I agree. I can also see why they didn't do a new case because how could they possibly top the Steven Avery case? It would take years to make and it is highly unlikely that the new police department would be as shady as the police department in the first season.
Making a Murderer (Spoilers)
- Thread starter Veritate Duce Progredi
- Start date
I agree. I can also see why they didn't do a new case because how could they possibly top the Steven Avery case? It would take years to make and it is highly unlikely that the new police department would be as shady as the police department in the first season.
ACamp1900
Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
- Messages
- 48,947
- Reaction score
- 11,226
This thread keeps going, lol,... Okay, so my wife tried watching the first episode a while back... the whole thing is just a bunch of different'60 Minutes" style breakdowns of different murder trials and such??
We watched the first 30 minutes or so and it didn't grab either of us at all...
We watched the first 30 minutes or so and it didn't grab either of us at all...
Last edited by a moderator:
Give it at least the first two episodes. If I remember correctly, the first episode goes over how Steven was wrongly convicted of a crime and spent 18 years in prison, talks about the Avery family, and just kinda goes over what kind of town it is.
Episodes 2-6, I had steam coming out my ears; I was so frustrated and mad with the law enforcement but I had to keep watching because it was so interesting. The whole things seems so fixed that it almost doesn't even seem real.
gkIrish
Greek God
- Messages
- 13,184
- Reaction score
- 1,004
The entire season follows the story of the guy featured in the first episode and his nephew. The first 6 episodes are amazing. The last 4 are meh but still worth watching.
Rocket89
Uniform Connoisseur
- Messages
- 2,914
- Reaction score
- 551
So, I've followed this case every day since late December. The Reddit page has done an excellent job bringing forth police reports/additional evidence/extra photos and a mountain of info that isn't in the MaM documentary. But as Reddit is want to do, drama ensued. Rogue mods took over r/MakingaMurderer, banned any speculation, and mostly killed the sub. Today, the most active sub is r/TickTockManitowoc and it's much smaller nemesis r/StevenAveryIsGuilty. I'd be shocked if the latter wasn't predominantly Wisconsin-based with ties to law enforcement--their zeal is that strong.
Here are random thoughts based on 8 months of scrutiny:
*I'm roughly 85% sure Avery is completely innocent and did nothing. My biggest thing is that there'd be more evidence of his guilt, otherwise. Teresa DNA found in multiple places, more blood of both parties, etc. On a Halloween day/night with some family, friends, and some salvage yard customers--no one saw anything.
*Brandon "saw something" or "participated" but his entire confession was coerced with no involvement on his part. I'm 100% sure he's innocent.
*The investigation tactics in this case were appalling. Shortly after the doc came out there was a much publicized media storm about what was "left out" spurred by comments made by disgraced DA Ken Kratz--so many people ate it up, including in discussions here. Anyone who has legitimately looked at this case would know how silly those comments were. If anything, the doc could have gone much deeper into the mistakes (innocent or otherwise) made by dozens of officials. The lack of justice/search for truth which rightfully pissed off so many people after watching the doc is so much worse after reading the case files.
*I'll say this, the only serious things that were left out of the doc were some of Avery's past actions--the biggest being he was accuse of sexual assault (I believe) at least twice. But, then charges were never filed and if those Avery clan-hating cops couldn't take him down for this were we looking at serious allegations or some petty small-town hick he-said/she-said BS?
*Famed exoneration attorney Kathleen Zellner's brief is due near the end of this month. She could file for another extension. She's been very bold in the media in regards to this case, and of course they've already started filming MaM 2 through Netflix. The way she's been acting Avery will be exonerated AND the killer(s) will be named and/or brought to justice. I'm super interested to see the reaction if she piles a bunch of new evidence that "proves" Avery couldn't have murdered Teresa and brings more evidence of police planting evidence, but not ID the real killer. Following the recent federal judgement for Dassey I can see the r/SAIG group already beginning to double down on "if Zellner can't find the real killer" nothing else matters I'll still believe it was Avery. I'm curious how people who think Avery is guilty right now think--what would it take to change your mind without someone else going down for the murder?
*Did police plant evidence and commit the crime? Both? One, not the other? Neither? It's really hard to wrap your head around the coincidence of the timing of murder that's pinned on Avery. All red flags point to a set up.
*If police did the deed, wouldn't they have had more evidence to plant on Avery? Crap ton more blood/hair/DNA from Teresa? This has always led me to think they didn't actually commit the murder but could've hired a hit man of sorts, where either things got way too messy to ever transfer mass amounts of evidence besides burning the body and moving on. Or, police were far too certain they'd successfully nail Avery and saw no need to, at first, bring all this physical evidence into play and risk anything coming back to them. Key word, at first. Make Teresa disappear, pin it on Avery, worry about more evidence later.
*I'd break down my percentages of the murder as 40% police did it or hired someone, 20% police pinched hard on someone close to Avery and forced them to do it, 20% someone close to Teresa did it, 15% Avery did it, and 5% completely random murder. Yet, with nearly half a dozen seriously sketchy men who were close to Teresa these percentages seem crazy. In most cases, odds are it was someone close to the victim but it's so hard to get over the circumstance and timing for Avery.
*We know the proposed crime story from the DA was fantasy, which doesn't absolve Avery, but makes it difficult to imagine how things could've gone down. Where is Teresa's purse? Her full set of keys? Why would Avery make those items completely disappear and then causally dump her phone and camera in a barrel outside his home? How was he seemingly so cunning to erase so many traces of Teresa and then just dump her license plates so they'd easily be found, to say nothing of parking her car where it's easily recognizable? He had 3 days before Teresa was reported missing he just parked here car in the salvage yard, burned her up good, and tossed some incriminating evidence carelessly in other places?
*The Avery blood in the vehicle is the strongest piece of evidence of his guilt, and nothing else is even close. If Zellner can prove that was planted, or even better, that it's not even Avery's blood that's a major bombshell. A lot of attention has been paid to a few cops possibly getting overzealous and dropping a key on the ground but people should be prepared for something much larger. Plenty of signs point to the DNA tests being flawed if not outright rigged, the EDTA from the FBI being phony, and possibly the bones not even being Teresa's. I'm not saying this is all happening but I think some of it will be proven. I'd bet it's more likely than not that Zellner will prove almost everything touching this case, from phone records to the jury, was massaged and tampered with to an unacceptable degree.
