Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

Uncharted wrote: »

Ok. Iv given you 4 separate occasions of the benefit of the doubt. Iv encouraged you to actually watch the show that you are speculating on.
It beggars belief that you could be so aggressively and doggedly ignorant whilst admittedly not having seen the evidence.

I can assure you that anyone with a modicum of a brain cell would have their eyes opened by series 2.
I'm certain your eyes will remain closed.

Please go troll somewhere else,you are boring and obviously have zero interest in the case.

As I said, afraid to backtrack when he sees the new evidence.

walshb wrote: »

This is unreal...

So, watching the show where all this is presented as a big frame job is all we need to know? And accept as fact?

No chance that a frame didn’t occur? No chance that there was no evidence planting?

This nonsense belongs in the conspiracy forum..

Just watch season 2, and maybe if you really want to take a skeptical stance, have a little notebook beside you.

Every time a scientific experiment or an expert refutes some piece of evidence, note on the side what it is and whether you can counter-argue on their conclusions.

For example, you could start with the fact that there was no other DNA than SA's on the key that TH was supposed to have used earlier in the afternoon to come along in her Rav4.

I guess you could maybe argue that she had disposable sterile gloves, and she only ever handled her Rav4 key with them. Maybe she had OCD or something. That could be argued, maybe that's the sort of arguments the prosecution would like to present in a counter-program on Netflix. Maybe you could argue that SA wiped the key clean with a solution for some reason. (and then rubbed it under his armpits) (sorry, sarcasm taking hold here, wipe this off the record your honour)

Or that she was a non-shedder, like the DNA woman in court (the one who contaminated the samples) argued. This shedder/non-shedder theory dates back from previous decades (and has been rubbished since), whether it applies to someone who would handle a key daily is a different matter, but yeah, that would maybe allow for space to be skeptical.

retro:electro wrote: »

Something something sheep..

Open your eyes...

They have their men..

I haven’t watched it but I know more than you..

Mary had a little lamb..

You havent watched it but you know more then me hahahaha

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

Its uncanny to how Walshb sounds right now.

Hahaha ive never in my life met 2 more closed minded fools.

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

These FACTS were all discussed in great details in series 2. Yes, FACTS.

That's great now that they are established facts he should be out in no time.

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Unfortunately, there were no pictures taken of the fire pit when they discovered the bones. There was no grid installed, and the exact layout of the bones when discovered was not recorded. The detective there collected the bones with a shovel and placed them in a box.

So a lot of information on how these bones ended up there, whether they were burned on the spot or not, was lost.

My explanation of the above question would be that someone brought over the bones from another location.

This could be the police, trying to incriminate Avery, or the killer himself, trying to achieve the same.

Or Avery Put her in the pit did you ever consider that?

Where was he anyway while this body was been planted and burned for hours? did the series show him praying in church at this exact time?

Commanchie wrote: »

Sorry i thought that was WalshB replying.

Yeah that’s the angle I was going for :pac:

Mountainsandh wrote: »

J
Every time a scientific experiment or an expert refutes some piece of evidence, note on the side what it is and whether you can counter-argue on their conclusions.

For example, you could start with the fact that there was no other DNA than SA's on the key that TH was supposed to have used earlier in the afternoon to come along in her Rav4.

I guess you could maybe argue that she had disposable sterile gloves, and she only ever handled her Rav4 key with them. Maybe she had OCD or something. That could be argued, maybe that's the sort of arguments the prosecution would like to present in a counter-program on Netflix. Maybe you could argue that SA wiped the key clean with a solution for some reason. (and then rubbed it under his armpits) (sorry, sarcasm taking hold here, wipe this off the record your honour)

Or that she was a non-shedder, like the DNA woman in court (the one who contaminated the samples) argued. This shedder/non-shedder theory dates back from previous decades (and has been rubbished since), whether it applies to someone who would handle a key daily is a different matter, but yeah, that would maybe allow for space to be skeptical.

Good job you just shot down the ridiculous no DNA on the key before I had too.

And just so you know, you can pay "experts" to make any argument you want or come up with stupid experiments to try make Avery look innocent.

