Steven Avery (making a murderer) Guilty or innocent?

Hammer89 · 14-02-2016 03:36AM

MadDog76 wrote: »

The man looked gutted when the Verdict was read out, he was in total shock and looked like he was going to vomit .

Maybe he remembered that he murdered an innocent 25-year-old woman and set her corpse on fire.

MadDog76 wrote: »

In short, you're wrong in your assessment of his reaction,simple as that really.

That's a paradox. If it's my assessment, then it can't be wrong and it can't be right because there is no right or wrong answer here - it's a f*cking opinion.

Can you prove I'm wrong? This is the part you tell me to prove my opinion about his reaction to the verdict. Then I remind you for the second time that it's an opinion, written in a thread created to discuss whether he's innocent or guilty.

tupenny · 14-02-2016 03:44AM

Brendan really shouldn't be locked up. It's upsetting that he is
Avery I don't know.. While I think he was wrongly convicted I wouldn't like to be alone with him... undecided I suppose

MadDog76 · 14-02-2016 04:44AM

Hammer89 wrote: »

Maybe he remembered that he murdered an innocent 25-year-old woman and set her corpse on fire.

That's a paradox. If it's my assessment, then it can't be wrong and it can't be right because there is no right or wrong answer here - it's a f*cking opinion.

Can you prove I'm wrong? This is the part you tell me to prove my opinion about his reaction to the verdict. Then I remind you for the second time that it's an opinion, written in a thread created to discuss whether he's innocent or guilty.

You're offering your assessment of actual video footage ........ and the footage clearly shows he was shocked, surprised and upset by the Verdict ........ therefore, you are wrong.

smash · 14-02-2016 09:08AM

There's just too much doubt to point towards a guilty verdict. For those who believe he's guilty, I'd love to hear what the piece of evidence was that lead you to the conclusion of having no reasonable doubt.

The Raptor · 14-02-2016 10:05AM

MadDog76 wrote: »

He seems upset and disappointed to me ...........

That video

How was he not guilty of mutilating a corpse but Brendan was?

letsseehere14 · 14-02-2016 10:25AM

JustTheOne wrote:

Just seen evidence of him blocking his number calling Theresa earlier in the day then unblocking it 5 hours later.

JustTheOne wrote:

Why?

Perhaps he had his phone on private for a while calling someone else whom he didn't want to give his number to. Then called her a few times, realised he still had it on private so turned it off and called again. A totally made up reason by me but just showing how a simple reason can be given for anything.
Why have his phone on private when the photo visit had be confirmed. Why murder a woman when everyone around him knew shed be there at that time thus not giving yourself an alibi.
Why keep the RAV4 on site. Why partially dispose of the body yards from his front door. Why invite his nephew to join not knowing if he would or wouldn't. Why clean up all blood splatter and dna from the garage but leave the bullet on the floor. Why clean up and dna in the bedroom but leave the key in full sight. Why clean the key of her dna but leave his own on it. Why transfer some of her bones to a third burn pit miles away. Why clean the RAV4 of his fingerprints but leave his blood there.
The sequence, explanations given, motive, and execution of what was put forward as happening just makes no sense whatsoever.

c montgomery · 14-02-2016 10:28AM

Guilty as sin

14-02-2016 10:42AM

letsseehere14 wrote: »

Perhaps he had his phone on private for a while calling someone else whom he didn't want to give his number to. Then called her a few times, realised he still had it on private so turned it off and called again. A totally made up reason by me but just showing how a simple reason can be given for anything.
Why have his phone on private when the photo visit had be confirmed. Why murder a woman when everyone around him knew shed be there at that time thus not giving yourself an alibi.

Pretty sure in America, you dial something like *67 before dialing, so I doubt it was accidental.

Still think there's way too much doubt, and yet to see any of the 'more informed' posters on here give me any reason to think otherwise.

The Raptor · 14-02-2016 10:42AM

I've seen a video on YouTube.

Well not a video, but a recording of Brendan Dassey's interview from November 6 2005. So a day after they found Teresa's car on the Avery property.

In it they said Teresa had more people/pictures to meet after Steven Avery but she never made it. I thought Steven Avery was the last stop of her day?

If she did have another stop on that day, why did they not interview that person, would they not also be a suspect?

Hammer89 · 14-02-2016 11:33AM

MadDog76 wrote: »

You're offering your assessment of actual video footage ........ and the footage clearly shows he was shocked, surprised and upset by the Verdict ........ therefore, you are wrong.

You literally rival Brendan Dassey in the IQ stakes. I suspect even he knows the difference between opinion and fact at this point.