*If we are to assume Teresa was burned I have a hard time believing Avery could pull that off. No way did he have a damn funeral pyre in his back yard with several people milling about the area and no one noticing it, or more importantly, smelling it. And if he drove somewhere else (like the quarry) to burn her it's 10x more difficult to pull off the logistics of moving everything, and again, not being seen or leaving more evidence bread crumbs. The police reports all show no one brings up a fire in their initial interviews. Only later after questioning does it get suggested by police (gee, this happens a lot in this case), then family members start mixing up their stories.
*The fire stuff pretty clearly shows that police went hard after Avery's family trying to pinch down on Steven--especially after the Kratz press conference. So much of the interviews are laced with no evidence from police, then they suggest something, then family says it could've happened, then gullible people think the family is lying. They pulled off mini-Brendan coerced statements from Barb, Blaine, and others. Not that she was intelligent enough to help either way but getting Barb to turn on Steve was crucial. That really hurt Brendan's defense and his psyche.
*Something that's really interesting is that police went really hard after Avery's alibi's in Jodi and Brendan. He had phone calls with Jodi when he was supposed to be doing murdery things so they tried to get her to roll over on her man, which she refused. When that didn't work they moved on to Brendan. They targeted him because he was dumb, easily manipulated, and it removed an alibi for Avery. Not because Brendan "was involved." The kid has been in jail for 10 years without a shred of evidence.
*The timeline has always been super suspicious. Tersea goes missing on the afternoon of Oct. 31st. On Nov. 4th police first arrive on Avery property & find nothing. Nov. 5th most of the Avery clan leaves for their cabin in northern Wisconsin then miraculously Teresa's car is found in the salvage yard quicker than anyone can believe. Next day they find her phone/camera in a burn barrel. Next day a key in Avery's trailer. Then the "bones" identified. It's like little one-a-day evidence planting episodes. Factor in who discovered all of this and it comes with a massive pound of salt.
*What if police went to Teresa's and used an old phone/camera and her valet key to plant on Avery. That wouldn't shock me at all. Neither would evidence, somehow, that there wasn't even a fire on Halloween. That'd be a fun twist.
Here are random thoughts based on 8 months of scrutiny:
*I'm roughly 85% sure Avery is completely innocent and did nothing. My biggest thing is that there'd be more evidence of his guilt, otherwise. Teresa DNA found in multiple places, more blood of both parties, etc. On a Halloween day/night with some family, friends, and some salvage yard customers--no one saw anything.
*Brandon "saw something" or "participated" but his entire confession was coerced with no involvement on his part. I'm 100% sure he's innocent.
*The investigation tactics in this case were appalling. Shortly after the doc came out there was a much publicized media storm about what was "left out" spurred by comments made by disgraced DA Ken Kratz--so many people ate it up, including in discussions here. Anyone who has legitimately looked at this case would know how silly those comments were. If anything, the doc could have gone much deeper into the mistakes (innocent or otherwise) made by dozens of officials. The lack of justice/search for truth which rightfully pissed off so many people after watching the doc is so much worse after reading the case files.
*I'll say this, the only serious things that were left out of the doc were some of Avery's past actions--the biggest being he was accuse of sexual assault (I believe) at least twice. But, then charges were never filed and if those Avery clan-hating cops couldn't take him down for this were we looking at serious allegations or some petty small-town hick he-said/she-said BS?
*Famed exoneration attorney Kathleen Zellner's brief is due near the end of this month. She could file for another extension. She's been very bold in the media in regards to this case, and of course they've already started filming MaM 2 through Netflix. The way she's been acting Avery will be exonerated AND the killer(s) will be named and/or brought to justice. I'm super interested to see the reaction if she piles a bunch of new evidence that "proves" Avery couldn't have murdered Teresa and brings more evidence of police planting evidence, but not ID the real killer. Following the recent federal judgement for Dassey I can see the r/SAIG group already beginning to double down on "if Zellner can't find the real killer" nothing else matters I'll still believe it was Avery. I'm curious how people who think Avery is guilty right now think--what would it take to change your mind without someone else going down for the murder?
*Did police plant evidence and commit the crime? Both? One, not the other? Neither? It's really hard to wrap your head around the coincidence of the timing of murder that's pinned on Avery. All red flags point to a set up.
*If police did the deed, wouldn't they have had more evidence to plant on Avery? Crap ton more blood/hair/DNA from Teresa? This has always led me to think they didn't actually commit the murder but could've hired a hit man of sorts, where either things got way too messy to ever transfer mass amounts of evidence besides burning the body and moving on. Or, police were far too certain they'd successfully nail Avery and saw no need to, at first, bring all this physical evidence into play and risk anything coming back to them. Key word, at first. Make Teresa disappear, pin it on Avery, worry about more evidence later.
*I'd break down my percentages of the murder as 40% police did it or hired someone, 20% police pinched hard on someone close to Avery and forced them to do it, 20% someone close to Teresa did it, 15% Avery did it, and 5% completely random murder. Yet, with nearly half a dozen seriously sketchy men who were close to Teresa these percentages seem crazy. In most cases, odds are it was someone close to the victim but it's so hard to get over the circumstance and timing for Avery.
*We know the proposed crime story from the DA was fantasy, which doesn't absolve Avery, but makes it difficult to imagine how things could've gone down. Where is Teresa's purse? Her full set of keys? Why would Avery make those items completely disappear and then causally dump her phone and camera in a barrel outside his home? How was he seemingly so cunning to erase so many traces of Teresa and then just dump her license plates so they'd easily be found, to say nothing of parking her car where it's easily recognizable? He had 3 days before Teresa was reported missing he just parked here car in the salvage yard, burned her up good, and tossed some incriminating evidence carelessly in other places?
*The Avery blood in the vehicle is the strongest piece of evidence of his guilt, and nothing else is even close. If Zellner can prove that was planted, or even better, that it's not even Avery's blood that's a major bombshell. A lot of attention has been paid to a few cops possibly getting overzealous and dropping a key on the ground but people should be prepared for something much larger. Plenty of signs point to the DNA tests being flawed if not outright rigged, the EDTA from the FBI being phony, and possibly the bones not even being Teresa's. I'm not saying this is all happening but I think some of it will be proven. I'd bet it's more likely than not that Zellner will prove almost everything touching this case, from phone records to the jury, was massaged and tampered with to an unacceptable degree.
*If we are to assume Teresa was burned I have a hard time believing Avery could pull that off. No way did he have a damn funeral pyre in his back yard with several people milling about the area and no one noticing it, or more importantly, smelling it. And if he drove somewhere else (like the quarry) to burn her it's 10x more difficult to pull off the logistics of moving everything, and again, not being seen or leaving more evidence bread crumbs. The police reports all show no one brings up a fire in their initial interviews. Only later after questioning does it get suggested by police (gee, this happens a lot in this case), then family members start mixing up their stories.
