The Kratz book

Kellyd said:

This just makes me ill.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

.
I'm with you Kellyd and :welcome4:

I am going to purchase the book. Often times in books like this new things will become known because all witnesses on the witness list are never called to tesify but what they stated is known by the prosecution.

oceanblueeyes said:

I am going to purchase the book. Often times in books like this new things will become known because all witnesses on the witness list are never called to tesify but what they stated is known by the prosecution.

Click to expand...

That would require a trust in KK. You would have to have a belief that what he is telling you is truth. Totally your choice. Personally, I believe he is so crooked that I couldn't believe anything he says or writes. JMO

missy1974 said:

BCA ~ just from the bit I read ... the "little" and "creepy, thought Teresa" were just a few of many embellishments!

Like I said in my first post, it's ironic that the premise of the book is to set the record straight and clear up what MaM got wrong, and in doing that, IMO he is changing the facts, or embellishing, or whatever word you want to use LOL

Click to expand...

He's a straight up liar, IMO.

He lies & manipulates just as he always has & now he's written a book...whoop dee do!
And Nancy Grace? Pfffffft..we've discussed her previously & I offered up link after link of lies she's told over the years😀

IMO, it'll be just a matter of time before Ken Kratz screws up again and is back in the news😉

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

missy1974 said:

if you scroll all the way to the bottom it says "pages 41-172 are not shown in this preview" .... if you have more pages than me.... I'm calling conspiracy hahaha

I do think there is more pages though, because the "forward" I don't think is included as page numbers? the hard copy of the book on amazon said it was 192 pages, did NG take up 20 maybe?

JMO but 192 pages seems pretty short, I feel like I could type that up in no time! And I bet I could source my facts.. just sayin'

Click to expand...

I bet you could too😉

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Kellyd said:

You couldn't pay me to read the book.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

oceanblueeyes said:

I am going to purchase the book. Often times in books like this new things will become known because all witnesses on the witness list are never called to tesify but what they stated is known by the prosecution.

Click to expand...

I was actually considering it.... But now that I have read the preview and seeing that he got some pretty basic facts wrong, or not stating whole truths, there is no way that I would be able to believe anything that he said, so I don't see the point in reading it now.

missy1974 said:

I was actually considering it.... But now that I have read the preview and seeing that he got some pretty basic facts wrong, or not stating whole truths, there is no way that I would be able to believe anything that he said, so I don't see the point in reading it now.

Click to expand...

I put a review out there. It disgusts me that he is trying to profit from this.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Kellyd said:

I put a review out there. It disgusts me that he is trying to profit from this.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

To be fair.... KK is not the only one that has written a book.

Michael Griesbach has released 3, and he wasn't even directly involved in the 2005 case and AFAIK and IMO he has no more information than any of us have available (according to his AMA's on reddit). His 1st book focused on SA's exoneration.

Jerome Buting has a book coming out on the 28th of February too. The difference with JB's book, IMO, is that he is using the SA/BD cases along with some of his other cases to discuss the system

https://www.harpercollins.com/9780062569332/illusion-of-justice

Saul Vesalot said:

Beginning six years after the trial, in January 2013, Steven Avery and I exchanged a series of letters. He knew that I was no longer a DA and no longer represented the state and he invited...

Click to expand...

That is where that page (page 164) ends and 165 is not viewable in my preview. Page 166 is the only letter I can find, the one where Steven suggests Kratz be his attorney.

Click to expand...

Just noticed this in your post Saul. So there are more letters. If they started correspondence in Jan 2013, the letter that is in the book is dated June 2013, I wonder what was written in the previous letters, from both of them. Does Kratz tell SA something about CA? Is that where the "And you got CA" comes in?

It might be interesting to know what went on with the EA/CA divorce. There was actually a hearing the same day that SA wrote this letter to KK. That can be seen here: https://wcca.wicourts.gov/index.xsl

To me it's like taking BD's phone call to his mom after talking the W&F in isolation without having the full context and knowing what went on in the days right before, which started with O'Kelly and then the interview where Kachinsky allowed W&F to interview BD without him and how they told him he should tell his mom before they did. JMO of course.

The letter needs context, and I still don't understand how KK thinks this helps him or makes SA look guilty LOL

KK's book might be of interest because he might inadvertently reveal the truth in the things he chooses to write about and the things he studiously avoids.

MOO.

Speaking of Kratz. I am sure many of you have seen this "interview" with Jena Friedman.
https://youtu.be/H-jF2Q3wjFE

I find it quite interesting how he answers her when asked if he killed TH. That sly little laugh!
He also remembers that he has an alibi. I wonder if he talks about his alibi in his book. He is a strange strange man.

