1289 users online (261 members and 1028 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 3 of 118 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 103 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 1767
  1. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,941
    Tweet from today:

    Kathleen Zellner ‏@ZellnerLaw 36m36 minutes ago
    If SA the killer why burn body just use crusher. SA crushes another car -11/3 so had access--clearly killer did not.#MakingAMurderer #Clues

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    The other side of the rainbow
    Posts
    924
    I didn't realize SA had used the crusher on 11/3, that makes the fact that he didn't crush TH's car even more suspicious.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,941
    Quote Originally Posted by Hippiemomof5 View Post
    I didn't realize SA had used the crusher on 11/3, that makes the fact that he didn't crush TH's car even more suspicious.
    I'm not really sure where that comes from, it may have been from SA's interviews because I do remember it being mentioned, I also thought that one of the brothers, Earl or Charles, had been down there too that week.

    If he killed her and parked the RAV4 over there... and then a few days later was down there crushing another car.... it would have given him the time and the excuse to go and check on the RAV4 in the daylight and ya know... maybe clean up some blood he left laying around IMO, but he didn't do that.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,941
    Kathleen Zellner ‏@ZellnerLaw 49m49 minutes ago
    Fifth trip to Steven Avery. Collected samples for new tests. The inevitable is coming--he was smiling so were we. #MakingAMurderer #Science+

    Looks like she is going to start testing.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Pure Michigan
    Posts
    2,195
    She's been saying things WE have ALL along =)

    COMMON SENSE arguments.
    Clues/evidence left behind that does NOT add up..
    Quote Originally Posted by missy1974 View Post
    I'm thinking.... she's saving her best for court documents.... she's just feeding us crumbs, and mostly left over crumbs LOL Most of us that have been following this for awhile already knew this ;-)

  6. #36
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Pure Michigan
    Posts
    2,195
    I think she uses statements like that, because she can.

    If I were her, (in light of how this case was " investigated " ) & I were trying to get a man I believed INNOCENT out of a LIFE sentence? You bet your sweet butt I'd be cocky and confident about it
    Especially if I KNEW I had the upper hand, and it was just a matter of time and tests.

    JMO
    Quote Originally Posted by Itsmevkb View Post
    I'm not sure why she bothers with statements like that. People get caught all the time because they messed up one or more things that had they not they might never have gotten caught. Does that make them innocent because logically they would have done such and such and then they wouldn't have been caught? When she tweets that kind of stuff it makes it look like she's grasping at straws. And, she knows nothing like that gets Avery a new trial.

  7. #37
    Madeleine74's Avatar
    Madeleine74 is offline Of course it's my opinion; who else's would it be?
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,241
    I don't like how social media is being used to tease and incite in this case. I realize Zellner is doing what many do and sure, it works, because people will buy it hook, line and sinker. But the public is not who she'll need to appeal to -- it's specifically the judges at the highest levels in WI who will make any decisions affecting Avery's case. Twitter and other SM tools are just the latest ways to posture to a mass audience. Posturing in criminal cases has been going on far longer than my existence. We saw it really explode in 1994 with the OJ case and it's grown from there.

    My motto in criminal cases: Put Up or Shut Up. If you have the evidence then show it. If you don't, even if you think you might at some point later, then you don't. It's binary. And that goes for both sides, btw. Teasing is a ploy for an audience and it's manipulative. I'm not a fan of it in serious matters like this.

    Zellner is better than this and she doesn't need to stoop to low levels. She's able to get enough publicity for her work--it comes down to making it happen where it counts--in the courtroom. I'm disappointed to see her pull a "Kardashian."

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Johns Creek
    Posts
    1,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    I don't like how social media is being used to tease and incite in this case. I realize Zellner is doing what many do and sure, it works, because people will buy it hook, line and sinker. But the public is not who she'll need to appeal to -- it's specifically the judges at the highest levels in WI who will make any decisions affecting Avery's case. Twitter and other SM tools are just the latest ways to posture to a mass audience. Posturing in criminal cases has been going on far longer than my existence. We saw it really explode in 1994 with the OJ case and it's grown from there.

    My motto in criminal cases: Put Up or Shut Up. If you have the evidence then show it. If you don't, even if you think you might at some point later, then you don't. It's binary. And that goes for both sides, btw. Teasing is a ploy for an audience and it's manipulative. I'm not a fan of it in serious matters like this.