MadDog76 · 14-02-2016 12:49PM

Hammer89 wrote: »

You literally rival Brendan Dassey in the IQ stakes. I suspect even he knows the difference between opinion and fact at this point.

Try being informed instead of just being opinionated ..........

Azalea · 14-02-2016 01:34PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Guilty....... as sin!

Je suis Mario wrote: »

Guilty.

c montgomery wrote: »

Guilty as sin

These posts are class. The fact they just swoop in with one to three words and that's it, is a strong indication of them having nothing much to back their view up.

smash · 14-02-2016 01:40PM

There have been plenty of posts online regarding the hidden number. A logical explanation is that he wanted to rearrange the photo shoot and couldn't get in touch with her so hid his number to see if she'd answer from an unknown number.

The reason to rearrange it was because he had a time set up to suit his day as he had plans to collect Jodie from jail. Strangely Jodie wasn't allowed out that day even though it had been organised in advance. It still hasn't been made public as to who denied the access but it leads in to the whole set up. Without the appointment to collect Jodie, his day was now free so maybe he wanted to get a better time for the photos.

DEFTLEFTHAND · 14-02-2016 02:17PM

Has anyone ever watched the 'Paradise Lost', West Memphis three documentaries?

From studying the case and trial transcripts I'm convinced that they did do it. It was utterly shocking to discover how much evidence was omitted from those biased documentary films.

The Assistinator · 14-02-2016 03:13PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Has anyone ever watched the 'Paradise Lost', West Memphis three documentaries?

From studying the case and trial transcripts I'm convinced that they did do it. It was utterly shocking to discover how much evidence was omitted from those biased documentary films.

Coming from someone here that has not studied the case apart from what was in the documentary would by any chance the bed posts that she was tied too not have any kinda marks on it be it burn marks from the ropes I presume she would have put up a struggle, I do believe on Brendan's statement he said her legs were tied in chains surely they would have left some kind of scrapping.
It's the one thing that keeps sticking in my mind but I don't believe any of this was explained anywhere.

MadDog76 · 14-02-2016 03:38PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Has anyone ever watched the 'Paradise Lost', West Memphis three documentaries?

From studying the case and trial transcripts I'm convinced that they did do it. It was utterly shocking to discover how much evidence was omitted from those biased documentary films.

I always thought that Terry Hobbs was a strong suspect in that case.

Hammer89 · 14-02-2016 04:25PM

MadDog76 wrote: »

I always thought that Terry Hobbs was a strong suspect in that case.

He wasn't.

I've no idea who Terry Hobbs is or what case you're on about - I just want to show you how annoying it is for someone to not disagree with your opinion, but say definitively that it's false

MadDog76 · 14-02-2016 04:43PM

Hammer89 wrote: »

He wasn't.

I've no idea who Terry Hobbs is or what case you're on about - I just want to show you how annoying it is for someone to not disagree with your opinion, but say definitively that it's false

I believe Trolling is against the Rules here on Boards ..........

KERSPLAT! · 14-02-2016 04:49PM

MadDog76 wrote: »

I believe Trolling is against the Rules here on Boards ..........

Mod

So is calling someone a troll.

Give it over lads.

R P McMurphy · 14-02-2016 05:04PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Has anyone ever watched the 'Paradise Lost', West Memphis three documentaries?

From studying the case and trial transcripts I'm convinced that they did do it. It was utterly shocking to discover how much evidence was omitted from those biased documentary films.

What evidence in their case pointed to their guilt? The only evidence was an extremely dodgy confession from Jessie. There was nothing else. He even had a cast iron alibi that proved his confession was rubbish

The_Valeyard · 14-02-2016 05:04PM

KERSPLAT! wrote: »

Mod

So is calling someone a troll.

Give it over lads.

I declare shenanigans!!

m1ck007 · 14-02-2016 06:38PM

How many allibis did avery have? 14 or sumtin?

8-10 · 14-02-2016 07:03PM

R P McMurphy wrote: »

What evidence in their case pointed to their guilt? The only evidence was an extremely dodgy confession from Jessie. There was nothing else. He even had a cast iron alibi that proved his confession was rubbish

Not everybody has seen this documentary. I prefer no spoilers when I watch true story documentaries so can I ask that we put spoiler tags for discussing Paradise Lost/West of Memphis?

Hannibelle Smeeeth · 14-02-2016 07:10PM

I keep meaning to watch the brother's interview. If theres anyone going to unveil everything hidden from the documentary I'd think he'd be the one to spill the beans.

Going on the documentary alone, youd have to say innocent. How could he possibly have cleaned up all the blood??

Stigura · 14-02-2016 08:44PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

It was utterly shocking to discover how much evidence was omitted from those biased documentary films.

