Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

enfant terrible · 29-10-2018 06:09PM

Commanchie wrote: »

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

He had already sold five cars and couldn't sell anymore without getting a licence.

Barb when interviewed said she didn't even want to sell the car but he did it anyway and specifically asked for Teresa, I wonder why?

At 8:12 a.m. on Oct. 31, the day Halbach was killed, Kratz says Avery called AutoTrader magazine and asked them to send "that same girl who was here last time."

He also rang using *67 to hide his number, his phone records show he only did this with Teresa number, no other numbers.

"Phone records show three calls from Avery to Teresa's cell phone on Oct. 31," says Kratz. "One at 2:24 [p.m.], and one at 2:35 – both calls Avery uses the *67 feature so Teresa doesn't know it him...both placed before she arrives.

The first two calls, one lasting only seven seconds and the other apparently hung up before it was answered, were placed around 2:30 p.m. used the blocking feature."

"Then one last call at 4:35 p.m., without the *67 feature. Avery first believes he can simply say she never showed up…so tries to establish the alibi call after she's already been there, hence the 4:35 call. She will never answer of course, so he doesn't need the *67 feature for that last call."]

The phone is no longer showing up on the network after 2:41.

enfant terrible · 29-10-2018 06:14PM

Pelvis wrote: »

Guys they're defo guilty, sure yer man brendan admitted it. I know people have had confessions coerced, but err, he admitted it. He admitted to all these details that have zero evidence to support his story, but he admitted it.

The jury saw all the evidence but they didn't see ALL the evidence, they're definitely guilty.

I've only seen half the show but I know I'm right and everyone else is wrong, you're still idiots who don't know things, except twice what I know because I've only seen half the show. But that doesn't matter because I'm right and they're guilty.

Am I doing this right?

No man your crazy they're deffo totally innocent the Netflix show full of very competent experts said so, and they lady did experiments and everything, free Steven Avery.

Commanchie · 29-10-2018 06:16PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

He had already sold five cars and couldn't sell anymore without getting a licence.

Barb when interviewed said she didn't even want to sell the car but he did it anyway and specifically asked for Teresa, I wonder why?

At 8:12 a.m. on Oct. 31, the day Halbach was killed, Kratz says Avery called AutoTrader magazine and asked them to send "that same girl who was here last time."

He also rang using *67 to hide his number, his phone records show he only did this with Teresa number, no other numbers.

"Phone records show three calls from Avery to Teresa's cell phone on Oct. 31," says Kratz. "One at 2:24 [p.m.], and one at 2:35 – both calls Avery uses the *67 feature so Teresa doesn't know it him...both placed before she arrives.

The first two calls, one lasting only seven seconds and the other apparently hung up before it was answered, were placed around 2:30 p.m. used the blocking feature."

"Then one last call at 4:35 p.m., without the *67 feature. Avery first believes he can simply say she never showed up…so tries to establish the alibi call after she's already been there, hence the 4:35 call. She will never answer of course, so he doesn't need the *67 feature for that last call."]

The phone is no longer showing up on the network after 2:41.

Yet when asked to produce the phone records they werent produced and struxk from transcripts

Tipsy McSwagger · 29-10-2018 06:24PM

Avery reminded me of Ian Huntley when he was talking to the news crew on the day Theresa went missing. From the first question he refers to her in the past tense ‘she used to come round here’. She was only missing a few hours and Avery admits she was on his land and then left, but somehow he refers to her in the past tense. Hold on Steven nobody is saying she’s dead she’s just missing.

marklazarcovic · 29-10-2018 06:25PM

walshb wrote: »

Yes. Watched season 1.....

And was amazed at how OTT biased and selective it was...

Decided to reason it out objectively and without bias...anyone who thinks that these men are innocent based off a one sided show.....silly beyond silly!

How could you possibly know how OTT biased and selective it was as you were watching it? That makes zero sense, you couldn't have known that just watching it unfold, you made your mind up afterwards , something made it change?

Mountainsandh · 29-10-2018 06:26PM

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?

