1057 users online (212 members and 845 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 49
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    1,234

    Was the lawsuit really a motive for allegedly framing Avery?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sustained View Post
    Totally agree in removing the possibility of a pardon from the governor from the equation ...

    I do believe that both men deserve a new trial due to Kratz' inflammatory remarks to the public on the State's theory on how TH died. Remarks that are strictly attributable to a confused 16-year-old forced into multiple confessions of which none were consistent across the board. Those remarks alone would have enraged the citizens of Manitowoc County and removed any chance of either of them getting a fair trial.

    Also, the judge should have tossed Brendan's confessions which were the ONLY evidence that he was ever involved in TH's death. 16-year-olds have vivid imaginations sometimes and it's astounding to me that Brendan was ever interrogated without a lawyer present. The fact that Kachinsky employed a PI to get a confession out of Brendan to aid in Avery's trial is a blatant disregard for a client's well being and the charges should have been dropped for that alone.

    IMO, Zellner will uncover some exculpatory evidence. As much as I want to believe Avery did it, I just can't get by the fact this man was in prison for 18 years, had a large sum of money coming to him, was looking forward to Jodi getting out of jail and getting married, and had a bill being passed the day after the murder in his name. IMO, he doesn't come off as a guilty man in his pre-arrest interviews. And what man, even with an IQ of 70, would leave so much evidence on his own property knowing he would get caught as soon as his property was searched.

    My two cents ...
    Do you really think he was going to get $36 Million?
    That is supposedly the whole motive to "frame" him and that is where there is a problem.
    #1 For the cops to want him in jail because of that, they would have to believe he would actually get that much. Plus him being in jail doesn't stop him suing anyway.
    #2 The insurance company would pay, not the cops. So where is the motive?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Johns Creek
    Posts
    1,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Limaes View Post
    Do you really think he was going to get $36 Million?
    That is supposedly the whole motive to "frame" him and that is where there is a problem.
    #1 For the cops to want him in jail because of that, they would have to believe he would actually get that much. Plus him being in jail doesn't stop him suing anyway.
    #2 The insurance company would pay, not the cops. So where is the motive?
    Being in jail doesn't stop him from suing, but he settled for $400K in order to pay for a decent defense team. I'd wager he would've gotten considerably more had the TH murder never happened.

    What insurance company ? Do you have a copy of the policy and the terms within ? I would think Manitowoc County would still have taken a huge hit, both financially and LE's reputation. Even former Sheriff Petersen had the gall to say that he thought Steven could be responsible for the Beersten attack. A civil trial would have exposed a severe level of incompetence in LE ...

    DEFENDANT IS A LIAR + DEFENDANT'S KID GOES MISSING + DEFENDANT REPORTS KID MISSING AFTER 31 DAYS + KID IS FOUND DEAD = DEFENDANT KILLED KID

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by Limaes View Post
    Do you really think he was going to get $36 Million?
    That is supposedly the whole motive to "frame" him and that is where there is a problem.
    #1 For the cops to want him in jail because of that, they would have to believe he would actually get that much. Plus him being in jail doesn't stop him suing anyway.
    #2 The insurance company would pay, not the cops. So where is the motive?
    Due to the nature of the claims against the county (intentional wrongdoing) the six insurance companies had decided they would not pay. They were only going to pay if it was accidental wrongdoing. His suit named the county as well as individuals. Even if he had only been awarded 18-24 million it would have been a heavy burden for all involved to bare.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    1,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Sustained View Post
    Being in jail doesn't stop him from suing, but he settled for $400K in order to pay for a decent defense team. I'd wager he would've gotten considerably more had the TH murder never happened.

    What insurance company ? Do you have a copy of the policy and the terms within ? I would think Manitowoc County would still have taken a huge hit, both financially and LE's reputation. Even former Sheriff Petersen had the gall to say that he thought Steven could be responsible for the Beersten attack. A civil trial would have exposed a severe level of incompetence in LE ...
    No, no copy of the insurance details sorry. I have never believed that he was ever going to get that much. 12yrs (not 18) would mean that he feels that he deserved $3 million for every year he was in there.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    NSW, Australia
    Posts
    1,234
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinsaint View Post
    Due to the nature of the claims against the county (intentional wrongdoing) the six insurance companies had decided they would not pay. They were only going to pay if it was accidental wrongdoing. His suit named the county as well as individuals. Even if he had only been awarded 18-24 million it would have been a heavy burden for all involved to bare.
    If they were that worried, he would have been bumped off. Not just locked up where he can still sue. Unless of course the cops have an amazing ability to predict the future and that he would settle for a dramatically lesser amount.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    5,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Limaes View Post
    Do you really think he was going to get $36 Million?
    That is supposedly the whole motive to "frame" him and that is where there is a problem.
    #1 For the cops to want him in jail because of that, they would have to believe he would actually get that much. Plus him being in jail doesn't stop him suing anyway.
    #2 The insurance company would pay, not the cops. So where is the motive?
    Yes, I've always found it somewhat disingenuous the way some people frame things as though SA was days away from receiving a fat check.

    Also, can anyone answer a basic question: why would committing a "new" crime automatically prevent him from receiving compensation for the prior false imprisonment?
    “Evil begins when you begin to treat people as things.” -- Terry Pratchett

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by ArianeEmory View Post
    Yes, I've always found it somewhat disingenuous the way some people frame things as though SA was days away from receiving a fat check.