This is why I gave up after the first episode of the subject programme.

Don't highlight a single sentence out of, potentially, a thick wad of typed material. Expecting me to accept your slant on the whole.

I've probably said, " I'd kill him. " at some point in the last month. Now type up every word I've uttered, in the past month. High light that, without any context. I'm homicidal. Bollocks.

These programmes show us what the makers want us to see / hear. They simply ,omit what doesn't fit their agenda.

Oh; And I have Avery blood. Still can't be arsed to watch it.

MadDog76 · 14-02-2016 10:13PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Has anyone ever watched the 'Paradise Lost', West Memphis three documentaries?

From studying the case and trial transcripts I'm convinced that they did do it. It was utterly shocking to discover how much evidence was omitted from those biased documentary films.

Stigura wrote: »

This is why I gave up after the first episode of the subject programme.

Don't highlight a single sentence out of, potentially, a thick wad of typed material. Expecting me to accept your slant on the whole.

I've probably said, " I'd kill him. " at some point in the last month. Now type up every word I've uttered, in the past month. High light that, without any context. I'm homicidal. Bollocks.

These programmes show us what the makers want us to see / hear. They simply ,omit what doesn't fit their agenda.

Oh; And I have Avery blood. Still can't be arsed to watch it.

DEFTLEFTHAND was referring to the Paradise Lost movies, you're talking about Making Of A Murderer .......... the thing about Making Of A Murderer (and the Paradise Lost movies in fact) is that it was such a powerful documentary that it compelled viewers to go do their own research into the case after watching it so any perceived (or actual) bias can be quickly discovered.

I looked deeper into both cases after viewing these documentaries and, in my opinion, the film-makers got it spot on ......... there's always going to be stuff left out of any documentary film due to running time constraints but all the relevant, and factual, stuff is still present ......... just because one aspect of a case is missing from a documentary it doesn't render what is left in the documentary untrue.

Stigura · 14-02-2016 11:47PM

MD756; I was aware of what Deft' was referring to. My own point / issue is pretty general. I tend to grow disinterested the moment productions feed us sound bites out what would clearly be Lots of material. Once that starts, I lapse into disinterested receptor mode. It's just entertainment, to be viewed passively.

Like I said; I baled out after the first episode. I couldn't be bothered. So, someone killed someone - or didn't? Wake up tomorrow and a load more people will have been at it. Life goes on ~ ironically. I'm not going to trawl the court records of every case out there.

This is not, for a moment, to try to detract from the very evident grip this cases presentation has on the public imagination.

I read an American forum, where a thread went stratospheric. I even had a friend, on an Irish forum, PM me. Wide eyed and breathless. " Stigura! You simply Must watch this! Watch it till the end!!! It's totally compelling! "

I think I'd already watched the first - my last - episode by then. Naah. I have more compelling stuff to do. " MAM " just didn't catch me. Nor did " Eastenders ".

Enjoy in peace

MadDog76 · 14-02-2016 11:58PM

Stigura wrote: »

MD756; I was aware of what Deft' was referring to. My own point / issue is pretty general. I tend to grow disinterested the moment productions feed us sound bites out what would clearly be Lots of material. Once that starts, I lapse into disinterested receptor mode. It's just entertainment, to be viewed passively.

Like I said; I baled out after the first episode. I couldn't be bothered. So, someone killed someone - or didn't? Wake up tomorrow and a load more people will have been at it. Life goes on ~ ironically. I'm not going to trawl the court records of every case out there.

This is not, for a moment, to try to detract from the very evident grip this cases presentation has on the public imagination.

I read an American forum, where a thread went stratospheric. I even had a friend, on an Irish forum, PM me. Wide eyed and breathless. " Stigura! You simply Must watch this! Watch it till the end!!! It's totally compelling! "

I think I'd already watched the first - my last - episode by then. Naah. I have more compelling stuff to do. " MAM " just didn't catch me. Nor did " Eastenders ".

Enjoy in peace

So .......... why bother with this thread then?
I don't watch EastEnders either ........ I wouldn't even consider reading a thread about EastEnders never-mind actually posting on it.

I'm genuinely confused.

Stigura · 15-02-2016 12:23AM

MadDog76 wrote: »

So .......... why bother with this thread then?

I see you've already been advised to " Get over it " once?

You crack on then. MAM. Eastenders. Your personal line. There's a common denominator

Bye, bye

MadDog76 · 15-02-2016 12:40AM

Stigura wrote: »

I see you've already been advised to " Get over it " once?

You crack on then. MAM. Eastenders. Your personal line. There's a common denominator

Bye, bye

Huh?

Steven Avery (making a murderer) Guilty or innocent?

Comments