Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

hardCopy · 14-01-2016 01:07PM

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

2. Avery targeted Teresa. On Oct 31 (8:12 am) he called AutoTrader magazine and asked them to send “that same girl who was here last time.” On Oct 10, Teresa had been to the Avery property when Steve answered the door just wearing a towel. She said she would not go back because she was scared of him (obviously). Avery used a fake name and fake # (his sister’s) giving those to the AutoTrader receptionist, to trick Teresa into coming.

This to me is massive and somehow left out of the documentary.

I don't really get the fake name and number thing. If he rang up and gave his sister's name it would be clear he was a male on the phone.

How could he ask for the girl who came out last time if he didn't tell them who and where he was?

Dodge · 14-01-2016 01:23PM

hardCopy wrote: »

I don't really get the fake name and number thing. If he rang up and gave his sister's name it would be clear he was a male on the phone.

How could he ask for the girl who came out last time if he didn't tell them who and where he was?

Not to mention the address was the same and she'd have known this (and it as his sister's car to sell)

retro:electro · 14-01-2016 01:24PM

Teresa knew well where she was going, she went to Avery's house on Avery lane. It doesn't get more obvious than that. If she was truly fearful or thought he was weird she would have declined to go or brought someone with her. It makes no sense, and as Judge Judy says "if it don't make sense it ain't true".

MillField · 14-01-2016 01:28PM

anna080 wrote: »

Teresa knew well where she was going, she went to Avery's house on Avery lane. It doesn't get more obvious than that. If she was truly fearful or thought he was weird she would have declined to go or brought someone with her. It makes no sense, and as Judge Judy says "if it don't make sense it ain't true".

Good point.

Heat_Wave · 14-01-2016 02:27PM

Did they ever get an answer as to why there was a hole in the test tube of Steven Avery's blood?

Also, the cop that called out Teresa's reg plate two days before she was murdered... The look of shock on his face when that was played in court. He couldn't even come up with a solid reason.

All fingers are pointing at Avery and I agree, he is an obvious suspect. But bizarre incidents like the two above make me seriously wonder.

I hope someday we will find out the truth. It is so exciting!

Joeface · 14-01-2016 02:30PM

Heat_Wave wrote: »

Did they ever get an answer as to why there was a hole in the test tube of Steven Avery's blood?

Also, the cop that called out Teresa's reg plate two days before she was murdered... The look of shock on his face when that was played in court. He couldn't even come up with a solid reason.

All fingers are pointing at Avery and I agree, he is an obvious suspect. But bizarre incidents like the two above make me seriously wonder.

I hope someday we will find out the truth. It is so exciting!

worse still for him (my own repost )
"Colborn testified that he "roughly" shook the bookend table when the key fell out, yet if you look at the photo, there is a remote and some paper sitting on top and things sitting neatly inside. https://imgur.com/a/vgV9B"

timmy880 · 14-01-2016 02:40PM

The whole fake name and number thing makes no sense. She left a voicemail on the machine saying what time she was coming and seemed to know well it was Steven Avery's place? But the fact that he rang autotrader and asked for her specifically (have autotrader confirmed this at anytime?) should have been included somewhere in a 10 hour documentary of the case.

Dodge · 14-01-2016 02:45PM

FWIW I think he probably did do it, but he was fairly obviously framed by the cops.

Drumpot · 14-01-2016 02:47PM

If it was one of his family that framed Stepehen:

If we focus on the whole "Stephen was harassing her and making sure it was her who was coming to the yard", is there a chance that it was Scott making phonecalls (knowing she has been to yard before) to create suspicious looking behavior? Particularly hanging up and private number, are they sure it was Stephen or were they more suspicious it was him?

Was Stephen "quick" to be very open and allow cops search his yard? If so, its kinda weird that he stashed the car and bones in his own yard, yet was happy to let the police in essence find it.

Also, I think back of when the cop (Colbyrne?) basically saw the victims car (called it in) before it was officially found. I originally thought Colbyrne knew where the car was and moved it. But I saw a very believable theory was that he found it when illegally searching the Avery yard, then we have the search party honing in on that specific spot and finding the car very quickly. In essence, I think it would not of been admissible as evidence if it had been found illegally without a search warrant or permission.

This would make it less likely the cops planted the car as evidence. The more I think of it, the more I think the cops made a complete balls of attaining evidence in this case. Their credibility is so low, its difficult to give them the benefit of the doubt in any scenario.

I still don't know if Stephen did or didn't do it. If he did it, he is thick (believable) to leave the evidence he did. But then, how did he cleanup evidence of the actual killing ? (no reliable physical evidence linking him with murder and no blood splatter from gunshots anywhere!). Its a contradictory stance that I cant figure out.

