nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Steven Avery (making a murderer) Guilty or innocent?

timthumbni

Having watched this 10 part documentary on Netflix regarding the trial of Steven Avery in some hick state (Wisconsin) in America I'm interested in other boardsies thoughts on the case/outcome.

I really don't know what to think. If I was on that jury after a local girl was murdered would I have also found him guilty?? Possibly...

His nephews interrogations were very hard to watch. Painful. His legal advisor/solicitor Len kazinsky was dodgy as feck. He appeared to me to be like a character from Fargo.

In summary I am not sure if Avery is innocent. But equally I'm not sure he is guilty. And considering that the law is supposed to presume innocent until proven guilty then should Avery be in jail?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

[Deleted User]

mewe wrote: »

Don't dodge the question. I'm confident in my opinion. You clearly are not.

You can confidently believe everything you watch on TV/ are told on paper.
Good for you.

I prefer to make up my own mind.

mewe

bubblypop wrote:

You can confidently believe everything you watch on TV/ are told on paper. Good for you.

bubblypop wrote:

I prefer to make up my own mind.

Yeah I've also made up my own mind too. Explain to me how you made up your own mind differently to me.

anothernight

It's a bit arrogant to assume that someone who thinks he's innocent must only think so because they've only watched the documentary and not sought out any other information themselves. :rolleyes:

Two Tone

bubblypop wrote: »

You can confidently believe everything you watch on TV/ are told on paper.

That's a bit dishonest - this is a ten-hour documentary, and that's only what made the final cut. It took a decade to make and was extremely indepthly researched. It's not some half assed newspaper article or hastily cobbled together news feature or hour-long TV3 documentary.

Plenty of airtime is given to the prosecution, Avery's previous crimes are not omitted, and the Halbach family were invited to be interviewed but declined.

It's laudable to have an open mind - something there could be more of, but not being devil's advocate for the sake of it to stand out from the crowd.

Chain Smoker

Two Tone wrote: »

That's a bit dishonest - this is a ten-hour documentary, and that's only what made the final cut. It took a decade to make and was extremely indepthly researched. It's not some half assed newspaper article or hastily cobbled together news feature or hour-long TV3 documentary.

Plenty of airtime is given to the prosecution, Avery's previous crimes are not omitted, and the Halbach family were invited to be interviewed but declined.

It's laudable to have an open mind - something there could be more of, but not being devil's advocate for the sake of it to stand out from the crowd.

That's not necessarily on point either though, it's a ten hour documentary that took a decade to make, but the documentarians have made absolutely nothing beforehand to help gauge what kind of filmmakers they are.

All I can really remember about Making A Murderer is that the documentarians at the very least were a bit afraid of portraying the Averys negatively. That's somewhat understandable (i.e. it's not necessarily relevant to the case whatsoever and its going to distort peoples opinions in the same way as it obviously done in the local community), but it also makes everything else a little harder to trust.

For the first season of Serial (which Making a Murderer got compared to a lot), it was really visible that Sarah Koenig (a pretty good journalist, not necessarily a great entertainer) was extremely frustrated with how people were so aggressively siding with the Adnan is innocent argument rather than the Adnan has been convicted on inconclusive evidence one.
Making a Murderer, at points, seemed as though it was oblivious to the difference in the two.

DEFTLEFTHAND

mikeym wrote: »

Any updates on Brendan Dassey?

He deserves a retrial.

I'd say the very same.

His trial really stayed with me. A 16 year old borderline mentally retarded kid.

From his general demeanour to his limited mental capacity I just don't believe that boy could be guilty of participating in a rape and a murder.

I remember in the doc when his father sees him walking to the courthouse in chains.
His Dad says that it hurts him to see Brendan in chains because he knows what kind of boy he is.

A gentle simple boy, who was manipulated and taken advantage of by both Police and Prosecutors.

Noo

Wasnt the once sided part of the documentry unintential though? The Avery family and lawyers etc. were the only ones willing to give interviews for it. The persecution refused, thats why they only have their side through media footage and whatnot.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Noo wrote: »

Wasnt the once sided part of the documentry unintential though? The Avery family and lawyers etc. were the only ones willing to give interviews for it. The persecution refused, thats why they only have their side through media footage and whatnot.

