Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery

[ziggy]

Unless I am misunderstanding something, the only relevance of that vial in this respect, is that we know it has EDTA.

It's the blood evidence that was found in the the Rav4 that you want to somehow keep safe, right? If the blood from the Rav4 has EDTA in it, that would prove a plant, because there should be no EDTA in that blood.

Or am I misunderstanding ?

I've seen some online discussions from phlebotomists and such, who did their own experiments with the same lavender top vacuutainer tube and that in order to leave a visible hole, a needle of at least 12 gauge would have been used with a syringe to extract blood from the vial.

That would be useful information - someone not familiar with the self-sealing attributes of the tube top (if using a smaller gauge) - and a test that could be replicated to show affirmative tampering.

 

[ZooSleuth]

Remember the officer who called in the plate check on Nov. 3? And he knew the make and model of the vehicle? That was very odd in court, when he was impeached with his own voice on dispatch.

Even odder, pretty much the same thing happened in one of Brendan's appeal hearings with Len Kachinsky. In the last episode Len denies on the stand that he made a statement implying Brendan was guilty that was attributed to him in the news. Then Brendan's lawyers played a clip from the news with Len on the phone saying exactly what he just denied ever saying. It drives me nuts how the police and lawyers in these cases lie over and over again and nothing is ever done.

BTW, for those who aren't aware, Len Kachinsky just had a restraining order taken out on him earlier this month: https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseDetai...6B747869BD406285750576&recordCount=3&offset=0

Something about Len and how he was always smiling while discussing the case made my blood boil. I hope this series gets him disbarred (or whatever they have in WI) and his reputation is ruined forever.

I believe the County LE found the vehicle on the property, but it would have been excluded because there was no warrant to search the property. They needed a way for a civilian to find it. I believe TH's family would have been willing to help out. I don't blame them - but I also think they would never admit it.

I think something like this is what happened. I don't think the ex-bf had anything to do with the murder, but there was something really shady about him that led me to believe the police used him and possibly her family members to further their case against Steven. Something was off about him.

 

[Random-me]

Len took the case for publicity. I am sure he said something at the start about how it would bring a lot of media attention so he thought he would take it on.

 

[ziggy]

Does make you think differently about the plate call in and the brother/ex:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMur...ike_halbach_and_hillegas_seem_sketchy_due_to/

That's what I thought while watching - but this person really goes into much more detail and brings up some great points about the creation of exigent circumstances, the awkward interviews and the person who found the car. I agree with this poster that the brother and ex bf are not suspects, and while not condoned, it's understandable how they might cooperate.

 

[ZooSleuth]

Len took the case for publicity. I am sure he said something at the start about how it would bring a lot of media attention so he thought he would take it on.

Well, it worked. 10 years later he's in the national news for this case:
http://www.newstalk.com/The-interne...ers-from-Netflixs-docseries-Making-A-Murderer

 

[SophieRose]

I agree with you re: the plates. I thought exactly the same when I heard that.

In the UK, I don't think anyone would ask if there were plates, because the assumption would be that there were. It would be like asking, "Are there wheels?"

I wasn't sure if the US is the same. I always think of Steve Jobs driving around without any!

All states require the back license plate but not all require the front license plate. Wisconsin does require both, but nearby Michigan does not require the front one.

https://www.cars.com/articles/2013/10/which-states-dont-require-a-front-license-plate/

 

[catswhiskers]

Whew! A dose of binge watching over the past two days, and have caught up with this thread too. I was out for dinner after watching until about episode 5, and had this sickening feeling that somehow the remainder of the episodes would reveal that LE had been responsible for TH's death as part of a malicious set up. At that point I wondered if I should even keep watching. Had a search on WS for SA's name and of course found the list of threads with 'Guilty' in the title, so had to keep watching to see how that could possibly have played out. Unbelievable.