    Zellner is better than this and she doesn't need to stoop to low levels. She's able to get enough publicity for her work--it comes down to making it happen where it counts--in the courtroom. I'm disappointed to see her pull a "Kardashian."
    I'm fine with social media as that's the way of the world now. It took KZ 4 years to get Ryan Ferguson out of jail and may take her just as long to get SA freed if she indeed does have new evidence. Why should she show her cards now ? She just took the case last year.

    If in fact SA is innocent, the guilty party is most likely sweating bullets right now and may trip up at some point if he/she knows KZ is closing in.

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

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,941
    2 tweets this morning.

    Kathleen Zellner ‏@ZellnerLaw 1h1 hour ago
    Framing SA twice results in real rapist & murderer never being charged. Who is being served & protected except MCSD? #MakingAMurderer

    Kathleen Zellner ‏@ZellnerLaw 2h2 hours ago
    Reality:framing innocent benefits guilty. Real rapistAvery case to get parole hearing http://greenbaypressgazette.com/story/news #MakingAMurderer #Badcopshurt

    As for KZ tweeting, I only see that she is throwing out logic.... little tidbits, most of which people online have already been saying. If she started tweeting out who she thinks did it before she filed any documents in court, I think I would have issues with it. IMO it's to keep peoples interest because we all know how long the court system takes ;-)

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    266
    I think Zellner is saying all these things on social media because she is trying to make someone tremble, but I agree and would rather her save it for the appeal. I hope it doesn't jeopardise the case in any way. It would be almost unheard of to do it here. I don't like posturing in criminal cases on either side.

    https://www.yahoo.com/tv/making-murd...004553810.html

    “It’s the evidence. In having had a number of these cases, it has the signature of a wrongful conviction case. They only focused on him. They did not look at a lot of other suspects, certainly some very key people they should have been looking at. There was a very poor investigation done of the victim’s background, who she was involved with, the circumstances of her life. It had all of the hallmarks of a wrongful conviction case.”

    According to TheLipTV, Zellner “also intends to prove who actually killed Teresa Halbach. She asserted it is fairly obvious if you review the record of the criminal case.”


    And as she states the LE didn't investigate people close to TH (which I think is obvious - it seems entirely focused on Avery, like the rape case) so I'm lead to believe it's someone who we know. Usually it is someone in the person's life. Not all the time, of course, but usually. She did tweet something pretty much saying, "whoever did _____ is either involved or knows something" but it's been deleted as I think it gave away too much and at this stage it's libel, so I think I know who she's talking about.

    Sarah - I'm on the opposing side but I agree with you. If there is any evidence found that really points to him being the killer beyond a reasonable doubt, I will accept it and if the prosecution can come through with a reasonable enough motive, or even a reasonable enough story (not BD's story, they were trying to make it fit around that and there just is no evidence to support BD's confession). And if there was video footage that looked legit, I would believe it. You can't argue with video. I believe he's innocent and there is possible tampering in the case but I'm not willing to put aside all reason. If the prosecution can convince me beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it, then I will believe he did it but I believe there is reasonable doubt here and a conflict of interest (people who were involved in the rape case being involved, jury members being related to LE, etc) and that's why I'd like to see a new trial (not exoneration, but I believe a new trial is in order, exoneration for BD)

    As for BD, he seems to have his lawyers working on the case. I think that's why SA was given more attention, he didn't have representation at that time and BD did (but I don't know for sure, someone correct me). I agree that what happened to BD is even more frightening and I'm still shocked you can convict someone based solely on a (coerced) confession that isn't backed up by forensic evidence or anything.

    I don't like the trial by social media either, on either side. As I've mentioned a few times before, I'm worried the jury pool will even be more tainted because of MaM, in SA's favour and against the prosecution. Unless they can find people who are open to the possibility that he could be not guilty or vice versa (like Sarah) then I don't see how it's going to work with a jury.

    We had a case very similar to this in my city where there was no motive, only one suspect considered (and controversially declare the "prime and only suspect" at a press conference) and the possibility of planted evidence. The judge ruled there was planted evidence and it's not as clear to me in that case as it is in the Avery case. A lot of people still think he's guilty and that he got away with murder because of the statements LE made to the media and the fact that he came off a bit shady. Kinda linking to what TheDuchess said about how people think others are still guilty, even after exoneration.

    Really though, whatever side we are on, we both want the same thing and that is justice for Teresa. Whatever way this goes, I really hope she is at peace and I do mean that.