Joeface · 14-01-2016 03:09PM

Drumpot wrote: »

Also, I think back of when the cop (Colbyrne?) basically saw the victims car (called it in) before it was officially found. I originally thought Colbyrne knew where the car was and moved it. But I saw a very believable theory was that he found it when illegally searching the Avery yard, then we have the search party honing in on that specific spot and finding the car very quickly. In essence, I think it would not of been admissible as evidence if it had been found illegally without a search warrant or permission.

only issue with that is Colburn Called in the reg plate , but when the car was found , the Reg plate was not on it. Avery was not on the plot when the car was found. how did he remove the plates between Colburn call and the car discovery

So where did he get them when he called in.

Ageyev · 14-01-2016 03:10PM

Stevens ex-fiance interview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTz673OMTF0

ricero · 14-01-2016 03:29PM

Ageyev wrote: »

Stevens ex-fiance interview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTz673OMTF0

Shes a spoofer bill.

Drumpot · 14-01-2016 03:29PM

Joeface wrote: »

only issue with that is Colburn Called in the reg plate , but when the car was found , the Reg plate was not on it. Avery was not on the plot when the car was found. how did he remove the plates between Colburn call and the car discovery

So where did he get them when he called in.

Yeh good point.

So what theory do you have for colourn calling in the car like that? It sounded like he was looking directly at the car the way he spoke!

Tipsy McSwagger · 14-01-2016 03:41PM

Dodge wrote: »

FWIW I think he probably did do it, but he was fairly obviously framed by the cops.

So do I but not sure about Dassey. What i will say is that the Monitowoc police should never have been allowed anywhere near this case and I wouldn't be surprised if they planted evidence or tampered with something.

Joeface · 14-01-2016 04:00PM

Drumpot wrote: »

Yeh good point.

So what theory do you have for colourn calling in the car like that? It sounded like he was looking directly at the car the way he spoke!

No theory , I was going with he did an illegal search but I ruled my own theory out when I saw no plates on the vehicle .

Unless he actually found the Vehicle near the quarry burn site, She was already dead and burned at this stage . Once he confirm the car they put it on site to make sure they got Avery ...as they believe it was him from the get go.

The more one looks at this the more holes in stories appear on both sides.

Why does Avery just request her,. Why did Lenk go at the blood sample.
Why does Avery call her after she has let , Why did the Brother and or X delete messages form the Answering service.

Only real conclusion I have been left with is the case was investigated and prosecuted by amateurs . If Avery is guilt and given the police force history with him it would be in their own interest to dot ever i from the word go.
Instead the break every rule for evidence you can think off . in the end they have just played into the defense .

A re-trial is required. with out of state Juror's or Judges

A number of police officers need to be investiaged on professional grounds and then maybe criminal (Lenk & Colburn oh and the sheriff)

Len needs to be dis barred ( i have said the too many times now . Boards doesn't work )

Michael O' Kelly should have his license removed and Charge with something ...anything.

How is it Ok to have the Judge who sat the trail rule on whether or not a re trial is required . Its checking your own work . That's also bollox.

Avery probably did it in the end . Cops will make him innocent.

Drumpot · 14-01-2016 04:04PM

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

So do I but not sure about Dassey. What i will say is that the Monitowoc police should never have been allowed anywhere near this case and I wouldn't be surprised if they planted evidence or tampered with something.

The Manitowoc policy shouldn't be allowed near any case.

Not only can they not be trusted to competently gather evidence for a case, they cant even frame somebody in a competent manner. .

paddy no 11 · 14-01-2016 04:21PM

The judgement is totally unsafe, whether guilty or not the police planted evidence and the crucial testimony from a minor was attained without a lawyer present.

Apparently Avery is some forensics genius whe cleaned the whole place down to remove blood and other forensic evidence but neglected to leave her bones, car and car keys at his house, seriously?

Drumpot · 14-01-2016 04:22PM

paddy no 11 wrote: »

The judgement is totally unsafe, whether guilty or not the police planted evidence and the crucial testimony from a minor was attained without a lawyer present.

Apparently Avery is some forensics genius whe cleaned the whole place down to remove blood and other forensic evidence but neglected to leave her bones, car and car keys at his house, seriously?

And the most relevant physical evidence (blood) was contaminated by the police themselves!

8-10 · 14-01-2016 05:26PM

Heat_Wave wrote: »

Did they ever get an answer as to why there was a hole in the test tube of Steven Avery's blood?

Yes it's standard procedure according to people who work with blood vials. You basically have to puncture the top of it to insert the blood, it's the only way of inserting it without exposure to the air. The vial is vacuumed so it won't spill out the hole. So it is likely that the hole was made in 1985 when blood was first collected and inserted into the tube as evidence.

Still doesn't mean that somebody couldn't use the same hole later to extract from the vial, but the presence of the hole is not suspicious although the documentary kinda made it seem like that. The broken seal on the box certainly looks suspicious though!

weldoninhio · 14-01-2016 06:38PM

[Deleted User] wrote: »

All those words in bold are aimed to paint Avery in a certain light.
On the other side of it he was actually selling his sisters car and was selling it at the same address, surely Theresa knew the address and wasn't "tricked" into going.