Like many of you, my jaw dropped when Colburn was being questioned about his call regarding the Rav4 number plate. That and the persistent hammering of Brendan for information about a scenario he had no clue about - especially when he was being asked repeatedly to give up what SA had done to her head ... cut her hair?? ... punched her?? That boy was trying so hard to come up with what they wanted to hear just to get them to stop.
Don't get me started on that smug, smiling DA in front of the media. Didn't he just relish repeating the most salacious and gruesome parts of what Brendan had said under duress.
People across the world are having the same sorts of reactions after watching this series - time for a shake up somewhere.

 

[ziggy]

Even odder, pretty much the same thing happened in one of Brendan's appeal hearings with Len Kachinsky. In the last episode Len denies on the stand that he made a statement implying Brendan was guilty that was attributed to him in the news. Then Brendan's lawyers played a clip from the news with Len on the phone saying exactly what he just denied ever saying. It drives me nuts how the police and lawyers in these cases lie over and over again and nothing is ever done.

BTW, for those who aren't aware, Len Kachinsky just had a restraining order taken out on him earlier this month: https://wcca.wicourts.gov/caseDetai...6B747869BD406285750576&recordCount=3&offset=0

Something about Len and how he was always smiling while discussing the case made my blood boil. I hope this series gets him disbarred (or whatever they have in WI) and his reputation is ruined forever.



I think something like this is what happened. I don't think the ex-bf had anything to do with the murder, but there was something really shady about him that led me to believe the police used him and possibly her family members to further their case against Steven. Something was off about him.

Exactly - from the moment I saw Len first smile for the camera, it bothered me. Something was off with him too. And then when he spoke I uttered, "uh oh" - because he was already admitting his client was led astray by his uncle - and I don't think he'd even spent time with the kid or done any significant research. It just bugged the crap out of me. So when he was also impeached, I was so glad, because, let's face it - he had it coming. And then nothing happened to him and although the judge found grounds to allow his dismissal as Brendan's attorney, he subsequently found no breach in the duty of loyalty? Seriously? I was astounded.

 

[ZooSleuth]

Exactly - from the moment I saw Len first smile for the camera, it bothered me. Something was off with him too. And then when he spoke I uttered, "uh oh" - because he was already admitting his client was led astray by his uncle - and I don't think he'd even spent time with the kid or done any significant research. It just bugged the crap out of me. So when he was also impeached, I was so glad, because, let's face it - he had it coming. And then nothing happened to him and although the judge found grounds to allow his dismissal as Brendan's attorney, he subsequently found no breach in the duty of loyalty? Seriously? I was astounded.

How those guys can blatantly perjure themselves on the stand like that and keep their jobs is beyond me. Why would you ever tell the truth if it makes you look bad if there's no consequence to getting caught lying? Unless something is done about it, it will just continue in perpetuity in that broken "justice" system they have there.

 

[Soulmagent]

The bonfire. The bones.

It has been stated that a fire would need to last 3 to 9 hours to speculate that kind of damage. I notice from the crime scene images flashed there are no marker flags anywhere near the bonefire pit which is absurd . I have not seen where they presented a fire investigator so if anyone knows that I would be greaetful for the info.

This is a huge deal in the case so the collection of those bones without markers is weird. I also noticed a photo of the steel belts from the tires stacked on the bonfire pit and noticed they did not seem to be covered in soot. I thought that extremely odd as I have seen burnt tires so it stuck in my head. Photos of the building close to the fire shows nothing note worthy I saw .

Anyone else observe anything in photo's shown?

 

[ziggy]

How those guys can blatantly perjure themselves on the stand like that and keep their jobs is beyond me. Why would you ever tell the truth if it makes you look bad if there's no consequence to getting caught lying? Unless something is done about it, it will just continue in perpetuity in that broken "justice" system they have there.

Well, Wisconsin is the only state that allows one to become a lawyer without sitting for the bar exam! Yep, if you go to Marquette or U of W law school, you have the diploma privilege. I guess they don't have to take two exams like the rest of us. One, the Bar. Two the MPRE - professional responsibility. Yes, a single exam on the ethics of the profession. Perhaps that is why some of them don't seem to understand these concepts.