CoolJ said:

Speaking of Kratz. I am sure many of you have seen this "interview" with Jena Friedman.
https://youtu.be/H-jF2Q3wjFE

I find it quite interesting how he answers her when asked if he killed TH. That sly little laugh!
He also remembers that he has an alibi. I wonder if he talks about his alibi in his book. He is a strange strange man.

Click to expand...

He's gross
JMO

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Speaking of KK, in the DO NOT thread, they are talking about SB calling SA on November 3rd. Does anyone know where this is documented other than in the upstanding model citizen of Calumet County's book. (sarcasm included)

https://books.google.com/books?id=c... the numbers that she called that day&f=false


You know that guy that made this statement "She was creeped out [by him]. She [went to her employer and] said she would not go back because she was scared of him," Kratz said.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Netflix-s-hit-documentary.html#ixzz4YaxsFgdz

So scared, that she did go back without a complaint to her employer.

I find it very suspicious that the roommate who is known to have had an intimate relationship with TH, making an claim that he spoke with SA, when it cannot be verified that he spoke directly to SA. Like I said in another post, its like the pot calling the kettle black. Both should have been suspects to me and SB should not have gotten a free pass.

I'd also like to know how that works~~SB calls BJ's phone on November 3rd and SA just happens to be over there and answers the phone? Where were the other 5 members of the house that SA had to answer their phone?

Any insight would be appreciated.

BigCityAccountant said:

Speaking of KK, in the DO NOT thread, they are talking about SB calling SA on November 3rd. Does anyone know where this is documented other than in the upstanding model citizen of Calumet County's book. (sarcasm included)

You know that guy that made this statement "She was creeped out [by him]. She [went to her employer and] said she would not go back because she was scared of him," Kratz said.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Netflix-s-hit-documentary.html#ixzz4YaxsFgdz

So scared, that she did go back without a complaint to her employer.

I find it very suspicious that the roommate who is known to have had an intimate relationship with TH, making an claim that he spoke with SA, when it cannot be verified that he spoke directly to SA. Like I said in another post, its like the pot calling the kettle black. Both should have been suspects to me and SB should not have gotten a free pass.

I'd also like to know how that works~~SB calls BD's phone on November 3rd and SA just happens to be over there and answers the phone? Where were the other 5 members of the house that SA had to answer their phone?

Any insight would be appreciated.

Click to expand...

Great questions!
Missy???
Oh Missy! Lol

I swear Missy has the memory of a dolphin❤

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

dexter75 said:

Great questions!
Missy???
Oh Missy! Lol

I swear Missy has the memory of a dolphin❤

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

.
Like I said, I'd hate to be one of her children, that is assuming she has children.

dexter75 said:

Great questions!
Missy???
Oh Missy! Lol

I swear Missy has the memory of a dolphin❤

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I was at work LOL sorry! haha Do dolphins have a good memory? do you have a link for that haha

BigCityAccountant said:

.
Like I said, I'd hate to be one of her children, that is assuming she has children.

Click to expand...

I do... and they hate it so does my hubby! :tantrum:

missy1974 said:

I was at work LOL sorry! haha Do dolphins have a good memory? do you have a link for that haha



I do... and they hate it so does my hubby! :tantrum:

Click to expand...

Here you are, my friend😉 One of many links😊
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/08/130806-dolphins-memories-animals-science-longest/

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk

BigCityAccountant said:

Speaking of KK, in the DO NOT thread, they are talking about SB calling SA on November 3rd. Does anyone know where this is documented other than in the upstanding model citizen of Calumet County's book. (sarcasm included)

https://books.google.com/books?id=c... the numbers that she called that day&f=false


You know that guy that made this statement "She was creeped out [by him]. She [went to her employer and] said she would not go back because she was scared of him," Kratz said.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Netflix-s-hit-documentary.html#ixzz4YaxsFgdz

So scared, that she did go back without a complaint to her employer.

I find it very suspicious that the roommate who is known to have had an intimate relationship with TH, making an claim that he spoke with SA, when it cannot be verified that he spoke directly to SA. Like I said in another post, its like the pot calling the kettle black. Both should have been suspects to me and SB should not have gotten a free pass.

I'd also like to know how that works~~SB calls BJ's phone on November 3rd and SA just happens to be over there and answers the phone? Where were the other 5 members of the house that SA had to answer their phone?

Any insight would be appreciated.

Click to expand...

okay... so first off.. is it in his book? Not saying it isn't, but I don't see it in the preview or when I search.