  11. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,941
    All the articles being posted quoting Zellner..... it's from this video, just thought you all would be interested if you haven't seen it yet. You can hear Zellner in her own words.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upcj...ature=youtu.be

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,263
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    I don't like how social media is being used to tease and incite in this case. I realize Zellner is doing what many do and sure, it works, because people will buy it hook, line and sinker. But the public is not who she'll need to appeal to -- it's specifically the judges at the highest levels in WI who will make any decisions affecting Avery's case. Twitter and other SM tools are just the latest ways to posture to a mass audience. Posturing in criminal cases has been going on far longer than my existence. We saw it really explode in 1994 with the OJ case and it's grown from there.

    My motto in criminal cases: Put Up or Shut Up. If you have the evidence then show it. If you don't, even if you think you might at some point later, then you don't. It's binary. And that goes for both sides, btw. Teasing is a ploy for an audience and it's manipulative. I'm not a fan of it in serious matters like this.

    Zellner is better than this and she doesn't need to stoop to low levels. She's able to get enough publicity for her work--it comes down to making it happen where it counts--in the courtroom. I'm disappointed to see her pull a "Kardashian."
    "Pull a Kardashian???" Really??? How on earth do you get a woman who is seeking justice for her client pulling a Kardashian? This woman has used the media to generate interest in her cases and has managed to exonerate 17 innocent people. I've read your posts and you are better than that!
    Everything I post without a supporting link is always JMO.

  13. #43
    Madeleine74's Avatar
    Madeleine74 is offline Of course it's my opinion; who else's would it be?
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,241
    Quote Originally Posted by Sustained View Post
    Why should she show her cards now ?
    She shouldn't. And IMO she should save the teasing and coyness, which is what is beneath her, as her case will be won or lost inside of a courtroom. In Ryan's case we already knew there was no forensic evidence linking him to the Heitholt murder and we knew he was convicted on 2 types of false direct evidence. In that case it didn't require proving who the murderer was. I'm not sure it's required in SA's case either.

  14. #44
    Madeleine74's Avatar
    Madeleine74 is offline Of course it's my opinion; who else's would it be?
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    10,241
    Quote Originally Posted by TheDuchess View Post
    "Pull a Kardashian???" Really??? How on earth do you get a woman who is seeking justice for her client pulling a Kardashian? This woman has used the media to generate interest in her cases and has managed to exonerate 17 innocent people. I've read your posts and you are better than that!
    Yes really. Posting teasing & coy messages on Twitter is what is referred to as "pulling a Kardashian." It's a social media technique, utilized perhaps most effectively and most obviously by the Kardashians, to gain exposure and increase followers and generate intrigue. Sorry if you don't like the term, but it is a technique. That it offends you does not change the fact that the technique exists.

    There's a difference between posting messages of support and updates to a case (ex. "we will submit our motions for new DNA testing to prove our client's innocence" and posting things like (paraphrasing here), "the real killer is right in front of your face. It's so obvious!" or "someone will be running scared as we start our DNA testing; can you see who it is?"

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    2,263
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeleine74 View Post
    She shouldn't. And IMO she should save the teasing and coyness, which is what is beneath her, as her case will be won or lost inside of a courtroom. In Ryan's case we already knew there was no forensic evidence linking him to the Heitholt murder and we knew he was convicted on 2 types of false direct evidence. In that case it didn't require proving who the murderer was. I'm not sure it's required in SA's case either.
    Well, I apologize because I have never heard the phrase "pulling a Kardashian" used before, let alone to someone as well respected as KZ. So anyone in this world who uses social media to generate interest is "pulling a Kardashian?" As important as those people feel they are, and regardless of how well they have used social media to their own benefit, they did not invent it nor own it. To compare a woman who has spent years studying, and years fighting for justice and is widely respected, to use such a phrase doesn't offend me as much as it offends anyone who might be compared to a woman whose fame is the result of the release of a disgusting sex tape where a man urinates on her. How anyone can use the name Zellner and Kardashian in the same sentence is just beyond me, but OK, you have that right. But it lowers my ability to see the relevance of many of your other statements, which generally seem to be well thought out.
    Everything I post without a supporting link is always JMO.

Page 3 of 118 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 53 103 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. FL - Mom tweets while son drowns
    By LadyL in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 09-02-2016, 04:11 PM