 

[Deeptoad]

News 3 interview with attorney Dean Strang - http://www.channel3000.com/news/News-3-talks-with-Steve-Avery-s-attorney-Dean-Strang/37202800

 

[LemonMousse]

Someone linked a convoluted brian post a while back, and I can't find the post to quote it, but they were asking why it was "interesting" that the styrofoam box with the blood vial was positioned so that the tampered with side was facing towards the inside, bottom of the box. I would assume, he pointed this out because it would make sense to position it this way if somebody was trying to hide the fact it had been tampered with. At a glance, the box would have appeared to have not been touched.

That was me...thanks for responding.

I suspect that the point the defence were trying to make is that the inner styrofoam box had to have been taken out of the cardboard one and opened in order to account for it being put back that way. And yes, as you say, it would look untampered with at first glance.

I can't see that this is especially significant and was wondering if I was missing the point...which may be the case. Hopefully the full trial transcripts will be released at some point so I can see exactly what the defence were getting at here.

 

[LemonMousse]

Oh...and for Max...regarding the "bleach spots" on Brendan's jeans.

Apparently there are two types of bleach...chlorine bleach and oxygen bleach.

Chlorine bleach wil only remove visible blood stains, but cannot remove haemoglobin. So any crime scene cleaned up with this bleach will reveal it's secrets via luminol. Cholorine bleach will also leave bleach spots on jeans.

Oxygen bleach will remove haemoglobin, but does not leave bleach spots on clothing.

So...if Brendan had bleach spots on his jeans it was chlorine bleach. If chlorine bleach was used to clean the garage floor, then it would not have managed to hide all the blood stains.

This, for me, demolishes any suggestion that Brendan had bleach spots on his jeans from cleaning up the garage after Theresa's murder no matter what he said.

 

[stephsb]

Well, Wisconsin is the only state that allows one to become a lawyer without sitting for the bar exam! Yep, if you go to Marquette or U of W law school, you have the diploma privilege. I guess they don't have to take two exams like the rest of us. One, the Bar. Two the MPRE - professional responsibility. Yes, a single exam on the ethics of the profession. Perhaps that is why some of them don't seem to understand these concepts.

To be fair, there are cases like this all across the U.S., in States where they do have to take the Bar and MPRE. Check out some of the death row exonerations that came out of Orleans parish under DA Harry Connick. These prosecutors said under oath they didn't know the meaning of the word "exculpatory evidence" Texas, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and Alabama have also had egregious cases of prosecutorial misconduct and lack of ethics that have led to people being sent to death row- in some cases they are still on it, or have actually been executed. These are just cases I can think of off the top of my head, I'm sure there are dozens more.

I'm not trying to defend what these prosecutors or Dassey's defense attorney did, their behavior is inexcusable. Dassey's attorney should have been disbarred without question, I've said on here multiple times it's sick people actually pay for him to defend them (he is now in private practice in Appleton). I don't think it's right that WI does not have students take the bar, and for me personally, it was the number one reason I chose to attend law school in Illinois. That being said, I had to take two classes on ethics and that was just for a paralegal studies degree. These *advertiser censored**holes took the classes, they would have had to pass them to graduate, the problem is the people, not WI. A simple search of the Innocence Project or the Equal Justice Initiative will show that wrongful convictions are unfortunately a problem for the entire United States.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stephsb]

http://mobile.onmilwaukee.com/movies/articles/makingamurdereralternativesuspects.html

Not sure if I posted the link correctly because I'm on my iPhone but if it doesn't work I'll repost later this morning when I get to my computer. It's from OnMilwaukee. If this has already been posted, I apologize. I thought it was a good summary of where the defense was going w. Who they thought the most likely suspects other than Steven were.

For the record, they were correct not to use their names, but it should be obvious for everyone who regularly posts here who is who. I'll go as far as giving their initials, so PLEASE correct me if I am wrong on any of them- CA and EA are both easily confirmed w. CCAP search. BD and ST were the ones who were each other's alibi, correct? BD is obviously not referring to Brendan Dassey, who's name I will always use in full. Brendan's statements should make it obvious which of his brother's this is.