*The fire stuff pretty clearly shows that police went hard after Avery's family trying to pinch down on Steven--especially after the Kratz press conference. So much of the interviews are laced with no evidence from police, then they suggest something, then family says it could've happened, then gullible people think the family is lying. They pulled off mini-Brendan coerced statements from Barb, Blaine, and others. Not that she was intelligent enough to help either way but getting Barb to turn on Steve was crucial. That really hurt Brendan's defense and his psyche.
*Something that's really interesting is that police went really hard after Avery's alibi's in Jodi and Brendan. He had phone calls with Jodi when he was supposed to be doing murdery things so they tried to get her to roll over on her man, which she refused. When that didn't work they moved on to Brendan. They targeted him because he was dumb, easily manipulated, and it removed an alibi for Avery. Not because Brendan "was involved." The kid has been in jail for 10 years without a shred of evidence.
*The timeline has always been super suspicious. Tersea goes missing on the afternoon of Oct. 31st. On Nov. 4th police first arrive on Avery property & find nothing. Nov. 5th most of the Avery clan leaves for their cabin in northern Wisconsin then miraculously Teresa's car is found in the salvage yard quicker than anyone can believe. Next day they find her phone/camera in a burn barrel. Next day a key in Avery's trailer. Then the "bones" identified. It's like little one-a-day evidence planting episodes. Factor in who discovered all of this and it comes with a massive pound of salt.
*What if police went to Teresa's and used an old phone/camera and her valet key to plant on Avery. That wouldn't shock me at all. Neither would evidence, somehow, that there wasn't even a fire on Halloween. That'd be a fun twist.
Emcee77
latress on the men-jay
- Messages
- 7,295
- Reaction score
- 555
Making a Murderer (Spoilers)
I've always been agnostic about this case, but I'll try and say just briefly what might tilt me into the Avery camp, without digging into the gory details until I see the Zellner brief. Why duplicate her work. Plus I'm not sure how much I remember now; it's been a few months since I have watched the show or read about this case or really thought much about it case.
The circumstantial evidence against Avery is strong, certainly in a big picture sense. She physically went to his property, he was the last confirmed person to see her alive, her remains were found on his property, etc.
Certainly, however, when you take a closer look at the investigation, there are MANY things that raise your eyebrows. So many things don't add up that you have to take seriously the accusations of police misconduct.
But the problem is that the facts underlying those accusations don't add up either. The facts don't cohere into a logical narrative of police misconduct. It all sounds a bit over-elaborate and conspiracy-theory-ish.
(Some will read this and say, "But it doesn't matter -- the burden of proof is on the state." That was true at trial, but now it's not. I don't know exactly what his theory will be, but it's gonna be Avery's burden to prove the misconduct that violated his constitutional rights or to prove his innocence, although he has to meet a lower standard than the state did at the criminal trial.)
And that has always been my problem with the misconduct theory. I have seen a LOT of police misconduct in my career. In my experience, it happens when police make a good-guy/bad-guy judgment. It's this kind of reasoning: "This Latin Kings member is a bad guy, so I am going to bully this vulnerable kid to testify against him even though I know he probably didn't see shit, because I know that Latin Kings member is guilty and the ends justify the means." Or it's, "Was the trunk open? Did I see the drugs in plain view? No. But I knew the sunuvabitch was a drug dealer and I knew he had drugs in that trunk. I'll say the trunk was open and the drugs were in plain view; ends justify the means." This tends to happen in cases in which there is already overwhelming evidence against the defendant. For example, I can recall a pro se postconviction petitioner making a BRILLIANT argument about procedural irregularities in his case ... then I looked at the facts in greater detail and found that a half-dozen people had identified him at trial firing an assault rifle into a crowd. It the evidence is that strong, the defendant isn't prejudiced by the procedural irregularities. So based on this experience, it is not hard for me to believe that there may have been misconduct along these lines pertaining to the key, for example. But the problem for Avery is that these accusations of misconduct don't go very far. They don't prove he didn't do it or that he was convicted based on material, tainted evidence. The core facts making up the circumstantial evidence underlying the conviction remain, even if the state may have embellished.
Stronger evidence for me would be evidence conclusively proving that Halbach actually left the property alive or that the remains were actually transported to the property from elsewhere, for example. I've heard rumors that Zellner has cell phone evidence showing that Halbach did leave the Avery property alive? That, for example, would be very strong evidence, imo. Avery's people need to break down that core matrix of facts (she came there, no one saw her alive after she was there, her remains were discovered there) or show that its based on evidence that is totally unreliable. It's gonna be hard to say for sure that Avery wasn't involved unless they do that.
Just my totally off-the-cuff musings. I'll be interested to see the Zellner brief.
I've always been agnostic about this case, but I'll try and say just briefly what might tilt me into the Avery camp, without digging into the gory details until I see the Zellner brief. Why duplicate her work. Plus I'm not sure how much I remember now; it's been a few months since I have watched the show or read about this case or really thought much about it case.
The circumstantial evidence against Avery is strong, certainly in a big picture sense. She physically went to his property, he was the last confirmed person to see her alive, her remains were found on his property, etc.
Certainly, however, when you take a closer look at the investigation, there are MANY things that raise your eyebrows. So many things don't add up that you have to take seriously the accusations of police misconduct.
But the problem is that the facts underlying those accusations don't add up either. The facts don't cohere into a logical narrative of police misconduct. It all sounds a bit over-elaborate and conspiracy-theory-ish.
(Some will read this and say, "But it doesn't matter -- the burden of proof is on the state." That was true at trial, but now it's not. I don't know exactly what his theory will be, but it's gonna be Avery's burden to prove the misconduct that violated his constitutional rights or to prove his innocence, although he has to meet a lower standard than the state did at the criminal trial.)
And that has always been my problem with the misconduct theory. I have seen a LOT of police misconduct in my career. In my experience, it happens when police make a good-guy/bad-guy judgment. It's this kind of reasoning: "This Latin Kings member is a bad guy, so I am going to bully this vulnerable kid to testify against him even though I know he probably didn't see shit, because I know that Latin Kings member is guilty and the ends justify the means." Or it's, "Was the trunk open? Did I see the drugs in plain view? No. But I knew the sunuvabitch was a drug dealer and I knew he had drugs in that trunk. I'll say the trunk was open and the drugs were in plain view; ends justify the means." This tends to happen in cases in which there is already overwhelming evidence against the defendant. For example, I can recall a pro se postconviction petitioner making a BRILLIANT argument about procedural irregularities in his case ... then I looked at the facts in greater detail and found that a half-dozen people had identified him at trial firing an assault rifle into a crowd. It the evidence is that strong, the defendant isn't prejudiced by the procedural irregularities. So based on this experience, it is not hard for me to believe that there may have been misconduct along these lines pertaining to the key, for example. But the problem for Avery is that these accusations of misconduct don't go very far. They don't prove he didn't do it or that he was convicted based on material, tainted evidence. The core facts making up the circumstantial evidence underlying the conviction remain, even if the state may have embellished.
Stronger evidence for me would be evidence conclusively proving that Halbach actually left the property alive or that the remains were actually transported to the property from elsewhere, for example. I've heard rumors that Zellner has cell phone evidence showing that Halbach did leave the Avery property alive? That, for example, would be very strong evidence, imo. Avery's people need to break down that core matrix of facts (she came there, no one saw her alive after she was there, her remains were discovered there) or show that its based on evidence that is totally unreliable. It's gonna be hard to say for sure that Avery wasn't involved unless they do that.
Just my totally off-the-cuff musings. I'll be interested to see the Zellner brief.
Last edited:
Rocket89
Uniform Connoisseur
- Messages
- 2,914
- Reaction score
- 551
I'm curious what you mean here, exactly.
That's interesting. For me, any cell phone evidence about Halbach leaving the property ranks pretty low on the Avery innocence scale. Just because of how wishy-washy and confusing that type of evidence can be. It could be huge or depending on how far she supposedly drove it could mean not much. I guess "conclusively" comes into play there, right?
Also pretty low for me, just because if Avery did burn her it was probably not in his backyard. But who knows. I know plenty of people who think he's guilty and could've burned her somewhere else and tried to fully cremate her later in his yard.
Good thoughts, though!
Emcee77
latress on the men-jay
- Messages
- 7,295
- Reaction score
- 555
Well, it's probably not worth explaining in more detail until we see what Avery's theory really is.
Exactly. It depends exactly what the evidence is. Zellner has been talking a great game about it. Let's see what she delivers.
Sure, anything is possible, but at least imo what makes this whole thing look bad for Avery is that the epicenter of the episode is him and his property. She came there to see him, her car was found there, her remains were found there. If you are pursuing the misconduct theory, the way to do that, imo, is to take the focus off the Avery property and Avery himself with other evidence that connects to other places and people. Well, that's true of any defense theory, I suppose.
From what I've read, one way Zellner plans to do that is by focusing on the other people Halbach had contact with in her last days and weeks, including a convicted sex offender (although this gets away from the original question, which was what evidence is important if there is no one-armed man). If she can connect another suspect to a plausible explanation for how and why Halbach's remains and car were found on the Avery premises, or combine evidence of another suspect with stronger evidence that those items were planted there by someone other than Avery (right now I don't think that evidence is overly convincing), she might be cooking with gas.
Last edited:
IrishBroker
New member
- Messages
- 1,278
- Reaction score
- 50
I never believed the kid had anything to do with it.
Don't know if Avery did.
But I have no idea how this case wasn't thrown out with all the conflicts of interest, horrible representation for Avery and the kid, and bad police work.
It's insane watching that trial and seeing the incompetence play out in front of you
Don't know if Avery did.
But I have no idea how this case wasn't thrown out with all the conflicts of interest, horrible representation for Avery and the kid, and bad police work.
It's insane watching that trial and seeing the incompetence play out in front of you
Rocket89
Uniform Connoisseur
- Messages
- 2,914
- Reaction score
- 551
Kathleen Zellner has filed her motion for post-conviction scientific testing today:
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...on-for-Post-Conviction-Scientific-Testing.pdf
She also held a short presser outside of Manitowoc County Courthouse today:
ZELLNER: So your question is probably what did I just file? I filed a motion for new scientific testing on the Steven Avery case. We're requesting to test dozens of items from the crime scene. The testing spans all the way from radio carbon-14 testing, DNA methylation, body identification testing. New DNA testing. Testing of items that were previously tested with new DNA methods. Microtrace testing. Different items to detect whether there were contaminates on those items so we can determine whether or not the items in evidence were planted.
I think this will be the most comprehensive testing motions ever filed in the state of Wisconsin. Probably one of the most comprehensive motions ever filed in the united states. We're using scientists from Stockholm Sweden, Vienna Austria, California, Illinois. So we got a large number of scientists that will be doing the testing. We have completed testing on items that we don't need to request from Calumet county. That testing has already been completed. So, procedurally, what's going on is the motion that's filed today will stay the appeal that's pending in Wisconsin appellate court. That appeal was filed pro se by Mr. Avery and does not involve the issues that we want to raise--the new issues we want to raise with the court.
So we're going to file a post-conviction petition as soon as we get these test results. We will file a post-conviction petition. Most wrongful conviction cases, I would say almost all of them, are not overturned on direct appeal. They're overturned at the post-conviction stage. So that's out plan. That's how we will proceed. I know there was confusion about the appeal on Monday, but we have to have these test results combined with the investigation we've already done. So that's where we're at. This is the motion; we have copies of it. It's got exhibits attached.
QUESTION: Can you talk about the procedural aspect of this? This isn't a done deal; you have to get a judge to [approve it]?
ZELLNER: Oh, we already have a court order from 2007. Judge Willis very wisely entered a DNA order saying that any future DNA testing that was done, that the defendant wanted to have done, could be done. So that's step one. Step two is under the Wisconsin statute, typically the state would have to pay for the testing. That's not going to happen here. The defense--we're paying for the testing. So that's already done.
We foresee absolutely no problems getting this testing done. Because, if you think about it, no one who's guilty would ever allow this extensive testing to be done. From fibers, to contaminates, to DNA, to blood agents, all of those things are going to be done in this. I think the thing you most want to take away with this is read the motion. No one who's guilty would ever allow this to happen. Because these tests are going to establish definitely the age of the blood in the victim's vehicle. So we are going to know through radio carbon or DNA methylation whether the blood in the RAV was planted from the '96 vial.
In addition to that, there were many, many items that should had been DNA tested that weren't. There was presumptive DNA testing done. There was not confirmatory DNA testing done. So for us, the case is amazing how much forensic evidence there is that can be tested. For the public, I think that it also will be very encouraging because we're going to find out one way or the other was the evidence planted. And we're also going to be able to get test results that we believe will completely exonerate Mr. Avery.
The other thing we're going to do, and the petition is, we're going to lay out all of our investigation that we have done that will point to a third party. So that was not successfully done at the trial level. So, I think the most reassuring thing is that we are going to get to the bottom of who killed Teresa Halbach. And we currently believe that we will establish it was not Steven Avery.