    Also, can anyone answer a basic question: why would committing a "new" crime automatically prevent him from receiving compensation for the prior false imprisonment?
    It didn't prevent him from following through on his suit. As of October 30th he was a sympathetic, wrongly accused man who lost 18 years of his life. By November 9th he was a wicked, evil, vile human being who murdered (presumably) a beautiful young woman. Any chance of a multi-million dollar judgement was gone. In light of his current situation at that time, no jury was going to find him sympathetic enough to award him what he was entitled to.

    He ended up settling the suit because he was desperate to get the money he needed to hire lawyers to defend him in his current criminal case. Sitting around waiting for a few years for a fair settlement offer or civil trial wasn't an option for him at that point.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    55
    I honestly wonder if SA thought that since he'd prevailed and was proven to be wrongfully convicted; that no court would dare convict him again? I feel sometimes like his interviews etc., are scripted to obtain sympathy; and that we only glimpse a tiny taste of the real person.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    498
    Quote Originally Posted by Desertwind View Post
    I honestly wonder if SA thought that since he'd prevailed and was proven to be wrongfully convicted; that no court would dare convict him again? I feel sometimes like his interviews etc., are scripted to obtain sympathy; and that we only glimpse a tiny taste of the real person.
    We never needed a glimps or taste of him at all. He was wrongfully convicted when LE ignored what is now known to be the true assailant at the time. Ten years later, this information (that should have been provided to him) was basically swept under the rug as well. He was a victim of the system, no two ways about it.

    Many people are now thumbing their noses at him over this very conviction... "Look at his record." What record? He burned a cat. Not the best idea but I know a guy who burned a cow in his youth. It was extremely stupid on his part. He went to jail and, of all things, now owns a farm with a deer sanctuary. He accosted a woman? It was his cousin, the gun wasn't loaded and he was ticked off over rumors she was spreading. Did he handle it the way most people would expect him to? No. Does that mean he suddenly has a predisposition to be a murdering rapist? No.

    He's never struck me as the kind of guy I want to hang out with but I don't assume he could be a murderer just because I don't want him at my cook outs.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    5,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Sinsaint View Post
    It didn't prevent him from following through on his suit. As of October 30th he was a sympathetic, wrongly accused man who lost 18 years of his life. By November 9th he was a wicked, evil, vile human being who murdered (presumably) a beautiful young woman. Any chance of a multi-million dollar judgement was gone. In light of his current situation at that time, no jury was going to find him sympathetic enough to award him what he was entitled to.

    He ended up settling the suit because he was desperate to get the money he needed to hire lawyers to defend him in his current criminal case. Sitting around waiting for a few years for a fair settlement offer or civil trial wasn't an option for him at that point.
    So in the "he was framed" theory, this is the specific outcome the framers were aiming for? That he would settle for a lesser sum?
    “Evil begins when you begin to treat people as things.” -- Terry Pratchett


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    THE COAST OF CAROLINA
    Posts
    2,084

    Some food for thought. What say you?

    Quote Originally Posted by Desertwind View Post
    I honestly wonder if SA thought that since he'd prevailed and was proven to be wrongfully convicted; that no court would dare convict him again? I feel sometimes like his interviews etc., are scripted to obtain sympathy; and that we only glimpse a tiny taste of the real person.
    It's a possibility I've considered. But, if he specifically manipulated his words and reacted in such a way to gain sympathy, he did an outstanding job.

    I try to keep in mind that SA has an IQ of 70. BD's IQ has been discussed at great lengths, all over the Internet (probably because his lack of awareness was glaringly obvious), but a lot of people seem to forget that SA's IQ is just as poor, if not more so. (I believe BD's IQ was said to fall somewhere between 70-73.)

    An IQ of 70 is on the absolute lowest end of the "below average" spectrum and borders on mentally disabled. Individuals with an IQ of 70 have grave problems with logic, foresight, planning, strategic thinking, and understanding consequences.

    I just have a difficult time believing that someone with an IQ of 70 has the wherewithal to strategically manipulate his words in such a way.
    "In law school, the concept of the jury is taught through the metaphor of a black box. Into the box, evidence and the law go. Out of the box, a verdict comes. But a black box doesn’t have feelings." - THE FACT OF A BODY by Alexandria Marzano-Lesnevich
    ✌️

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,372
    Quote Originally Posted by ArianeEmory View Post
    So in the "he was framed" theory, this is the specific outcome the framers were aiming for? That he would settle for a lesser sum?
    How would anybody know the specific outcome the framers were aiming for? What was their aim the first time they put him away for something they knew he didn't do?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    5,071
    Quote Originally Posted by Tawny View Post
    How would anybody know the specific outcome the framers were aiming for? What was their aim the first time they put him away for something they knew he didn't do?
    Since people keep bringing up the money, I assume they think they have some idea of the framers' motives. Just trying to figure out the mechanics of how it was supposed to work.
    “Evil begins when you begin to treat people as things.” -- Terry Pratchett

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    3,604
    Couldn't ST and the other BD have killed her and planted the evidence? I just have that feeling they are involved.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I always wondered why somebody doesn't do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody.

    Lily Tomlin

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,372
    Quote Originally Posted by Tssiemer View Post
    Couldn't ST and the other BD have killed her and planted the evidence? I just have that feeling they are involved.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I've felt this way a few times myself. I think they could have left the evidence where it was (the Rav4, the bones) and when LE got on SA's trail, they knew they'd get away with it. I think it's possible it's a combination of these two knowing LE would likely target SA, and then LE "bolstering" their case by planting the key, the blood, and the bullet fragment. JMO.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. GUILTY MS - Everett Dutschke for mailing ricin letters, framing rival, Tupelo, 2013
    By wfgodot in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: 05-28-2015, 04:53 PM
  2. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-17-2013, 11:54 PM

Tags for this Thread