I've said quite a few times who I think the best suspect other than Steven is, and would like to add if he is the one who did it, that wouldn't necessarily exclude Steven from involvement or knowledge. I've said from the beginning, I think Steven got a fair trial, while Brendan didn't. I wouldn't be opposed to Steven getting a new trial, as I don't think he should have been the #1 suspect from day 1 w. So many others having repeated, extended access to crime scene. With so many uncertainties in this case, I am at this point I at least am confident of two things- Brendan Dassey was innocent, and this crime began and ended at Avery's Salvage. Feel free to debate either of those points.

Would also like to add that evidence could still have been planted for this to have been true. I definitely think there was evidence tampering, but have never believed police would kill this girl, or find her dead somewhere else and plant her at Steven's. There are so many new variables that introduces, and things that could go wrong, that I just don't believe it without solid proof. CA, one of the suspects, mentioning a suspicious vehicle around the Salvage Yard is not solid proof. He could easily have made that up to point suspicion away from the Salvage Yard and himself. JMO



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SCHMAE]

I have not started episode 5 but I have a question for those who believe SA is innocent of this murder. Do you believe a 3rd party killed her and was never investigated and got away with it ? Or do you believe LE killed her to frame SA ? TIA

 

[blastfemur]

I can't see that this is especially significant and was wondering if I was missing the point...which may be the case. Hopefully the full trial transcripts will be released at some point so I can see exactly what the defence were getting at here.

Right, without knowing the full context I would guess its significant because it shows that whoever accessed it last didn't want anybody to know they accessed it. Going into evidence by itself is not incriminating, but if defense could show that there was an attempt to conceal the fact that it had been accessed, that would be significant.

If and when the full transcripts come out it will also be interesting to see the full conversation around Colburn's call on 11/3 and Lenk's explanation for miss remembering when he got to the scene.

 

[nathansmart]

I have not started episode 5 but I have a question for those who believe SA is innocent of this murder. Do you believe a 3rd party killed her and was never investigated and got away with it ? Or do you believe LE killed her to frame SA ? TIA

If he is innocent (and I'm not sure he is) then I believe it was someone not investigated. I do not believe the police killed her.

 

[stephsb]

I have not started episode 5 but I have a question for those who believe SA is innocent of this murder. Do you believe a 3rd party killed her and was never investigated and got away with it ? Or do you believe LE killed her to frame SA ? TIA

I think it was without a doubt Steven or a third party. Planting evidence to ensure he goes back to prison is somewhat understandable (although terribly unethical) but murdering an innocent one and mutilating her corpse is not. I think these guys were willing to sacrifice their careers and reputations to frame Steven, but do not think they were will to murder or mutilate a corpse. How would they have even known she was on the property? Were they stalking her so the second she left they could make their move and send Steven away for good? I mean come on. That's ridiculous.

I'm of the unpopular opinion Steven did this, or at least a jury could reasonably believe he did. That being said, I am not certain I could have I myself could have convicted him, with so many other great suspects on the property. I believe 100% Brendan is innocent and probably has no first hand knowledge of anything. But I think he heard and saw things, and a close reading of his statements should have led police to look closely at another person on that property. Instead, they changed the subject and led him away from probably some of the only reliable info coming from his mouth. I can post the specific statements later today.

For the record, I am sick of people saying Steven had no motive, he was going to get a huge payout and was turning his life around. The apparent motive immediately should have been sexual assault. I believe that the motive was sexual assault, and that he could have done it. No one ever suggested (except Brendan of course) that the motive was anything else. While I believe Steven could have done it, there were at least two other people who had committed and been charged w. sex offenses running around that salvage yard. I'd just like to put to rest the notion that Steven is this wonderful person. The guy poured gasoline on the family cat and lit it on fire, and he served 6 years for assaulting his female cousin with a deadly weapon because she spread rumors about him. This guy was not know for his restraint or rational thinking, just saying. Then again, neither were his brothers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk