Steven Avery (making a murderer) Guilty or innocent?

Senna

smash wrote: »

It's speculation based on the fact that the examiner was not allowed to answer the question when asked. The defence listed off a number of people to which the examiner stated the fingerprint was not a match (Avery's dad, his two brothers, his mother, Avery himself, three of the Dassey brothers, Barb Janda and Scott Bloedorn, Halbach's roommate). When the defence asked if it matched Scott's Tadych's, the state said it was irrelevant, and the court sustained the objection.

This is potential evidence.

A question not being answered is not potential evidence, they listed out relevant people and the list of names could conceivable went on and on, it was stopped before his name was answered.
It's not like they continued on with names and his name was the only one objected to.
I don't mind the hypothesis, it's the presenting as fact when it's not that I have a problem with in this thread

smash

Senna wrote: »

A question not being answered is not potential evidence, they listed out relevant people and the list of names could conceivable went on and on, it was stopped before his name was answered.
It's not like they continued on with names and his name was the only one objected to.
I don't mind the hypothesis, it's the presenting as fact when it's not that I have a problem with in this thread

The problem with the question not being answered is that they were continuously denied the right to introduce additional suspects. Scott was a potential suspect, the court knew this and the defence were denied the answer based on this. The fingerprint was evidence and it was thrown out because it didn't suit the course of action taken by the state. Even if it's not Scott's, the question should have been answered so the lead could have been followed up.

Senna

smash wrote: »

The problem with the question not being answered is that they were continuously denied the right to introduce additional suspects. Scott was a potential suspect, the court knew this and the defence were denied the answer based on this. The fingerprint was evidence and it was thrown out because it didn't suit the course of action taken by the state. Even if it's not Scott's, the question should have been answered so the lead could have been followed up.

Yes and the defence had the time pre trial to put forward another suspect and they could not. Finding one fingerprint in a jeep and saying it's the killer is a stretch. What I find even more remarkable is halbach used this jeep for work and out of family and friends, only one other fingerprint was found, there's bound to be someones print from visiting a work client, giving someone a lift or any other amount of circumstances, maybe even a past owner?
I know I couldn't account for ever fingerprint in my car, there's bound to be loads from people I couldn't even think of.

smash

Senna wrote: »

Yes and the defence had the time pre trial to put forward another suspect and they could not.

As far as I recall, they weren't allowed. SA's new attorney is going all out with the new case and reddit is awash with reports of suspects, with Zipperer and Martinez on the top. They're worth reading in to.

Senna wrote: »

Finding one fingerprint in a jeep and saying it's the killer is a stretch.

All I'm saying is that it's evidence that wasn't dealt with properly.

Senna wrote: »

What I find even more remarkable is halbach used this jeep for work and out of family and friends, only one other fingerprint was found, there's bound to be someones print from visiting a work client, giving someone a lift or any other amount of circumstances, maybe even a past owner?
I know I couldn't account for ever fingerprint in my car, there's bound to be loads from people I couldn't even think of.

I agree with this.

Senna

I'm open to correction too, but it was stated that new suspects couldn't be added during the trial, however at pre trial new suspects could be proposed by the defense.

Also if the fingerprint was his and this was tested, the defense would know (they also get any test results) and I'm sure a bigger deal would have been made of it in the documentary and after

8-10

Deleted User wrote: »

If there's even an inkling that the prosecution's case isn't exactly it happened, then there's doubt.

A reasonable inkling. You don't need 100% proof, but proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

I actually think the jury were not briefed well enough on this point. Particularly Kratz's statment along the lines of "reasonable doubt is for innocent people". From my experience on a jury the instructions we were given by defence and prosecution was completely unbiased and both, along with the judge, made it completely clear what the burden is and how it's proved.

Flint Fredstone

Badly Drunk Boy wrote: »

No, I don't look at any of those. It just seems like what you call "whatever else grabs an audience across the globe", I see more as what people are being told is good, so they have to like it.

No wonder zombie films/television programmes are so popular nowadays. You're part of the apocalypse...

If there's a buzz about something across the board it's usually because it's good. If it was crap I wouldn't have made it past 2 episodes.