Oh I suspect Avery. And I also consider the opinion of experts who reckon the bones were moved, and I also take into account the fact that bones were located in the quarry right beside SA's premises.

There is strong support for these bones being cremated in a barrel rather than in an open air pit. They simply had reached a level of cremation that would be very difficult to achieve without a tank of fuel beside you, in the open air.

The barrel in which bones were found (just a few) had been searched a first time, and nothing had been found that first time. It was days later, after another search, that bones were found.
There was only one tooth found in the fire pit.
There was no goo, no residue typical of a human body being burned.

Avery stayed at home that evening, there were calls from the girl friend in prison coming in.

There was no need for anyone to put the body anywhere that very evening, as she was not even officially missing yet.

retro:electro · 29-10-2018 06:32PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

No man your crazy they're deffo totally innocent the Netflix show full of very competent experts said so, and they lady did experiments and everything, free Steven Avery.

You’re in no position to be making jokes when you can’t even get the name of the deceased right

Commanchie · 29-10-2018 06:33PM

retro:electro wrote: »

You’re in no position to be making jokes when you can’t even get the name of the deceased right

Go away you sheep

walshb · 29-10-2018 06:40PM

marklazarcovic wrote: »

How could you possibly know how OTT biased and selective it was as you were watching it? That makes zero sense, you couldn't have known that just watching it unfold, you made your mind up afterwards , something made it change?

Who said I knew it was so biased as I was watching it?

I watched season 1 and read up on the case. The show is very biased from a defense/acquittal point of view.

Tipsy McSwagger · 29-10-2018 06:45PM

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.

Troll? Someone has a different opinion than you and you resort to calling them a troll. There seems to be a gang mentality in this thread where you turn on someone, call them names and then all jerk each other off.

Commanchie · 29-10-2018 06:47PM

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Troll? Someone has a different opinion than you and you resort to calling them a troll. There seems to be a gang mentality in this thread where you turn on someone, call them names and then all jerk each other off.

Jerk each other off? Are we pretending we are from America now with terminology.

enfant terrible · 29-10-2018 06:47PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

There is strong support for these bones being cremated in a barrel rather than in an open air pit. They simply had reached a level of cremation that would be very difficult to achieve without a tank of fuel beside you, in the open air.

The barrel in which bones were found (just a few) had been searched a first time, and nothing had been found that first time. It was days later, after another search, that bones were found.
There was only one tooth found in the fire pit.
There was no goo, no residue typical of a human body being burned.

Why couldn't it be done open air?

Who says there was no goo?

enfant terrible · 29-10-2018 06:49PM

retro:electro wrote: »

You’re in no position to be making jokes when you can’t even get the name of the deceased right

Yes its me who is been disrespectful to the deceased, not the people who think her rapist and murdered is innocent and are defending him.

Tipsy McSwagger · 29-10-2018 06:50PM

Commanchie wrote: »

Jerk each other off? Are we pretending we are from America now with terminology.

A lot of ye have anger issues like Avery

enfant terrible · 29-10-2018 06:57PM

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

A lot of ye have anger issues like Avery

Avery is a good guy, did you not hear the nice music they played when he was talking.

Ignore all this too
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Avery-Activity-Log_Manitowoc.pdf

Commanchie · 29-10-2018 06:57PM

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

A lot of ye have anger issues like Avery

Hahah what how am I angry? I asked why your saying we **** each other off

Mountainsandh · 29-10-2018 07:02PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

Why couldn't it be done open air?

Who says there was no goo?

How about you watch season 2 to get all these fascinating answers ?

Tipsy McSwagger · 29-10-2018 07:06PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

Avery is a good guy, did you not hear the nice music they played when he was talking.

Ignore all this too
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Avery-Activity-Log_Manitowoc.pdf

Jesus even if you think the guy is innocent he still took part in setting a cat on fire for Christ’s sake.

RocketRaccoon · 29-10-2018 07:23PM

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Jesus even if you think the guy is innocent he still took part in setting a cat on fire for Christ’s sake.