QUESTION: What have you learned from the testing you've done
already?
ZELLNER: Yeah, we're not going to disclose that until we do the post-conviction petition. But, I can tell you that the testing we've already done will establish Mr. Avery's innocence. But we are going to do the whole thing. We're going to do every conceivable test. We've been contacted by scientists all over the world. Volunteering, offering us ideas. And now we've got it pinned down to the testing we need to do to determine once and for all was the evidence in the vehicle planted? Was the DNA on the bullet planted? Was the car key planted? Was the DNA on the car key planted? We're going to be able to answer all of those questions because it's been almost 10 years since the verdict and there have been really huge developments in the forensic scientist [governance].
QUESTION: How long do you think this will take?
ZELLNER: Probably about three months. Maybe less. Some of it's going to be done really rapidly. So they're ready.
QUESTION: Is the blood in the car the key for you? Is there one bit of
evidence that's key to you?
ZELLNER: Well you know what the contention is. The planted evidence is the blood in the car. It's Mr. Avery's DNA that shows up on the magically appearing car key. It was also her DNA on the bullet. We're requesting these ballistic tests that will establish whether the bullet--the fragment--even came from the shells Mr. Avery had. So what's great about this case is all the testing is out there. It's all developed. It's all validated. So we can take the mystery out of this mystery, and we think we know what the answer will be.
QUESTION: What are you doing next? You said you're going to see Mrs. Avery?
ZELLNER: Yeah, I am. So, anyway that's all I have to say. We have copies [of the filing] why don't you hand those out.
QUESTION: Do you just have one suspect in mind or are you looking at multiple suspects?
ZELLNER: In fairness, yeah we are looking at multiple people but we are narrowing it down, so...
QUESTION: How many pages? Of the top of your head?
ZELLNER: It's like 48.
QUESTION: Would you like to say something to the Avery family group [on Facebook]?
ZELLNER: Oh, yeah. Just that we're excited. This is going to answer everything. It's testing that wasn't done, testing that didn't exist at the time. But we are going to exhaust it when we go back through. Many of the swabs weren't tested. Presumptive testing was done. Presumptive blood testing wasn't done. Now we can do confirmatory tests with the Carbon-14 we are going to be able to--within a year--date this blood. So we can answer that.
QUESTION: If the tests come back and shows the blood is from 2005?
ZELLNER: Gee, that will be the risk that we're taking. Every client I
represent I tell them "You want to be innocent when you hire me because I'll get to the bottom of it with the testing." And so Mr. Avery has encouraged us to do all of these tests. He is just like every other innocent client I've represented where he has no hesitation about it. But remember there are a lot of things planted in this. So we're not just talking blood. We're talking buckle swabs. There's a lot of different variations on this. So that's the problem, if you do something or if you did plant the evidence, that science is going to catch up to you. That's what we're going to see in this.
QUESTION: Does Brendan Dassey's case have any impact on this?
ZELLNER: It does, yes. Particularly on the hood latch. Because the court really zeroed in on Dassey's testimony about the hood latch. Because remember that the hood latch swab was not taken until March, not tested until April. After the confession on March 1st, then they go back and they get the swab and then they test that swab. We're going to be able to, I think, show that that's saliva on the hood latch. So now the test exists so you can tell if it's saliva, or blood, or just epithelial cells. There's no such thing as sweat DNA. So we've got, I think the best scientists in the country and they are going to answer all of those questions.
QUESTION: And who is this media crew with you?
ZELLNER: They're not with me. No one’s with me. I'm with the people that work with me.
QUESTION: But who are the people that drove up with you that have cameras and audio equipment? You don't know who they are?
ZELLNER: There are people all over. Don't know.
QUESTION: Any idea how long these tests are going to take?
ZELLNER: I think they should take about three months. One of the tests is going to be done in Vienna, Austria. But we're thinking on that, the actual test, the Carbon-14 test phase (have to use a mass spectrometry machine) will probably take about two months to take the data and results from it.
QUESTION: So you're going to have to wait until everything gets back before Steve can even be considered to be released?
ZELLNER: The procedure on post-conviction, ok, so Steve's been in 10 years from this conviction. Almost 10 years. So to undo a conviction like this, there's 27,000 pages of records. There's many, many swabs that were never tested. So we've had to go back through everything and we've had to find the scientists who can go through this very carefully [inaudible]. So we've been working about seven months on it.
Some post-convictions last a few years. We don't anticipate that because we have so much forensic evidence with us. So this one I think will go--I haven't had one that has lasted over three years so I don't imagine it will take this long once I get the tests. Because, he never made any incriminating statements, all right? The [Dassey] confession has been invalidated. So you're down to the evidence at the crime scene. You're down to the key, the hood latch, the blood in the RAV and the bullet.
QUESTION: Have you talked to Steve today?
ZELLNER: Yes. Today, no. Yesterday, yes.
QUESTION: What did he have to say?
ZELLNER: He was thrilled. He's absolutely thrilled. He can't wait for the results, so.
QUESTION: Why did you decide to take this case?
ZELLNER: I decided to take it because I knew that he's innocent. I thought when I watched the documentary, which I did--Steven Avery had contacted me in 2011 when I was on trial in Washington in a civil rights case. But I decided to take it because I think that the crime scene doesn't make sense. A couple other things that make absolutely no sense. There's no mixture of blood in the car. We've never seen that before. None of my forensic scientists have. You have all of Steven Avery's blood in the front, all of the victim's blood in the back. He's supposedly cut and he throws her in the car. So my scientists were saying they've never seen that where there isn't a mixture of the victim's blood along with the alleged perpetrator.
The bones were moved. That was admitted. There was a human pelvis found over in the quarry. The bones were in different spots. The body was not burned whole. It's not possible to do that. So you've got the same bone in three different places. You've got only 30% of the bones recovered. You have 29 of the teeth never recovered. The bones look like they were planted. The property was closed down. The coroner from Manitowoc was not allowed on the property and actually was not notified it was a murder--that violates the Wisconsin statute.
So when I looked at the case, I could see all kinds of problems, but I could also see a lot of evidence that could be tested. Evidence that could be retested. And that we could determine if the evidence was planted. So I thought, "great case,", you know, I want to be involved in it. I met with him 18 times. I'm positive that he's innocent. I won't have to prove he's innocent but I would like to because I absolutely believe that he's innocent.
QUESTION: What can you tell us about the suspect?
ZELLNER: Nothing. Nothing. Not until I file.
QUESTION: Procedurally, does this federal hearing, do you know where [it stands]?
