Avery:
I got your letter dated August 28 2015, wherein you tell me your visitor list is full, and ask if I checked out other fingerprints found on Teresa Halbach’s car, telling me that these people could have “set you up” for this.
I apologise for misunderstanding your letters from a couple years ago, as I thought you were interested in being honest about what happened and finally telling the whole story to someone. Since I’m the person who probably knows more about your case that anyone else, I hoped that you would chose me to tell your story to.
Unfortunately, you only want to continue your nonsense about being set you. That’s too bad, because you had ONE opportunity to finally tell all the details, but now that will never happen.
By the way, the difference between you and famous convicted murderers from the past is that they told their whole truthful story to someone, who then wrote a book about what actually happened and people got to understand both sides. I was willing to do that for you… but if you are going to continue to lie about what happened between you and Ms Halbach, I am not interested.
If you change your mind, and want to tell your story someday, please contact me.
Sincerely yours,
Kenneth R Kratz
Has to be fake.
:shrug:

A copy of the actual letter was posted on twitter by Avery's current attorney

 
Said that from the beginning that those two are lying in that interview. They start stuttering when asked how many times have you been on the property? If they were never there they promptly answer I wasn't. Leads me to believe they were on the property at least illegally searching, at most involved with the murder and frame job. Either way there's more involvement of those two that we'll never know.

 
‘Making A Murderer’: This Letter Ken Kratz Sent Steven Avery Will Leave You Dumbfounded

Dear Mr Avery:

I got your letter dated August 28 2015, wherein you tell me your visitor list is full, and ask if I checked out other fingerprints found on Teresa Halbach’s car, telling me that these people could have “set you up” for this.

I apologise for misunderstanding your letters from a couple years ago, as I thought you were interested in being honest about what happened and finally telling the whole story to someone. Since I’m the person who probably knows more about your case that anyone else, I hoped that you would chose me to tell your story to.

Unfortunately, you only want to continue your nonsense about being set you. That’s too bad, because you had ONE opportunity to finally tell all the details, but now that will never happen.

By the way, the difference between you and famous convicted murderers from the past is that they told their whole truthful story to someone, who then wrote a book about what actually happened and people got to understand both sides. I was willing to do that for you… but if you are going to continue to lie about what happened between you and Ms Halbach, I am not interested.

If you change your mind, and want to tell your story someday, please contact me.

Sincerely yours,

Kenneth R Kratz
Has to be fake.
:shrug:

A copy of the actual letter was posted on twitter by Avery's current attorney
I am confused. She also posted the envelope? The envelope is date stamped August 10, 2015. The letter says I got your letter dated August 28, 2015? Also stamped from St Paul but return address is in WI?

ETA Side note: She sure looks like the mom from Gilmore Girls

 
Last edited by a moderator:
‘Making A Murderer’: This Letter Ken Kratz Sent Steven Avery Will Leave You Dumbfounded

Dear Mr Avery:

I got your letter dated August 28 2015, wherein you tell me your visitor list is full, and ask if I checked out other fingerprints found on Teresa Halbach’s car, telling me that these people could have “set you up” for this.

I apologise for misunderstanding your letters from a couple years ago, as I thought you were interested in being honest about what happened and finally telling the whole story to someone. Since I’m the person who probably knows more about your case that anyone else, I hoped that you would chose me to tell your story to.

Unfortunately, you only want to continue your nonsense about being set you. That’s too bad, because you had ONE opportunity to finally tell all the details, but now that will never happen.

By the way, the difference between you and famous convicted murderers from the past is that they told their whole truthful story to someone, who then wrote a book about what actually happened and people got to understand both sides. I was willing to do that for you… but if you are going to continue to lie about what happened between you and Ms Halbach, I am not interested.

If you change your mind, and want to tell your story someday, please contact me.

Sincerely yours,

Kenneth R Kratz
Has to be fake.
:shrug:

A copy of the actual letter was posted on twitter by Avery's current attorney
I am confused. She also posted the envelope? The envelope is date stamped August 10, 2015. The letter says I got your letter dated August 28, 2015? Also stamped from St Paul but return address is in WI?

ETA Side note: She sure looks like the mom from Gilmore Girls
Yea, doesn't make sense... also says "Letter out on 8-27" in hand writing on the envelope

 
A conspiracy involving the police, the victim's brother and the victim's ex-boyfriend seems really unlikely.
I posted a theory from the innerwebs above where it could have been multiple conspiracies - unrelated, but converging on each other.

The sheriff's department had incentive to want Avery convicted - so they could have planted some evidence in an effort to ensure conviction - blood and key

Someone else murdered Halbach - say Bobby Dassey and Scott Tadych - and then put the car on the property and charred remains next to Steve's trailer.

The brother and Ex could have been involved with the police in finding the car - they found it originally while trespassing, and notified the sheriff's deputy, and they then concocted a story about a search member finding it later. This also gave the Manitowoc deputy access to the key.

 
Here's my current probabilities...

Steven Avery - 10%

Some other Avery/Tadych - 50%

Serial Killer theory - 25%

Ex Boyfriend - 10%

Some combo of cops - 5%

 
Here's my current probabilities...

Steven Avery - 10%

Some other Avery/Tadych - 50%

Serial Killer theory - 25%

Ex Boyfriend - 10%

Some combo of cops - 5%
I don't think I know the serial killer theory - but that seems less likely to me.

I think the cops were dirty, but despite the sheriff's comments, I cant see them killing anyone, let alone knowing to kill Halbach after she left the Avery's junk yard.

I don't think Steve Avery did it, nor that Brendan Dassey had any part in it.

 
Here's my current probabilities...

Steven Avery - 10%

Some other Avery/Tadych - 50%

Serial Killer theory - 25%

Ex Boyfriend - 10%

Some combo of cops - 5%
I don't think I know the serial killer theory - but that seems less likely to me.

I think the cops were dirty, but despite the sheriff's comments, I cant see them killing anyone, let alone knowing to kill Halbach after she left the Avery's junk yard.

I don't think Steve Avery did it, nor that Brendan Dassey had any part in it.
This is where I'm at. The serial killer theory is far-fetched.

I think for a lot of people the word conspiracy causes an insta-eye-roll. Same with accusations of police tampering or cover-up.

I don't think there was an elaborate plot that ten or fifteen people perpetuated in stealth. I think the murderer moved the bones into Steven's fire. I think after the search did't reveal any evidence the Sheriff prompted Lenk to plant evidence. That's it.

 
I thought the serial killer theory was far fetched. But after learning more, I now doubt Ed Edwards only committed the five murders he was convicted of. I don't think it's the hundred that that author claims it is. It's probably somewhere in between. We will probably never know everyone he actually killed. That doesn't mean I'm leaning towards believing Ed Edwards set Avery up. But it's no longer a far fetched theory to me. He's worthy of being a suspect.

 
Here's my current probabilities...

Steven Avery - 10%

Some other Avery/Tadych - 50%

Serial Killer theory - 25%

Ex Boyfriend - 10%

Some combo of cops - 5%
I don't think I know the serial killer theory - but that seems less likely to me.

I think the cops were dirty, but despite the sheriff's comments, I cant see them killing anyone, let alone knowing to kill Halbach after she left the Avery's junk yard.

I don't think Steve Avery did it, nor that Brendan Dassey had any part in it.
This is where I'm at. The serial killer theory is far-fetched.

I think for a lot of people the word conspiracy causes an insta-eye-roll. Same with accusations of police tampering or cover-up.
After the Walter Scott video, police tampering should hardly be an eye roll.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top