Has anyone in this thread said he is a good guy? By all accounts he seems like an awful **** tbh but I strongly believe he is innocent of this crime.

enfant terrible · 29-10-2018 07:24PM

Mountainsandh wrote: »

How about you watch season 2 to get all these fascinating answers ?

DeHaan seems to think the burn only lasted four hours for some reason.

Two witnesses said they saw the fire going strong at 7pm and still going strong at 11pm and "and according to DeHaan himself the bones look exactly like they would if Avery burned them in his pit for more than four hours."

DeHaan also says he's concerned the remains didn't retain their anatomical layout, which could only be achieved by stirring and stoking. This is ridiculous on its face. There were a rake, two hammers, shovel, etc, with charring on them, found next to the burn pit. Of course Avery was stirring and breaking up the remains as they burned. No one anywhere has claimed Avery started the fire and walked away, leaving it to burn undisturbed.

He says multiple times in his affidavit the remains look exactly as they should if Avery had a fire longer than 4 hours and stoked it, so as soon as it's pointed out the fire lasted more than 4 hours and was stoked, he'll be forced to admit of course the burn pit looks like the primary burn site.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/037-Affidavit-of-Dr-DeHaan2.pdf

RocketRaccoon · 29-10-2018 07:25PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

He had already sold five cars and couldn't sell anymore without getting a licence.

Barb when interviewed said she didn't even want to sell the car but he did it anyway and specifically asked for Teresa, I wonder why?

At 8:12 a.m. on Oct. 31, the day Halbach was killed, Kratz says Avery called AutoTrader magazine and asked them to send "that same girl who was here last time."

He also rang using *67 to hide his number, his phone records show he only did this with Teresa number, no other numbers.

"Phone records show three calls from Avery to Teresa's cell phone on Oct. 31," says Kratz. "One at 2:24 [p.m.], and one at 2:35 – both calls Avery uses the *67 feature so Teresa doesn't know it him...both placed before she arrives.

The first two calls, one lasting only seven seconds and the other apparently hung up before it was answered, were placed around 2:30 p.m. used the blocking feature."

"Then one last call at 4:35 p.m., without the *67 feature. Avery first believes he can simply say she never showed up…so tries to establish the alibi call after she's already been there, hence the 4:35 call. She will never answer of course, so he doesn't need the *67 feature for that last call."]

The phone is no longer showing up on the network after 2:41.

The phone pinged a tower not near the Avery yard at 2.41, Bobby Dassey said he left his house at about 2.40/2.45 and her car was still there but he didn't see Teresa. So who had her phone near that tower? Or is Bobby lying about seeing her car on the property?

walshb · 29-10-2018 07:27PM

RocketRaccoon wrote: »

Has anyone in this thread said he is a good guy? By all accounts he seems like an awful **** tbh but I strongly believe he is innocent of this crime.

Just happens to be D unluckiest man in history really...

What are the chances of being innocent of two heinous crimes...

All the evidence and all the circumstances and it all came down to was corruption and framing and coincidence. Adding in also that he is one nasty individual...

What are the chances, eh?

RocketRaccoon · 29-10-2018 07:30PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

DeHaan seems to think the burn only lasted four hours for some reason.

Two witnesses said they saw the fire going strong at 7pm and still going strong at 11pm and "and according to DeHaan himself the bones look exactly like they would if Avery burned them in his pit for more than four hours."

DeHaan also says he's concerned the remains didn't retain their anatomical layout, which could only be achieved by stirring and stoking. This is ridiculous on its face. There were a rake, two hammers, shovel, etc, with charring on them, found next to the burn pit. Of course Avery was stirring and breaking up the remains as they burned. No one anywhere has claimed Avery started the fire and walked away, leaving it to burn undisturbed.

He says multiple times in his affidavit the remains look exactly as they should if Avery had a fire longer than 4 hours and stoked it, so as soon as it's pointed out the fire lasted more than 4 hours and was stoked, he'll be forced to admit of course the burn pit looks like the primary burn site.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/037-Affidavit-of-Dr-DeHaan2.pdf

I can appreciate the effort you are putting in and will actually enjoy discussing this case with you rather than someone like walshb.