ZELLNER: It depends on whether the attorney general agrees to the testing. As I said, there's already an order in place, so there's nothing to talk about on the DNA testing. Judge Willis entered that in 2007. So that's done. The rest of the testing, I would think, they would want that done. Because it gives them the opportunity to [find out] whether the evidence is planted or not and we're paying for it, so.
QUESTION: Has the AG received a copy of this?
ZELLNER: No, but they will.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-c...on-for-Post-Conviction-Scientific-Testing.pdf
She also held a short presser outside of Manitowoc County Courthouse today:
ZELLNER: So your question is probably what did I just file? I filed a motion for new scientific testing on the Steven Avery case. We're requesting to test dozens of items from the crime scene. The testing spans all the way from radio carbon-14 testing, DNA methylation, body identification testing. New DNA testing. Testing of items that were previously tested with new DNA methods. Microtrace testing. Different items to detect whether there were contaminates on those items so we can determine whether or not the items in evidence were planted.
I think this will be the most comprehensive testing motions ever filed in the state of Wisconsin. Probably one of the most comprehensive motions ever filed in the united states. We're using scientists from Stockholm Sweden, Vienna Austria, California, Illinois. So we got a large number of scientists that will be doing the testing. We have completed testing on items that we don't need to request from Calumet county. That testing has already been completed. So, procedurally, what's going on is the motion that's filed today will stay the appeal that's pending in Wisconsin appellate court. That appeal was filed pro se by Mr. Avery and does not involve the issues that we want to raise--the new issues we want to raise with the court.
So we're going to file a post-conviction petition as soon as we get these test results. We will file a post-conviction petition. Most wrongful conviction cases, I would say almost all of them, are not overturned on direct appeal. They're overturned at the post-conviction stage. So that's out plan. That's how we will proceed. I know there was confusion about the appeal on Monday, but we have to have these test results combined with the investigation we've already done. So that's where we're at. This is the motion; we have copies of it. It's got exhibits attached.
QUESTION: Can you talk about the procedural aspect of this? This isn't a done deal; you have to get a judge to [approve it]?
ZELLNER: Oh, we already have a court order from 2007. Judge Willis very wisely entered a DNA order saying that any future DNA testing that was done, that the defendant wanted to have done, could be done. So that's step one. Step two is under the Wisconsin statute, typically the state would have to pay for the testing. That's not going to happen here. The defense--we're paying for the testing. So that's already done.
We foresee absolutely no problems getting this testing done. Because, if you think about it, no one who's guilty would ever allow this extensive testing to be done. From fibers, to contaminates, to DNA, to blood agents, all of those things are going to be done in this. I think the thing you most want to take away with this is read the motion. No one who's guilty would ever allow this to happen. Because these tests are going to establish definitely the age of the blood in the victim's vehicle. So we are going to know through radio carbon or DNA methylation whether the blood in the RAV was planted from the '96 vial.
In addition to that, there were many, many items that should had been DNA tested that weren't. There was presumptive DNA testing done. There was not confirmatory DNA testing done. So for us, the case is amazing how much forensic evidence there is that can be tested. For the public, I think that it also will be very encouraging because we're going to find out one way or the other was the evidence planted. And we're also going to be able to get test results that we believe will completely exonerate Mr. Avery.
The other thing we're going to do, and the petition is, we're going to lay out all of our investigation that we have done that will point to a third party. So that was not successfully done at the trial level. So, I think the most reassuring thing is that we are going to get to the bottom of who killed Teresa Halbach. And we currently believe that we will establish it was not Steven Avery.
QUESTION: What have you learned from the testing you've done
already?
ZELLNER: Yeah, we're not going to disclose that until we do the post-conviction petition. But, I can tell you that the testing we've already done will establish Mr. Avery's innocence. But we are going to do the whole thing. We're going to do every conceivable test. We've been contacted by scientists all over the world. Volunteering, offering us ideas. And now we've got it pinned down to the testing we need to do to determine once and for all was the evidence in the vehicle planted? Was the DNA on the bullet planted? Was the car key planted? Was the DNA on the car key planted? We're going to be able to answer all of those questions because it's been almost 10 years since the verdict and there have been really huge developments in the forensic scientist [governance].
QUESTION: How long do you think this will take?
ZELLNER: Probably about three months. Maybe less. Some of it's going to be done really rapidly. So they're ready.
QUESTION: Is the blood in the car the key for you? Is there one bit of
evidence that's key to you?
ZELLNER: Well you know what the contention is. The planted evidence is the blood in the car. It's Mr. Avery's DNA that shows up on the magically appearing car key. It was also her DNA on the bullet. We're requesting these ballistic tests that will establish whether the bullet--the fragment--even came from the shells Mr. Avery had. So what's great about this case is all the testing is out there. It's all developed. It's all validated. So we can take the mystery out of this mystery, and we think we know what the answer will be.
QUESTION: What are you doing next? You said you're going to see Mrs. Avery?
ZELLNER: Yeah, I am. So, anyway that's all I have to say. We have copies [of the filing] why don't you hand those out.
QUESTION: Do you just have one suspect in mind or are you looking at multiple suspects?
ZELLNER: In fairness, yeah we are looking at multiple people but we are narrowing it down, so...
QUESTION: How many pages? Of the top of your head?
ZELLNER: It's like 48.
QUESTION: Would you like to say something to the Avery family group [on Facebook]?
ZELLNER: Oh, yeah. Just that we're excited. This is going to answer everything. It's testing that wasn't done, testing that didn't exist at the time. But we are going to exhaust it when we go back through. Many of the swabs weren't tested. Presumptive testing was done. Presumptive blood testing wasn't done. Now we can do confirmatory tests with the Carbon-14 we are going to be able to--within a year--date this blood. So we can answer that.
QUESTION: If the tests come back and shows the blood is from 2005?
ZELLNER: Gee, that will be the risk that we're taking. Every client I
represent I tell them "You want to be innocent when you hire me because I'll get to the bottom of it with the testing." And so Mr. Avery has encouraged us to do all of these tests. He is just like every other innocent client I've represented where he has no hesitation about it. But remember there are a lot of things planted in this. So we're not just talking blood. We're talking buckle swabs. There's a lot of different variations on this. So that's the problem, if you do something or if you did plant the evidence, that science is going to catch up to you. That's what we're going to see in this.
QUESTION: Does Brendan Dassey's case have any impact on this?