The Jury member who was excused after the first day of deliberations due to a family emergency on the Steven Avery Trial said that the initial vote was 7 not guilty, 5 guilty.

The Jury really was split. He thinks the stronger members wore down the weaklings over the course of the 4 days.

smash

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

He admitted she was at his house the day she disappeared.
She was never seen again after he admitted talking to her.
He made 3 calls to her phone that day but hid his number.
She was terrified of him.
Her belongings were found outside his house.
Her remains were on his property.
Her car was on his property.
The bullet that killed her was fired from his gun.
His DNA was on her car.
He had threatened females before with a gun.

If you'd done any research you'd know that your wrong on multiple accounts here.

riclad

He deserves a new trial,
the evidence used against him was partly a statement made by younger relative .
a person of low intelligence .
Who did not have a lawyer present when he was interviewed .

I read articles about the case .
In many cases some people will say almost anything when put under
pressure by police especially someone who is young and naive .
IF someone goe,s to jail for life the evidence used against should be examined carefully in great detail .the jury saying 7 not guilty,.5 guilty , at some point
Shows there was alot of evidence to show that he was maybe innocent .
Would someone make a 10 hour documentary about someone they
believe to be guilty .

SebastianT

Brendan Dassey's conviction overturned and his release has been ordered by a judge.

Breaking on Twitter now.

ben.schlomo

SebastianT wrote: »

Brendan Dassey's conviction overturned and his release has been ordered by a judge.

Breaking on Twitter now.

Ya just read a few of the source articles there, great news.

MonkieSocks

The prosecutors have 90 days to retry him or let him walk free.

Hope they let the lad go and live his life in peace.

smash

MonkieSocks wrote: »

The prosecutors have 90 days to retry him or let him walk free.

Hope they let the lad go and live his life in peace.

They'll let him go. Avery's attorney has less than 3 weeks to file her brief which allegedly contains mountains of new evidence. If the state step in to retry Dassey they'll end up in a world of pain.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Brendan Dassey's conviction has been overturned.

http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Judge-Overturns-Conviction-for-Making-a-Murderers-Brendan-Dassey-390019181.html

I think sense finally prevailed here.

Kitty6277

Personally, I think innocent. Say that all the evidence against him is true, that he did kill her, one (of many) things that make absolutely no sense, how did he manage to make a fire so hot that it literally burned the DNA out of "her" bones? Even a cremation expert testified that it wasn't possible.

Noo

Kitty6277 wrote: »

Personally, I think innocent. Say that all the evidence against him is true, that he did kill her, one (of many) things that make absolutely no sense, how did he manage to make a fire so hot that it literally burned the DNA out of "her" bones? Even a cremation expert testified that it wasn't possible.

And allegedly butcher her up in the bedroom or garage and manage to clean up every single drop of blood without missing a drop and even make it look like nothing was ever cleaned up......criminal mastermind.

clever user name

Noo wrote: »

And allegedly butcher her up in the bedroom or garage and manage to clean up every single drop of blood without missing a drop and even make it look like nothing was ever cleaned up......criminal mastermind.

This had me absolutely baffled. And still does. Every time I think 'OK, perhaps he is guilty', I think of this and change my mind.

irishgeo

clever user name wrote: »

This had me absolutely baffled. And still does. Every time I think 'OK, perhaps he is guilty', I think of this and change my mind.

Lets not forget the bones in the quarry. How they get there. If he killed with the intention of burning her and store her in the boot of his car why he bring her to the quarry.

130Kph

This is the only theory (posted here in Feb) I’ve seen that makes any coherent sense because it plausibly explains all the facts, supposed mysteries, inconsistencies and flaws that arise in any one theory of the case given by the various defence or prosecution teams or other commentators. It’s just in layman’s language.

It’s dispiriting to read certain posters accepting that the police likely did some planting of evidence but still assert Avery is “probably” guilty, based on hunches or feelings. This type of thinking –by people who should know better- is one of the best reasons to abolish trial by jury in criminal cases?

It’s worth re-posting and I’ve put it in paragraphs for easier reading.

AH wrote:

This is from youtube, the best explanation of what happened imho:

The police didn't kill Theresa Halbach. Andrew Colborn located that RAV4 with the assistance of Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas who illegally trespassed onto the Avery Salvage Yard on the night of November 3rd 2005.

Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas suspected something was up since the Avery Salvage Yard was the last place they knew Theresa visited on Oct.31st Halloween day. They went snooping on the property and found the car. They checked the car and found the key in the ignition and blood in the cargo area.

Mike or Ryan removed the key from the ignition to ensure that no one could easily move the car off of the Avery property... freaked out about this huge discovery they call the Manitowoc Sheriffs Department. Andrew Colborn fielded the call that night and went out and met Ryan and Mike at the Salvage Yard so he could view the car for himself. Ryan and Mike show him the car and to be certain its Halbachs.

he "calls" in the plate number to dispatch. Colborn has to "call" in... instead of "radio" in... the plate number to Manitowoc dispatch because he wasn't in his police cruiser at the moment, but rather on foot and in the "field' on the Avery Salvage property. This mistake places Colborn at the scene and in contact with Halbachs RAV4... 2 days before it is officially located on November 5th, 2005, by Pam Sturm....

This is problematic for Colborn because all call and radio transmissions to dispatch are recorded and logged onto the Manitowoc Police server. Andrew Colborn is now operating outside of police protocol at a potential crime scene that he has no official directive to be at. He tells Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas to basically STFU about what they found and not mention to anyone that they were ever on the Avery Salvage property that night.

Ryan or Mike turns the RAV4 key over to Andrew Colborn. Mike and Ryan are told to go home. Andrew Colborn then immediately calls Lt. James Lenk and briefs him about the discovery of the Halbach car and breaches of protocol he committed on the Avery property, also about Ryan Hillegas and Mike Halbach being there. Lt James Lenk realizing that Colborn's calling in Halbachs plate is a serious mistake with potential consequences orders Andrew Colborn to remove the license plate from Halbach's car and then report to him immediately.

What James Lenk and Andrew Colborn, or the others for that matter, don't realize at this point and are completely unaware of is that Bobby Dassey and Scott Tadych have kidnapped, raped, shot and then burned Theresa Halbach in the privacy of the gravel quarry off of Jambo Rd on Halloween evening. They choose to burn her body to dispose of their DNA evidence of the crimes.

They hid Halbach's car in the rear of Avery Salvage and wiped it clean of their prints. I believe it is Scott Tadych's idea to secretly transport the cremains of Halbach from the gravel quarry and dispose them into Steven Avery's burn pit. Scott Tadych transports Halbach's cremains in secret by using one of Barb Jandas burn barrels from her yard.

Scott Tadych fails to collect all of Halbach's cremains from the original burn site in the gravel quarry, thus leaving some behind that FBI investigators later find... but he also fails in making certain all of Halbach's cremains are out of Barb Jandas burn barrel after dumping them into Steven Avery's burn pit. This is why investigators found small bits of Halbach in Barb Jandas burn barrel. Thus making a total of three sites where Halbach's cremains are found.

Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey are unaware that Ryan Hillegas and Mike Halbach have found Theresas car on the property and that Lenk and Colborn are now involved and in play with their scheme. .........By shear colossal luck, two completely independent frame jobs targeting one man, Steven Avery were shaping up into the perfect storm. On one front, from Lenk and Colborn regarding the RAV4, ....and on the other unconnected front by Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey regarding the cremains of Theresa Halbach.

One party wasn't aware of the other's involvements at any point during the days leading up to the official discovery of Halbach's RAV4 at the Avery Salvage Yard hence why the investigation and murder trial made zero sense to anyone especially the Jury.

None of the evidence could be connected because it was all unrelated... everybody was guessing. But Buting and Strang had zeroed in on a part of it but couldn't fully form a solid defense to prove it. The Jury couldn't conceive that Manitowoc officers could have conspired to kill Theresa Halbach to frame Steven Avery as Ken Kratz insisted they had to if they wanted to follow the theory the defense presented of the frame up of Steven Avery by Manitowoc officials. And Ken Kratz was right...

Imagine Scott Tadych's confused and utter relief when Steve Avery's blood was found in the Halbach car and the RAV4 key found in Steve Avery's bedroom..... he must have been like.... WTF?! A quote from Scott Tadych after Steven Avery is convicted of Theresa Halbach's murder.... "THIS IS THE GREATEST THING TO EVER HAPPEN" ..... We will see Scott, we will see....................."