Like how they made a dummy to to show how TH's blood wouldn't have made the pattern inside the back door that was found. So stupid, they have to idea how the body was moved or thrown around, yet this is supposed to throw doubt on prosecution.

Blood spatter expert says "selective blood deposition". Is it possible Avery cleaned the obvious places he might have touched but missed the less obvious ones, i know crazy thought.

Nick Curran the best one, placing blood on finger and seeing if he got blood on dashboard, I won't even comment on that experiment

Mountainsandh wrote: »

My explanation of the above question would be that someone brought over the bones from another location.

This could be the police, trying to incriminate Avery, or the killer himself, trying to achieve the same.

And why do you not suspect Avery? its his fire pit.

Where do you think he was while Elizabeth was been murdered, transported and put into his fire pit?

enfant terrible wrote: »

And why do you not suspect Avery? its his fire pit.

Where do you think he was while Elizabeth was been murdered, transported and put into his fire pit?

In custody. His pit was searched nothing was found he wss then in custody and 5 days later bone fragment is found.

Any reason it wasnt first time?

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

Same reason the key wasn't found the first time despite that exact position being searched and photographed?

Ahhh dont spoil it RR flip sakes

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

I would love to see those 2 posters explain the appearance of Teresas car key in that exact spot. What was the official story again? It fell out from behind a locker?

Yes or was in a shoe and stumbled out while Colbourn was standing supporting another agebt who was stood down from the case. Absolute tripe he should of been destroyed in the box. But hey why would he do that he was onky thr same man 21 years previous to this who filed the rape charges against SA.

Commanchie wrote: »

In custody. His pit was searched nothing was found he wss then in custody and 5 days later bone fragment is found.

Any reason it wasnt first time?

That's handy he was in custody the day she was murdered, again he should be released soon.

I thought he was the one who used a false name to sell his mother's car which she didn't want to sell, just to get Elisabeth up there.

Was the last person to see her alive, lied constantly when questioned.

Anyone got a list of all the lies Avery told the police and his changing story, would be funny to see.

On meeting Elisabeth I found
I met her at the van to pay her while she was taking the pics (Marinette LE).

I watched her through the wondow and never spoke to her (to AC).

I took her to taken pics of a couple of cars behind the office garage (to DB).

She never showed up (his brother and RF).

I met her half way between my house and the van (2017).

Didn't he also lie about not starting any fires the week she went missing, but they had to concede lighting one on 31st?

Must be hundreds more anyone got a list?

enfant terrible wrote: »

That's handy he was in custody the day she was murdered, again he should be released soon.

I thought he was the one who used a false name to sell his mother's car which she didn't want to sell, just to get Elisabeth up there.

Was the last person to see her alive, lied constantly when questioned.

Anyone got a list of all the lies Avery told the police and his changing story, would be funny to see.

On meeting Elisabeth I found
I met her at the van to pay her while she was taking the pics (Marinette LE).

I watched her through the wondow and never spoke to her (to AC).

I took her to taken pics of a couple of cars behind the office garage (to DB).

She never showed up (his brother and RF).

I met her half way between my house and the van (2017).

Didn't he also lie about not starting any fires the week she went missing, but they had to concede lighting one on 31st?

Must be hundreds more anyone got a list?

Who's Elizabeth??

enfant terrible wrote: »

That's handy he was in custody the day she was murdered, again he should be released soon.

I thought he was the one who used a false name to sell his mother's car which she didn't want to sell, just to get Elisabeth up there.

Was the last person to see her alive, lied constantly when questioned.

Anyone got a list of all the lies Avery told the police and his changing story, would be funny to see.

On meeting Elisabeth I found
I met her at the van to pay her while she was taking the pics (Marinette LE).

I watched her through the wondow and never spoke to her (to AC).

I took her to taken pics of a couple of cars behind the office garage (to DB).

She never showed up (his brother and RF).

I met her half way between my house and the van (2017).

Didn't he also lie about not starting any fires the week she went missing, but they had to concede lighting one on 31st?

Must be hundreds more anyone got a list?

False name he used barb Janda? Barb is his sister she owned the car. Usually thats how you sell a car