ZELLNER: It does, yes. Particularly on the hood latch. Because the court really zeroed in on Dassey's testimony about the hood latch. Because remember that the hood latch swab was not taken until March, not tested until April. After the confession on March 1st, then they go back and they get the swab and then they test that swab. We're going to be able to, I think, show that that's saliva on the hood latch. So now the test exists so you can tell if it's saliva, or blood, or just epithelial cells. There's no such thing as sweat DNA. So we've got, I think the best scientists in the country and they are going to answer all of those questions.
QUESTION: And who is this media crew with you?
ZELLNER: They're not with me. No one’s with me. I'm with the people that work with me.
QUESTION: But who are the people that drove up with you that have cameras and audio equipment? You don't know who they are?
ZELLNER: There are people all over. Don't know.
QUESTION: Any idea how long these tests are going to take?
ZELLNER: I think they should take about three months. One of the tests is going to be done in Vienna, Austria. But we're thinking on that, the actual test, the Carbon-14 test phase (have to use a mass spectrometry machine) will probably take about two months to take the data and results from it.
QUESTION: So you're going to have to wait until everything gets back before Steve can even be considered to be released?
ZELLNER: The procedure on post-conviction, ok, so Steve's been in 10 years from this conviction. Almost 10 years. So to undo a conviction like this, there's 27,000 pages of records. There's many, many swabs that were never tested. So we've had to go back through everything and we've had to find the scientists who can go through this very carefully [inaudible]. So we've been working about seven months on it.
Some post-convictions last a few years. We don't anticipate that because we have so much forensic evidence with us. So this one I think will go--I haven't had one that has lasted over three years so I don't imagine it will take this long once I get the tests. Because, he never made any incriminating statements, all right? The [Dassey] confession has been invalidated. So you're down to the evidence at the crime scene. You're down to the key, the hood latch, the blood in the RAV and the bullet.
QUESTION: Have you talked to Steve today?
ZELLNER: Yes. Today, no. Yesterday, yes.
QUESTION: What did he have to say?
ZELLNER: He was thrilled. He's absolutely thrilled. He can't wait for the results, so.
QUESTION: Why did you decide to take this case?
ZELLNER: I decided to take it because I knew that he's innocent. I thought when I watched the documentary, which I did--Steven Avery had contacted me in 2011 when I was on trial in Washington in a civil rights case. But I decided to take it because I think that the crime scene doesn't make sense. A couple other things that make absolutely no sense. There's no mixture of blood in the car. We've never seen that before. None of my forensic scientists have. You have all of Steven Avery's blood in the front, all of the victim's blood in the back. He's supposedly cut and he throws her in the car. So my scientists were saying they've never seen that where there isn't a mixture of the victim's blood along with the alleged perpetrator.
The bones were moved. That was admitted. There was a human pelvis found over in the quarry. The bones were in different spots. The body was not burned whole. It's not possible to do that. So you've got the same bone in three different places. You've got only 30% of the bones recovered. You have 29 of the teeth never recovered. The bones look like they were planted. The property was closed down. The coroner from Manitowoc was not allowed on the property and actually was not notified it was a murder--that violates the Wisconsin statute.
So when I looked at the case, I could see all kinds of problems, but I could also see a lot of evidence that could be tested. Evidence that could be retested. And that we could determine if the evidence was planted. So I thought, "great case,", you know, I want to be involved in it. I met with him 18 times. I'm positive that he's innocent. I won't have to prove he's innocent but I would like to because I absolutely believe that he's innocent.
QUESTION: What can you tell us about the suspect?
ZELLNER: Nothing. Nothing. Not until I file.
QUESTION: Procedurally, does this federal hearing, do you know where [it stands]?
ZELLNER: It depends on whether the attorney general agrees to the testing. As I said, there's already an order in place, so there's nothing to talk about on the DNA testing. Judge Willis entered that in 2007. So that's done. The rest of the testing, I would think, they would want that done. Because it gives them the opportunity to [find out] whether the evidence is planted or not and we're paying for it, so.
QUESTION: Has the AG received a copy of this?
ZELLNER: No, but they will.
- Messages
- 44,593
- Reaction score
- 20,051
This may be obvious, but it appears that she's trying to do so much testing and will try to point things in another direction to take the focus off of Avery. It will be interesting to see if the authorities will retest to counter her test results?
Rocket89
Uniform Connoisseur
- Messages
- 2,914
- Reaction score
- 551
Really quick summary of Zellner's motion today after scanning it:
Avery asking for additional testing, most advanced in Wisconsin state history, Avery will pay for it.
They've already completed a series of tests which in conjunction with the new tests will conclusively prove his innocence.
After the new test results come back a petition will be filed.
Halbach's last cell tower ping was 13.1 miles away from the Avery Salvage Yard.
Five of Halbach's voicemails were deleted on Oct. 31 (date she was at Avery's) and 11 more deleted on Nov. 2nd. Claiming Halbach's ex-boyfriend Ryan deleted these.
Officer Colburn discovered Halbach's car on Nov. 3rd--seized by Manitowoc on the same day per their reports (this was believed by some to be a typo in the report).
Claim that Halbach's vehicle was moved onto the Avery property on the evening of Nov. 4th following a fly-over by Calumet County.
Claim that the vehicle was moved from the Radandt Quarry, near Avery's property.
Claim that the blood in Halbach's car was planted prior to its placement on Avery's property. Claims that the key, bullet, and bones were all planted, likely by Colburn and Officer Lenk.
Two non-law enforcement individuals (Ryan and Josh Radandt) were allowed to access the Avery property after it was closed to the public. Radandt accessed the property 4 times--specifically at the same time as Lenk and Colburn when the car was found on November 5th. Radandt is first person anywhere to mention a fire in a burn barrel on Oct. 31 behind Avery's garage, a claim Zellner believe is entirely false due to his vantage point from the quarry.
Ryan accessed the property under a fake name and lied about the damaged head light to Halbach's vehicle. Ryan received 22 calls from police on Nov. 4th on the night the car was allegedly planted on Avery's property. He accessed the property on Nov. 7th and 8th.
Claim the bones were planted on Nov. 7th, discovered the next morning. Investigators blocked the Manitowoc coroner from the property.
Claim that most of Halbach's bones were not found on Avery's property, likely burned on Radandt's quarry.
No blood or bodily fluids of Halbach found in Avery's trailer or garage.
Compelling scientific evidence that with no mixing of Avery and Halbach blood in her vehicle points to planting. Prosecution claimed Avery wasn't wearing gloves and bled in the car making this story impossible--there'd be mixed blood from both.
Claim that the key was planted and not tested properly.
Claim that LE used a second phone from Halbach's home to plant on Avery's property.
Bullet found was not tested properly--should have blood on it and a .22 bullet wouldn't have exited Halbach's skull.