I've never watched a single episode of Game of Thrones or The Walking Dead because I know it wouldn't interest me at all so that kind of throws a spanner in the works of your silly little theory.

Missing out on something in an attempt to be non-conformist is a far sadder state of affairs IMO.

8-10

smash wrote: »

There was also a finger print found in the car that was not Avery's or the victims, but the court would not allow the witness to answer when questioned who's it was as they refused to allow the defence to introduce the possibility of another suspect.

I didn't know about this one...where did you get this info from?

Edit: D'oh it's a page back - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=98663903&postcount=265 - don't mind me

jester77

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xtlu123dg0I

8-10

Miniegg wrote: »

It is not beyond the realms of possibility that a scenario was in place where some members of the MCPD agreed that should a serious crime be committed in Manitowoc, pin it on Steven Avery. Their livelihoods, reputations and those of their familes were at stake at the hands of a dirty lowlife scumbag with serious behavioral issues.


The possibility of this scenario is evident in the fact that the MCPD were not supposed to be involved in any way in the investigation.

Manitowoc Police Department had nothing to do with the investigation and nothing to do with either this case or the original 1985 rape case.

This keeps cropping up again and again that they were involved and they've had to issue statements to prove that they're not involved.

This case and investigation was by Manitowoc Sheriff's Department which is a completely different law enforcement body to the MCPD, in conjunction with Calumet County Sheriff's department and this is repeated many times in the documentary.

Senna

8-10 wrote: »

Manitowoc Police Department had nothing to do with the investigation.

They didn't run the investigation, but their officers voluntered to help and they took part in the evidence gathering process.

8-10

Senna wrote: »

They didn't run the investigation, but their officers voluntered to help and they took part in the evidence gathering process.

I don't think that's true as the crime scene was outside the city limits it was under jurisdiction of the Sheriff's Department.

I haven't seen anything to suggest the Manitowoc Police Department were involved in evidence gathering - though it would not be surprising given the manpower that was needed - I just haven't seen them referenced before

Senna

8-10 wrote: »

I don't think that's true as the crime scene was outside the city limits it was under jurisdiction of the Sheriff's Department.

I haven't seen anything to suggest the Manitowoc Police Department were involved in evidence gathering - though it would not be surprising given the manpower that was needed - I just haven't seen them referenced before

Who found the key in the trailer?

Tsipras

For the people who think he's innocent:

Would you leave him alone in a room with your Daughter/Sister/Wife/Mother??

8-10

Senna wrote: »

Who found the key in the trailer?

Lenk - County Sheriff's Department

smash

It was the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Dept who were involved, not the police. Even when they shouldn't have been involved:

Hermann reported that 744 hours were expended by the Sheriff’s Department for the Avery-Halbach investigation with $2,800 of incidental expenses.

http://www.co.manitowoc.wi.us/upload/3/PublicSafetyMinutes12-6-05.pdf

jooksavage

8-10 wrote: »

I don't think that's true as the crime scene was outside the city limits it was under jurisdiction of the Sheriff's Department.

I haven't seen anything to suggest the Manitowoc Police Department were involved in evidence gathering - though it would not be surprising given the manpower that was needed - I just haven't seen them referenced before

Wasn't their involvement one of the central planks of the defense? Detective James Lenk was the one who found the key, along with Andrew Colburn, both of Manitowoc Police Department.

smash

jooksavage wrote: »

Wasn't their involvement one of the central planks of the defense? Detective James Lenk was the one who found the key, along with Andrew Colburn, both of Manitowoc Police Department.

No. They were from Manitowoc County Sheriff Dept.

Senna

smash wrote: »

No. They were from Manitowoc County Sheriff Dept.

Neither should have been involved, they asked Calumet County to lead the investigation as impartial. They stated MC should not be involved at the crime scene, which they were. Which MC police or sherif officers is irrelevant, neither should have been there.

smash

Senna wrote: »

Neither should have been involved, they asked Calumet County to lead the investigation as impartial. They stated MC should not be involved at the crime scene, which they were. Which MC police or sherif officers is irrelevant, neither should have been there.

I know. And they're the ones to have 'discovered' literally every piece of the evidence.

jooksavage

smash wrote: »

No. They were from Manitowoc County Sheriff Dept.