This was being discussed a few days back on reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/SuperMaM/comments/5soww7/ken_kratzs_guilty_prosecutorial_omission_scott_bs/

The following is a statement from a RH who works at AutoTrader:

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=38

Ms. H**** advised me that someone named DAWN who works at AUTO TRADER stated she
had overheard that STEVEN AVERY had called on yesterday's date (11/03/05) between 4:30
and 5:00 p.m. approximately, because STEVEN needed to reschedule the appointment with the
photographer. STEVEN indicated that the photographer had not made the scheduled meeting on
Monday, 10/31.05.

RACHEL indicated that a subject named SCOTT had called STEVEN regarding TERESA
HALBACH and, apparently, was under the impression STEVEN was not happy about "being
accused of stuff."

So.... from the above, Dawn overheard it, told Rachel, and Rachel called in. I don't see any mention of this in Dawn's interviews... or in her testimony, or Angela's (Dawn's supervisor).


At some point, Dedering is trying to get in touch with GZ to talk to him about calling AT:

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CASO-Investigative-Report.pdf#page=352

GEORGE once again denied making any sort of phone calls to AUTO TRADER purporting himself to be STEVEN AVERY. I asked GEORGE if it was possible that JASON had contacted AUTO TRADER and he stated he was unsure about this.

Why are they asking him this? what made them think that GZ or his grandson had done this? And what does ONCE AGAIN denied mean, had they asked him before, and when before? And again... why did they ask him in the first place?

I think we need to go back to the basics... go to page 2, when they first responded to the missing person report. The initial investigation from Calumet County didn't start until 5pm on the 3rd. Lemiuex speaks to TH's mom, then Scott B. by phone, then Angela at AT...

ANGELA said that she was waiting for a call back from the appointments to see if they had indeed been completed. ANGELA said she would have become concerned by tomorrow if she had still not heard any.thing from TERESA. ANGELA said TERESA did have scheduled appointments for photoshoots for the AUTO TRADER magazine today. ANGELA said in checking those appointmentsshe was told that TERESA did not show up. ANGELA said they had not received any call or
notice from TERESA that she would not be making those appointments today.

So at that point, it would be after 5pm on Nov 3rd, when it was reported from RH that heard it from DP who overheard someone else that SA called? But Angela doesn't have a clue about that call when talking to LE? :thinking:

If SB or RyanH called the numbers on TH's phone records, they would have called BJ's house. Did someone answer? But if they did, how come we didn't hear that in the trial? Now I'm curious about the messages on that answering machine, we have only heard one, the one that TH left, and IIRC, it was recorded on Remiker's cell phone. Was there a message from RH? SB? Angela?

Oh and... Andy Colborn was the first officer to make contact with SA, SA never denied that TH was there, so this "SA denied TH was there" is a made up fact IMO I think it would be a big deal and would have been part of the trial if it was true. JMO

missy1974 said:

I think we need to go back to the basics... go to page 2, when they first responded to the missing person report. The initial investigation from Calumet County didn't start until 5pm on the 3rd. Lemiuex speaks to TH's mom, then Scott B. by phone, then Angela at AT...

Click to expand...

I'm calling the police. You have pushed me down the conspiracy rabbit hole. I will be lucky to get out of here alive.

Cpl. Leslie Lemieux

Click to expand...

Is this Leslie Lemieux in any way related to the the Lemieux on the RAV4 sticker?

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Exhibit-307-RAV4-Back.jpg

Could make getting one of those stickers for a swapped out car much easier.... hmmm.




Here is part of page 20 of the CASO

DAWN states she, in fact, had talked with TERESA on Monday morning, 10/31/05. DAWN states they had received a phone call from somebody who identified himself as B.JANDA. DAWN states she knows the JANDAS are basically the AVERY brothers. She States they have done work for them before and she does not know why they give the name of B. JANDA
*snipped by me*
She did state when she had talked to TERESA, TERESA had told her she
was going to go out to the AVERY property to take the photo. DAWN states TERESA seemed
fine on the phone when she had spoken with her. DAWN states TERESA always seems to be a
pretty upbeat person when she speaks with her and does not know of any type of problems that
TERESA would have.

DAWN did tell me TERESA had confided in her about STEVEN AVERY on one prior
occasion. She states STEVEN had come out of the house wearing nothing but a towel one time
and TERESA was somewhat concerned by that.

Click to expand...

So if Avery is trying to be secret about his identity, this fell through immediately. So even if he WAS being sneaky, (maybe he just gave the name of the owner of the vehicle he was trying to sell), it did not work. Teresa knew where she was going and who she would likely be dealing with and she was "somewhat concerned" but not in any way living in terror. Makes the "would not go back" statement seem a bit fishy.

Couldn't find anything more useful in the CASO about this Dawn. There is a second dawn, a Dawn H who is a different person. Just a heads up to avoid confusion.