Post Conviction Brief

New Posts

ACJL said:
I'll gladly mark them. Also your other post about the evidentiary hearing.

I doubt she'll get a hearing this year, or in any year, but tbh I do hope she gets one. Could be interesting. And Steven will most likely take the stand, so I'm curious to see how that will go.
Click to expand...


Oh yea, I meant to ask you why you think SA will take the stand at an evidentiary hearing?
 
CoolJ said:
Hey missy, how familiar are you with the Ryan Ferguson case? It is interesting in that there were many similar delays and extensions. I believe it took Zellner 4 years to have Ferguson exonerated. And it all came down to a Brady violation. No re-retrial.
Click to expand...

I haven't looked into his case in depth, but know enough ;-) And this is kind of what I mean by looking at this case in a bubble... it appears to be taking a long time, with delays, etc., but is it just because it's a case we are all following? I think the delays and filings and the games played on both sides are all just part of the justice system, unfortunately. I would have to go back and look, but IIRC Zellner said in an interview shortly after she took the case that this would take years. I also think sometimes people forget that KZ has other clients, and it's not like she is devoting 100% of her time on this one particular case.
 
missy1974 said:
There have been a lot of filings or a lot of information in those filings, (...)
Click to expand...

But you don't even recall one moment while reading the Motion or whatever that made you go "hmmm..." ?

missy1974 said:
You never answered my post above where I asked what you thought she had to gain from delaying? I have read here and on reddit and elsewhere that she is just delaying, delaying, delaying, but I have yet to read a plausible reason to why she would be. I've read because she thinks he's guilty... well, there is an easy remedy to that, drop him as a client. I've read that it's because she doesn't have anything.... but I don't see that as true IMO
Click to expand...

It's just that back in 2016 she promised she would release Steven in a matter of months due to an "airtight alibi" and whatever else that never made it into her PC Motion. Ever since she's been delaying a lot of times. And just now she got yet another delay. She seems fond of delays! That's all the comment was about it.

There are some people who think she is just using this case to get herself some media attention, so maybe they think that's why she's delaying so she can have some more of it or appear in MaM2. There are others who think she was duped by MaM and has figured out by now he is guilty and that she is trying to figure out how to get rid of him without losing face. Drop him as a client when it took you two and a half years to figure out he's guilty... I dunno about that.
 
missy1974 said:
I think it's highly unlikely that a lawyer, in this case KZ, would put Steven on the stand. I could be wrong, I did say it was JMO :confused:
Click to expand...
I feel that the only reason Zellner would not want Steven Avery to testify would be a concern that he would say something that would incriminate himself. JMO
 
ACJL said:
But you don't even recall one moment while reading the Motion or whatever that made you go "hmmm..." ?
Click to expand...

Actually yes... the pipette story lol When I first read it I was thinking.. no way! So I started looking at RH's phone records, etc. and found that I couldn't prove her theory wrong. In fact, one of the other friends he was supposed to be with at the time, there were calls going back and forth, why call each other if you are together? There is also no reference to Ryan at all in the police reports from that first night. I don't know how much I believe of the pipette story, but I do recall that SA was saying from the beginning that someone was in his trailer that night. I think it's more likely that it was someone close that went in to his trailer if anyone did at all.

I will have to go back and look at my posts to see what else I questioned, because I think there was more ... investigation continues... :D
 
RANCH said:
I feel that the only reason Zellner would not want Steven Avery to testify would be a concern that he would say something that would incriminate himself. JMO
Click to expand...

Also highly unlikely, as I am quite positive Zellner is certain SA didn’t do anything criminal. Hard to incriminate yourself if you haven’t done anything criminal. Let’s not forget Zellner has invested close to 1 million dollars of her own money into this mans innocence.

I just don’t see why Steven would need to testify at an evidentiary hearing. I could very well be wrong, just not sure what purpose it would serve.
 
missy1974 said:
Actually yes... the pipette story lol When I first read it I was thinking.. no way! So I started looking at RH's phone records, etc. and found that I couldn't prove her theory wrong. In fact, one of the other friends he was supposed to be with at the time, there were calls going back and forth, why call each other if you are together? There is also no reference to Ryan at all in the police reports from that first night. I don't know how much I believe of the pipette story, but I do recall that SA was saying from the beginning that someone was in his trailer that night. I think it's more likely that it was someone close that went in to his trailer if anyone did at all.

I will have to go back and look at my posts to see what else I questioned, because I think there was more ... investigation continues... :D
Click to expand...

These circumstances that make you go “hmmm” are definitely tactical. There is a method to the madness, no question about it. I am basing that off of her other wrongful conviction cases and how they played out.
No sense in arguing about it either way, as we will not know for sure until this is all over.
Once she gets the evidentiary hearing, things will start rolling.
 
CoolJ said:
These circumstances that make you go “hmmm” are definitely tactical. There is a method to the madness, no question about it. I am basing that off of her other wrongful conviction cases and how they played out.
No sense in arguing about it either way, as we will not know for sure until this is all over.
Once she gets the evidentiary hearing, things will start rolling.
Click to expand...

That's why I'm not sure what to think about some things lol I think the fact that KZ only has to show reasonable doubt gets lost, regardless of what she tweeted and when. If she can show that RH did have the opportunity, or LE did have the opportunity, or that Bobby did have the motive, or there were Brady violations, etc. that is all she needs to possibly get a new trial. I do still think that she has made some procedural mistakes, but she does also have local counsel that is supposed to know the procedures, so is it KZ or is it local counsel's responsibility, or maybe both?
 
missy1974 said:
I think it's highly unlikely that a lawyer, in this case KZ, would put Steven on the stand. I could be wrong, I did say it was JMO :confused:
Click to expand...

Yea I saw that, it was right next to the "lol".

If Zellner gets an evidentiary hearing, also referred to as "evidentiary hearing on Postconviction Motion", he will likely take the stand. As the name implies, it will be about the Postconviction Motion. Steven has signed two affidavits for Zellner, and Zellner has put those two affidavits before the Court as part of her Postconviction Motion. This means he is good to go.

We are guaranteed he takes the stand if Zellner relies, directly or indirectly, on anything he says in any of his affidavits or if the State wishes to call him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 153 more.
Total: 3,961 (members: 154, guests: 3,807)

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
3,807
Total visitors
3,961
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,507
Messages
17,970,096
Members
228,789
Latest member
redhairdontcare
Back
Top