This is probably the most credible theory I have come across so far. Notice how the events here not only make logical sense, but they also line up with how many of the parties involved behaved during the documentary i.e how Mike Halbach and Ryan Hillegas seemed like they knew more about what happened than they were leading on. As well as Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey's bizarre hostility towards Steven Avery.

Wigglepuppy

130Kph wrote: »

This is the only theory (posted here in Feb) I’ve seen that makes any coherent sense because it plausibly explains all the facts, supposed mysteries, inconsistencies and flaws that arise in any one theory of the case given by the various defence or prosecution teams or other commentators. It’s just in layman’s language.

It’s dispiriting to read certain posters accepting that the police likely did some planting of evidence but still assert Avery is “probably” guilty, based on hunches or feelings. This type of thinking –by people who should know better- is one of the best reasons to abolish trial by jury in criminal cases?

It’s worth re-posting and I’ve put it in paragraphs for easier reading.

Very interesting, thanks.

I remember Avery's brother Chuck saying he saw headlights in the vicinity of their property on the night the two lads would have found the car.

I'm glad Brendan Dassey's conviction has been overturned - although I wonder would other wrongfully imprisoned individuals experience this without a popular documentary and public support.

smash

130Kph wrote: »

This is the only theory (posted here in Feb) I’ve seen that makes any coherent sense because it plausibly explains all the facts, supposed mysteries, inconsistencies and flaws that arise in any one theory of the case given by the various defence or prosecution teams or other commentators. It’s just in layman’s language.

Scott and Bobby had nothing to do with it. I believe they cooperated with the prosecution in fabricating a story because they were promised a deal for Brendan, which he never got.

There's so many characters at play in this case that it's almost impossible to keep track of the potential suspects. If you want some interesting reading run a search for Brad Czech or George Zipperer.

Wigglepuppy wrote: »

I'm glad Brendan Dassey's conviction has been overturned - although I wonder would other wrongfully imprisoned individuals experience this without a popular documentary and public support.

Ryan Furgeson, a previous client of Kathleen Zellner is doing this at the moment, shedding light on wrongful convictions.

Winterlong

The Daily Mail are not sitting on the fence with this headline.

Justice by Netflix? Fears that TV hit of the year Making A Murderer could lead to the freeing of a man who may be a killer

smash

Winterlong wrote: »

The Daily Mail are not sitting on the fence with this headline.

Don't expect them to understand how the law actually works.

Winterlong

smash wrote: »

Don't expect them to understand how the law actually works.

Rabble rabble!

smash

A member of Avery's defence team has tweeted saying to watch the news tomorrow. This is when the brief will be submitted to the court.

smash

For anyone interested. Avery's lawyer held a press conference as she filed her brief and stated that she already has tests completed that prove his innocence and is now looking to retest old evidence to prove that it was planted.

She has also uncovered a police report which states the car was recovered on the 3rd of November in the Quarry behind the Avery residence (2 days before it was found on the Avery property) and evidence of two witnesses who lied to the police. One being the owner of the quarry and one being the victim's ex boyfriend.

http://europe.newsweek.com/steven-avery-lawyer-demands-evidence-and-accuses-cops-framing-him-bombshell-493873?rm=eu

[Deleted User]

smash wrote: »

For anyone interested. Avery's lawyer held a press conference as she filed her brief and stated that she already has tests completed that prove his innocence

Wow!
Just tests that prove his innocence!

I'd imagine there must be thousands of people waiting to hear what these magic tests are!

ScumLord

Avery and Brendan are going to be some very rich men once they get this stuff over turned.

I never really warmed to Avery, I got the feeling he's not really the angle he made himself out to be, but the young lad was taken for a ride, I feel really sorry for him. I hope he becomes a millionaire out of this and has developed a bit of sense in the meantime. My worry would be at this point that he'll get a big payout and be dead within years from drug addiction. I don't know what he's life in prison has been like but it wouldn't surprise me if he comes out of an American prison with an life altering addiction.

smash

bubblypop wrote: »

Wow!
Just tests that prove his innocence!

I'd imagine there must be thousands of people waiting to hear what these magic tests are!

Magic tests? You think DNA tests are magic?