826 users online (107 members and 719 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 4 of 28 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 413
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by SCHMAE View Post
    If a family member ' had the key' how did they get it ? If a family member gave LE the key, then LE could have just said family member gave us the key and not ' plant it' in his room.

    ETA Now that you mention it, I guess the key could have been ' planted' by a family member and not Lenk! I'm fairly convinced someone on the property is involved in the murder and his family probably could come in and out anytime during all the time the searches were going on . SA's out at work and a brother or bil slips in to use the bathroom, drops the key and walks away.

    I'm not saying that the family member got it from the crime scene. I'm just talking about a very normal situation of how the key is not in the car, and law enforcement could have had access to the key, and then plant it while never having entered the vehicle.


    I say this because I myself have been in possession of family and friend's valet keys in the past or a secondary key when borrowing a car or when me being able to access the vehicle in a given time period is important. That's kind of what the valet key is for. It's not JUST used for valet.

    In some cases I've even used a valet key when I lost my regular key. I typically don't keep my valet key in the car, even though it's the intended usage -- to give it to a valet. I keep it out and in my home as a way of me getting into my car if I locked myself out.


    So, if a family member had that valet key for a similar purpose, and they felt avery was guilty, would they have a problem with law enforcement using it to plant evidence ?

    If they convinced themselves that the ends justify the means ?

    that's all. I personally don't think this happened. But do I see the emotions, motivation, and means that could lead to something like this happening. Sure.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Texas USA
    Posts
    12,825
    Quote Originally Posted by MaxManning View Post
    I'm not saying that the family member got it from the crime scene. I'm just talking about a very normal situation of how the key is not in the car, and law enforcement could have had access to the key, and then plant it while never having entered the vehicle.


    I say this because I myself have been in possession of family and friend's valet keys in the past or a secondary key when borrowing a car or when me being able to access the vehicle in a given time period is important. That's kind of what the valet key is for. It's not JUST used for valet.

    In some cases I've even used a valet key when I lost my regular key. I typically don't keep my valet key in the car, even though it's the intended usage -- to give it to a valet. I keep it out and in my home as a way of me getting into my car if I locked myself out.


    So, if a family member had that valet key for a similar purpose, and they felt avery was guilty, would they have a problem with law enforcement using it to plant evidence ?

    If they convinced themselves that the ends justify the means ?

    that's all. I personally don't think this happened. But do I see the emotions, motivation, and means that could lead to something like this happening. Sure.
    Oh , I'm sorry. You meant what if Teresa's family had given the key to LE , not one of Avery's family!

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    Saying they "could have" gotten her spare valet key (which just so happened to have the exact same fob on it that her sister testified she gave to her months before, and that TH used all the time) does not tell us how they got it, who they got it from, or when, or where. There needs to be some evidence to point to beyond "well they could'a").
    Quote Originally Posted by GigiG View Post
    Please, let's remember, the burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.
    In general, yes the burden of proof is on the prosecution.

    However, IMO when accusing someone of framing you, the burden is not on the accused to disprove it (that's basically impossible), but rather the accuser to present some compelling evidence they've been framed (if they want the accusation to be taken seriously). (Can a lawyer weigh in on this?)

    Avery's defense presented some evidence that points to the possibility that Avery could have been framed, but IMO it wasn't very compelling and never amounted to more than that, and it seems like it wasn't compelling enough for the jury either.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuther87 View Post
    Avery's defense presented some evidence that points to the possibility that Avery could have been framed, but IMO it wasn't very compelling and never amounted to more than that, and it seems like it wasn't compelling enough for the jury either.
    They were very restricted in what they could say in the courtroom regarding other possible leads.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Tawny View Post
    They were very restricted in what they could say in the courtroom regarding other possible leads.
    This is based on law and it's for a good reason. They could've said other stuff regarding other possible leads if they could've at least presented a motive for anyone else, and they couldn't.

    What evidence did the defense actually have that they weren't able to present in the courtroom? Or are you just saying they would have been accusing other people of possibly doing it and basically slandering their name without that person being able to defend themself?

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by missy1974 View Post
    http://fox6now.com/2016/01/07/march-...ert-testifies/
    this is a video that shows testimony about the the key not being dusted for fingerprints.
    Regarding not testing for prints on the key, here's a reason for that:

    Ten years ago the methods they used of dusting for prints could destroy DNA evidence, so if an item was small it was typical to choose between dusting for prints or testing for DNA, but not trying to do both since they didn't want to dust for prints, find nothing, and then discover that that had destroyed the trace amounts of DNA: http://search.proquest.com/openview/...gsite=gscholar
    https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...of_mam/cyu09uc

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuther87 View Post
    This is based on law and it's for a good reason. They could've said other stuff regarding other possible leads if they could've at least presented a motive for anyone else, and they couldn't.

    What evidence did the defense actually have that they weren't able to present in the courtroom? Or are you just saying they would have been accusing other people of possibly doing it and basically slandering their name without that person being able to defend themself?
    How would I know the answer to this?