While all of that is of course a possibility, would you also agree that someone else could be responsible? Like why were human bones found in the Manitowoc quarry aswell as the Randandt quarry IIRC.

Also, if Steven did rape, shoot and murder Teresa that afternoon/early evening. Why did he then throw her in the boot of her car, drive her around for a bit and then return to burn her? Then remove her car which was spotted by a member of the public, it was called in by Colburn only to then bring it back to his yard and cover it with tarp and branches?

Mountainsandh · 29-10-2018 08:08PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

DeHaan seems to think the burn only lasted four hours for some reason.

Two witnesses said they saw the fire going strong at 7pm and still going strong at 11pm and "and according to DeHaan himself the bones look exactly like they would if Avery burned them in his pit for more than four hours."

DeHaan also says he's concerned the remains didn't retain their anatomical layout, which could only be achieved by stirring and stoking. This is ridiculous on its face. There were a rake, two hammers, shovel, etc, with charring on them, found next to the burn pit. Of course Avery was stirring and breaking up the remains as they burned. No one anywhere has claimed Avery started the fire and walked away, leaving it to burn undisturbed.

He says multiple times in his affidavit the remains look exactly as they should if Avery had a fire longer than 4 hours and stoked it, so as soon as it's pointed out the fire lasted more than 4 hours and was stoked, he'll be forced to admit of course the burn pit looks like the primary burn site.
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/037-Affidavit-of-Dr-DeHaan2.pdf

Quotes from Enfant Terrible's link above :

The fragmentary skeletal remains examined by Dr. Eisenberg constituted only an
estimated fraction (from 40 to 60 percent) of the total mass of expected skeletal remains
from a person of Teresa Halbach's size. (TT: 2/28:226).

From Sgt. Jost's and Wisconsin DOJ Special Agent Sturdivant's
descriptions, it appeared that the remains showed no anatomical relationship to each
other. Some remains were found outside the "burn pit" and no large bones (more
resistant to fire) were visible at all. There was not sufficient pre-excavation
documentation of the condition of the materials in the pit to establish the sequence or
time of deposit of the remains ultimately recovered from the "burn pit". There was no
assessment of fuels associated with the fire, other than describing the remains of the
steel belts and beading of burned vehicle tires.

The process of stoking a fire with additional lumber or
stirring with an implement during its active burning will cause the mechanical
destruction of the bones as they are calcined by the flames and often, considerable
10
displacement. The larger bone masses (hip joints, shoulder blades, base of skull at the
spine) will remain mostly intact even after stoking an extended cremation of an adult
body. The appearance, size, and type of bone fragments documented in Dr. Eisenberg's
forensic anthropology reports and photographs exactly mirror the fragments recovered
after bum-barrel cremations involving frequent stirring and stoking observed by this
author.

It is further my opinion that the body was not burned in the "bum pit". This is based on
the reported lack of anatomical continuity of the remains, the findings of similarly
charred/calcined fragments in bum barrels and other locations on the property, and the
absence of the more massive fragments that normally resist such exposure. I disagree
with Dr. Eisenberg's opinion that the main destruction of the body took place in that
"pit" based merely on the amounts of remains recovered from the pit compared to the
small fragments found elsewhere in two locations

Apologies for all the quotes, there is not much point in my paraphrasing the content of the above, but I do want other posters to be able to judge the value of your above post in contrast with the content of your link.

Tipsy McSwagger · 29-10-2018 08:10PM

retro:electro wrote: »

You literally can’t even answer the most straightforward questions. It’s hilarious.

What’s hilarious is you were on here last year convinced Avery was guilty as sin.

I'm not blinkered at all. I used to think he was innocent. My past posts on this thread will attest to that. I've read up a lot on this case and listened to various podcasts about it and it's my opinion that he did it. I'm not asking anyone to agree with me. I'm just asserting my opinion.

You've made an awful lot of assumptions there and are throwing around insults- "stupid" "ignorant" "plebs", when you know nothing about how I used to actually think he was innocent. Irony.

Maybe people just think differently to you?
Chill out.

You had a lot of people giving you stick but stuck to your guns. Now you are just part of that same group attacking someone who was exactly like you were. I duly await your reply of ‘well I watched the second season and changed my mind’.

retro:electro · 29-10-2018 08:11PM

But I’ve already said I think he did it or was involved? But what’s important is I don’t think he did it in the manner he was accused of doing it. Keep up.

Also, people can change their minds!

My post from earlier today:

You’re acting like most of us here haven’t done a jot of research about this show outside of being spoon fed a documentary. There’s a way to make a point where you don’t come across like a total gobshlte you know.

I’ve already said that my personal opinion leads me to believe that Steven was involved. But my personal opinion matters not when I’m being presented with a version of events that don’t fit and evidence that is suspicious at best.
The way the prosecution state how the murder happened is what leads me to believe he should be acquitted. It simply didn’t happen that way.
Not only that, but it is a matter of fact that Brendan’s confession was coerced and unconstitutional.
If you cannot see that there are serious errors, breaches and professional misconduct here then I suggest it is you who needs to open your eyes and have a second look at what you’re being told.
After all of that and you still believe these two deserve to be in jail well then I just hope you never end up on a jury.

And from a few days ago:

retro:electro wrote: »

I think Kathleen has done an amazing job. She’s exactly who you’d want on your side if you found yourself in their position. She doesn’t have to prove that Steven didn’t do it, just that someone else could have, and that she did.
Having said that, and despite all of her efforts, I’m still not convinced of his innocence. A lot of her theories seem a tad far fetched. My personal belief is that Avery did it, or was certainly involved in some way, and I’ve not yet heard or seen anything to convince me otherwise. However, I do not believe he did it in the manner he was accused of doing it. There is no evident suggesion of rape or murder in either the garage or the bedroom and so I would probably acquit him if I was on the jury.

I’m only really interested in the fight for Brendan. It’s actually scary how far down the legal rabbit hole his case has gone. What seems so straightforward to most of us has been bandied about and appealed and overturned so much that at this stage I’m not sure he has any hope of ever getting early release.

I still have two episodes to go so not finished it all yet. It’s a great addition to season one, kind of ties most things up and explains the court process really well.

I guess you weren’t as thorough in your stalking of my posts as you thought.

walshb · 29-10-2018 08:15PM

retro:electro wrote: »

But I’ve already said I think he did it or was involved? But what’s important is I don’t think he did it in the manner he was accused of doing it. Keep up.

Also, people can change their minds!

Do you think he committed the crime?

You are simply arguing here that the way he did it as regards the prosecution’s presentation is inaccurate, or not fully accurate?

Uncharted · 29-10-2018 08:16PM

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Troll? Someone has a different opinion than you and you resort to calling them a troll. There seems to be a gang mentality in this thread where you turn on someone, call them names and then all jerk each other off.

Username obviously checks out if that's your take on it...

Gang mentality?? I never posted here in my life prior to this evening.

Also, to correct your utter craptalk,i referred to that poster as "trolling" simply because they openly admitted to having formed a full and whole opinion on the latest goings on in the case,despite the fact they hadn't even watched it!!!

retro:electro · 29-10-2018 08:17PM

walshb wrote: »

Do you think he committed the crime?

You are simply arguing here that the way he did it as regards the prosecution’s presentation is inaccurate, or not fully accurate?

Maybe you could answer all I’ve already asked of you before you demand any answers out of me, how’s that?

Mountainsandh · 29-10-2018 08:17PM

walshb wrote: »

Just happens to be D unluckiest man in history really...

What are the chances of being innocent of two heinous crimes...

All the evidence and all the circumstances and it all came down to was corruption and framing and coincidence. Adding in also that he is one nasty individual...

What are the chances, eh?

Of course the little matter of compensation for 18 years lost in jail after a crooked investigation, trial, and wrongful conviction may have been an incentive for framing and more corruption to move him out of the way.

Just sayin'.

Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

Comments