The address was Avery Road. I doubt she was that scared.

Flint Fredstone · 14-01-2016 07:20PM

Brendan's brother has a song :pac:

https://m.soundcloud.com/braddasseymusic/brad-dassey-they-didnt-do-it

enfant terrible · 14-01-2016 09:02PM

paddy no 11 wrote: »

The judgement is totally unsafe, whether guilty or not the police planted evidence and the crucial testimony from a minor was attained without a lawyer present.

Apparently Avery is some forensics genius whe cleaned the whole place down to remove blood and other forensic evidence but neglected to leave her bones, car and car keys at his house, seriously?

What do you know about how much forensic evidence should be where?

Do you watch a lot of CSI?

So you think someone sneaked in and spread her bones around Avery's bonfire?

Probably Link or Fassbender, they seem to be the bad guys going from the documentary.

paddy no 11 · 14-01-2016 09:48PM

enfant terrible wrote: »

What do you know about how much forensic evidence should be where?

Do you watch a lot of CSI?

So you think someone sneaked in and spread her bones around Avery's bonfire?

Probably Link or Fassbender, they seem to be the bad guys going from the documentary.

According to the prosecution there should be blood everywhere, there isn't

bryangiggsy · 14-01-2016 11:48PM

After reading this I believe Avery is guilty as charged !!

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

Lorne Malvo · 15-01-2016 12:03AM

This documentary is definitely biased towards the defendant.

retro:electro · 15-01-2016 12:11AM

bryangiggsy wrote: »

After reading this I believe Avery is guilty as charged !!

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies_and_tv/is-steven-avery-guilty-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php

This thread has been over all of those specifics a million times. Read back and enlighten yourself.

we'llallhavetea · 15-01-2016 12:53AM

ive answered the door in a towel... I am capable of murder!

honestly don't know if steven is guilty or not, I feel the documentary is obviously biased so I cant base an opinion from it. I do think Jodi seems to be full of horse ****e though! would've loved to have been on the jury though!

cowboyBuilder · 15-01-2016 01:03AM

My God, just finished episode 4 .... amazing addictive stuff ...

Lingua Franca · 15-01-2016 01:53AM

runningbuddy wrote: »

One thing struck me. When the judge was sentencing Avery, he mentioned (and I'm paraphrasing here) that Avery's crimes had escalated over the years. The only crimes I'm aware of are, the horrific cat incident and pulling a gun on some woman prior to his wrongful rape conviction. Am I missing something??

Just the 20 years of him not committing crimes while he was falsely imprisoned and while he was out being feted by the bigwigs as someone who'd been wronged.

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

2. Avery targeted Teresa. On Oct 31 (8:12 am) he called AutoTrader magazine and asked them to send “that same girl who was here last time.” On Oct 10, Teresa had been to the Avery property when Steve answered the door just wearing a towel. She said she would not go back because she was scared of him (obviously). Avery used a fake name and fake # (his sister’s) giving those to the AutoTrader receptionist, to trick Teresa into coming.

This to me is massive and somehow left out of the documentary.

That "evidence" came directly from Kratz. If you're cool with Kratz then you'll take his insinuations on board. Very damning. Especially that they left it out of the documentary when it was provided in court, right?

Manitowoc County Circuit Judge Patrick Willis would not allow Dawn Pliszka, an Auto Trader receptionist at the time, to testify about one of Halbach’s previous encounters with Avery.

“She had stated to me that he had come out in a towel,’’ Pliszka said while the jury was outside of the courtroom. “I just said, ‘Really?’ and then she said, ‘Yeah,’ and laughed and said kinda ‘Ew.’’’

Willis said he could not allow the testimony because the date wasn’t clear and few details were known about the alleged encounter.

But Pliszka did testify before the jury that Avery called her on Oct. 31, 2005, to request the photographer who had been out to the property previously. Schuster said she talked to Halbach by phone around 11 a.m. that day to tell her of the appointment at the Avery property.

Yeah, massive.

Ageyev · 15-01-2016 02:15AM

8-10 wrote: »

Yes it's standard procedure according to people who work with blood vials. You basically have to puncture the top of it to insert the blood, it's the only way of inserting it without exposure to the air. The vial is vacuumed so it won't spill out the hole. So it is likely that the hole was made in 1985 when blood was first collected and inserted into the tube as evidence.

Still doesn't mean that somebody couldn't use the same hole later to extract from the vial, but the presence of the hole is not suspicious although the documentary kinda made it seem like that. The broken seal on the box certainly looks suspicious though!

I've been having blood taken for testing for most of my life over the course of two decades. Never seen any phlebotomist pierce a vial with a needle like you suggest.

Note also: the box was opened, the evidence seal broken and Scotch tape applied.

Making A Murderer [Netflix - Documentary Series]

Comments