Hood latch, cables, and car battery of Halbach's vehicle were never tested.
Claim Avery was being framed because he was suing Manitowoc police.
The EDTA test made on the blood in the car by the FBI was unreliable and unsubstantiated.
They are testing tons of stuff (key, bullet, car, bones), will do radiocarbon testing on the blood in the car, etc. etc.
A pair of purple panties were found on Avery's property near where the license plates of Halbach's car were discovered (not known until today, by the way). Cops seized 7 pairs of Halbach's panties--they will be testing the purple panties to see if they are Halbach's.
The rest of the motion talks about all the stuff they will be testing---lots and lots of stuff. Testing could be done in as few as 3 months.
Avery asking for additional testing, most advanced in Wisconsin state history, Avery will pay for it.
They've already completed a series of tests which in conjunction with the new tests will conclusively prove his innocence.
After the new test results come back a petition will be filed.
Halbach's last cell tower ping was 13.1 miles away from the Avery Salvage Yard.
Five of Halbach's voicemails were deleted on Oct. 31 (date she was at Avery's) and 11 more deleted on Nov. 2nd. Claiming Halbach's ex-boyfriend Ryan deleted these.
Officer Colburn discovered Halbach's car on Nov. 3rd--seized by Manitowoc on the same day per their reports (this was believed by some to be a typo in the report).
Claim that Halbach's vehicle was moved onto the Avery property on the evening of Nov. 4th following a fly-over by Calumet County.
Claim that the vehicle was moved from the Radandt Quarry, near Avery's property.
Claim that the blood in Halbach's car was planted prior to its placement on Avery's property. Claims that the key, bullet, and bones were all planted, likely by Colburn and Officer Lenk.
Two non-law enforcement individuals (Ryan and Josh Radandt) were allowed to access the Avery property after it was closed to the public. Radandt accessed the property 4 times--specifically at the same time as Lenk and Colburn when the car was found on November 5th. Radandt is first person anywhere to mention a fire in a burn barrel on Oct. 31 behind Avery's garage, a claim Zellner believe is entirely false due to his vantage point from the quarry.
Ryan accessed the property under a fake name and lied about the damaged head light to Halbach's vehicle. Ryan received 22 calls from police on Nov. 4th on the night the car was allegedly planted on Avery's property. He accessed the property on Nov. 7th and 8th.
Claim the bones were planted on Nov. 7th, discovered the next morning. Investigators blocked the Manitowoc coroner from the property.
Claim that most of Halbach's bones were not found on Avery's property, likely burned on Radandt's quarry.
No blood or bodily fluids of Halbach found in Avery's trailer or garage.
Compelling scientific evidence that with no mixing of Avery and Halbach blood in her vehicle points to planting. Prosecution claimed Avery wasn't wearing gloves and bled in the car making this story impossible--there'd be mixed blood from both.
Claim that the key was planted and not tested properly.
Claim that LE used a second phone from Halbach's home to plant on Avery's property.
Bullet found was not tested properly--should have blood on it and a .22 bullet wouldn't have exited Halbach's skull.
Hood latch, cables, and car battery of Halbach's vehicle were never tested.
Claim Avery was being framed because he was suing Manitowoc police.
The EDTA test made on the blood in the car by the FBI was unreliable and unsubstantiated.
They are testing tons of stuff (key, bullet, car, bones), will do radiocarbon testing on the blood in the car, etc. etc.
A pair of purple panties were found on Avery's property near where the license plates of Halbach's car were discovered (not known until today, by the way). Cops seized 7 pairs of Halbach's panties--they will be testing the purple panties to see if they are Halbach's.
The rest of the motion talks about all the stuff they will be testing---lots and lots of stuff. Testing could be done in as few as 3 months.
NorthDakota
Grandson of Loomis
- Messages
- 15,701
- Reaction score
- 6,002
This has such great mini series on HBO potential
B
Buster Bluth
Guest
wat
I could see Netflix doing something on it
NorthDakota
Grandson of Loomis
- Messages
- 15,701
- Reaction score
- 6,002
Lol I mean like a show. With actors and shit. Not a sweet documentary.
haha I hear you.
the final story/chapter yet to be told. but, you got me thinking, could be a helluva movie if done right, too. has to be the right director and lead actor combo though.
BleedBlueGold
Well-known member
- Messages
- 6,270
- Reaction score
- 2,493
Irishcop
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,034
- Reaction score
- 332
There will be a MaM: Season 2. So your wish has been granted.
Ha. Thanks
Rocket89
Uniform Connoisseur
- Messages
- 2,914
- Reaction score
- 551
Lawyers for Brendan Dassey have filed a motion with the federal judge, who overturned his conviction, to release Brendan on bond while the state of Wisconsin appeals said conviction.
https://www.docdroid.net/6KRuOCU/motion-for-misc-relief.pdf.html
https://www.docdroid.net/6KRuOCU/motion-for-misc-relief.pdf.html
NDRock
Well-known member
- Messages
- 7,489
- Reaction score
- 5,448
Anyone see the Amanda Knox doc on Netflix? It was good. Although I'm no expert on the case, I always felt the story the police came up with was a little crazy. This show seemed to confirm that but it may have been biased towards Knox. Not sure if they left out anything that would point more towards her being guilty.
gkIrish
Greek God
- Messages
- 13,184
- Reaction score
- 1,004
Yeah I watched it. Thought it was good. I am still a bit suspicious of her but the physical evidence did not seem to support a guilty verdict.
Henges24
BUCKETHEAD
- Messages
- 4,804
- Reaction score
- 1,580
I watched it, I didn't think it was that great. I don't remember ever hearing about it so maybe that had an affect on me. I don't think she did it; however, I kind of hope she did because she seemed wacko. I suppose that a few years in prison could do to you.
just read somewhere yesterday that Wisconsin trying to keep Dassey in jail during the appeal
Rocket89
Uniform Connoisseur
- Messages
- 2,914
- Reaction score
- 551
Brendan Dassey ordered to be released from prison, pending the state of Wisconsin's appeal on the overturning of his murder conviction by a federal judge.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/brendan-dassey-making-a-murderer-to-be-freed.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/us/brendan-dassey-making-a-murderer-to-be-freed.html?_r=0
B
Buster Bluth
Guest
Awesome news.
Rocket89
Uniform Connoisseur
- Messages
- 2,914
- Reaction score
- 551
"Making A Murderer": Avery's attorney files 1,000-page post-conviction notice
Zellner is currently filing her 1,000+ page brief. It's not sealed.
/grabs popcorn
Zellner is currently filing her 1,000+ page brief. It's not sealed.
/grabs popcorn