Ah, cool. Thanks for the correction.

jooksavage

smash wrote: »

I know. And they're the ones to have 'discovered' literally every piece of the evidence.

Even allowing for the biased presentation of the doc-makers, they also made for shifty witnesses. Colburn's performance particularly stood out for me.

Senna

smash wrote: »

I know. And they're the ones to have 'discovered' literally every piece of the evidence.

Sorry should have been quoting 8-10 there.


I was reading the reddit threads, they are comical. I know they have the best interest at heart, but one person proposes something, often with an error or ignoring a fact, someone else picks up on the idea and runs with it.

They were talking about the axe fella, and how he killed halbach with his axe, then the police found the body and decided to burn it so that no one would know she was killed with an axe, they did this because they knew he would be going to jail for a long time, even thought that crime wasn't committed till after the body was burnt. So the police would make a deal with him to not mention the murder of halbach, get him off on a technicality and frame Avery. Just to cap it off they all forgot there was a bullet hole in her skull. I stopped reading then, it was just too stupid.

smash

Senna wrote: »

Sorry should have been quoting 8-10 there.


I was reading the reddit threads, they are comical. I know they have the best interest at heart, but one person proposes something, often with an error or ignoring a fact, someone else picks up on the idea and runs with it.

They were talking about the axe fella, and how he killed halbach with his axe, then the police found the body and decided to burn it so that no one would know she was killed with an axe, they did this because they knew he would be going to jail for a long time, even thought that crime wasn't committed till after the body was burnt. So the police would make a deal with him to not mention the murder of halbach, get him off on a technicality and frame Avery. Just to cap it off they all forgot there was a bullet hole in her skull. I stopped reading then, it was just too stupid.

Yea, some of the theories are a bit too far out there. Did you read the one about Edward Wayne?

8-10

Senna wrote: »

Neither should have been involved, they asked Calumet County to lead the investigation as impartial. They stated MC should not be involved at the crime scene, which they were. Which MC police or sherif officers is irrelevant, neither should have been there.

It is relevant when you consider one of those bodies, the Manitowoc City Police Department, were not there, were not at any stage of the investigation, weren't responsible for the crime scene, yet get called out in forums and reports incorrectly and get people actually tweeting and Facebooking them to the point that they actually have to release a statement saying they weren't involved.

Pedantic yes, but based on the portrayal of the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department, I wouldn't want to be associated with them either!

Crime happened in Manitowoc County - where the Sheriff's department have jurisdiction. Inside the city limits of Manitowoc, the Manitowoc City Police Department have jurisdiction and the Sheriff's Department don't. This is why they were not involved and only the Sheriff's Department should be in these discussions

/pedant

Senna

smash wrote: »

Yea, some of the theories are a bit too far out there. Did you read the one about Edward Wayne?

No but I did hear it mentioned about the serial killer who was at the trial. I'll certainly give it a read, purely for entertainment value.

smash

Senna wrote: »

No but I did hear it mentioned about the serial killer who was at the trial. I'll certainly give it a read, purely for entertainment value.

And it was even conceived by a former FBI agent...

MadDog76

Just to note, the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department voluntarily handed the investigation over to the Calumet County Sheriff's Department to "avoid a conflict of interest" and would only participate as "support" to the investigation.

This is an important fact because it meant that any evidence "found" or "collected" by the Manitowoc Officers would be admissible in Avery's Trial ......... if there had been a Court Order forbidding them from taking part then they wouldn't have been able to participate in the investigation at all.

The cynic in me tells me that this gave them more control over the investigation/evidence to ensure things went their way whilst at the same time maintaining a public perception of not being involved, ie. "How could we frame him? We weren't even involved! Why would we give up the investigation if we wanted to frame him!?!!" ......... and all the while it was them "finding" the most damning evidence against Steven Avery.

smash

I'm waiting to see if the new attorney can get her hands on the aerial photography taken by law enforcement and other sources from helicopters which were above the Avery yard up to 2 days before the SUV was found. Surprisingly there is admittance that there were photographs taken, but none can be located.

Senna

smash wrote: »

And it was even conceived by a former FBI agent...

Who has a website that generates revenue!!

The aerial photos is very interesting, pictures probably destroyed and never to see the light of day again.