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuther87 View Post
    This is based on law and it's for a good reason. They could've said other stuff regarding other possible leads if they could've at least presented a motive for anyone else, and they couldn't.

    What evidence did the defense actually have that they weren't able to present in the courtroom? Or are you just saying they would have been accusing other people of possibly doing it and basically slandering their name without that person being able to defend themself?
    Is it slandering the good name of Earl Avery to understand why he was driving a golf cart around shooting at rabbits with a rifle, and that golf cart ended up having a cadaver dog hit on it ?

    I'm open to hearing why they excluded him, but certainly this is worth looking into and investigating.

    I don't doubt there could be good reason. But if LE doesn't investigate. How exactly would there ever be evidence worthy of being accepted ?

    If LE has reason to not want to investigate, is it crazy to think that the motive would be that they don't want that evidence because it doesn't support their narrative ? Or even implicates them in not following up on a logical lead.

    That's my question in all this. Is law enforcement and the system above all reproach as to what a logical lead is? A lead that might reasonably result in evidence to support a different suspect.

    We see a glowing example in the rape conviction of how LE was able to exclude the guy who we now know factually raped her, even though OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT told them they believed it was this guy.

    If that wasn't fact. I likely would have a bit more faith in the system and the people investigating this case. ya know ?

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    We don't know how much others were or weren't investigated; to claim we do is foolish. We do know people from Avery's salvage yard were at least interviewed and had their DNA taken early on.

    We also know Brendan Dassey was eventually charged because of further investigation into other leads.

    Is it slandering the good name of Earl Avery to understand why he was driving a golf cart around shooting at rabbits with a rifle, and that golf cart ended up having a cadaver dog hit on it ?
    I'm pretty sure the defense would have been allowed to state Earl Avery "was driving a golf cart around shooting at rabbits with a rifle, and that golf cart ended up having a cadaver dog hit on it" if that was a fact (they may have even done so).

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuther87 View Post
    We also know Brendan Dassey was eventually charged also because of further investigation.
    RSBM

    Are you comfortable with Dassey's interviews?


  11. #56
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Tawny View Post
    RSBM

    Are you comfortable with Dassey's interviews?
    Not entirely, but that's not what we're discussing here.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuther87 View Post
    Not entirely, but that's not what we're discussing here.
    True. We're discussing the key being planted or not, so Dassey is a moot point.

  13. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,942
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuther87 View Post
    Regarding not testing for prints on the key, here's a reason for that:



    https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...of_mam/cyu09uc
    Thanks, that would make sense.... I clicked the link within that link and I can't read the document without an account. I wonder if this issue of if you test for one you can't test for the other was brought up at the trial. I really hope someone gets those transcripts online... soon LOL

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by Sleuther87 View Post
    We don't know how much others were or weren't investigated; to claim we do is foolish. We do know people from Avery's salvage yard were at least interviewed and had their DNA taken early on.

    We also know Brendan Dassey was eventually charged because of further investigation into other leads.



    I'm pretty sure the defense would have been allowed to state Earl Avery "was driving a golf cart around shooting at rabbits with a rifle, and that golf cart ended up having a cadaver dog hit on it" if that was a fact (they may have even done so).
    No one is claiming that they weren't investigated. But is it foolish to claim that they were, without any record of those interviews ?

    Again, the previous rape conviction was done by excluding a guy who they had not investigated, yet other law enforcement had significant reason to believe he was the guy -- and ultimately was proven to be the guy.


    Yet for some reason, you seem to think it's foolish for us to assume that it might be the case again, that they have either obtained information or not even looked for information about this current case that might link to other suspects.

    Is that accurate ? don't want to put words in your mouth.

    But it sounds like you are saying that it would have been foolish for us to claim that there wasn't a proper investigation in the rape conviction, just because we had no idea -- because they excluded any record of knowledge that they factually had. They chose not to put this guy in the lineup.

    So not clear on why it's foolish to claim they might do the EXACT SAME THING!

    ok, please explain to me , why I should not question that they'd do the same thing again ?
    Last edited by MaxManning; 01-11-2016 at 01:50 PM.

  15. #60
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,942
    now that I have figured out how to post a picture.... lol
    key.jpg

    Colborn testified: "Well, I'll be the first to admit I handled it rather roughly, twisting it, shaking it, pulling it."

    Is it logical that everything on that bookcase (what they call it lol I would call it a night table/end table) would still be there the way it is? a piece of paper.... a remote... the stuff on the bottom didn't fall out while he was twisting/shaking/pulling?

Page 4 of 28 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 14 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. For Those Who Do Not Think Avery was Framed & Evidence Planted - Discuss
    By Madeleine74 in forum Netflix Series: Making A Murderer
    Replies: 685
    Last Post: 11-18-2017, 12:27 PM
  2. SC - Student planted pipe bombs at school
    By OneLostGrl in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-28-2010, 01:09 AM
  3. CA - Nails Planted in CA playground
    By JBean in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 06-17-2010, 10:57 AM
  4. DA candidates say pornography planted
    By Quincy in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-01-2004, 02:19 PM

Tags for this Thread