Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #2

[LibertyandJustice4]

I can see a scenario w. Colburn seeing the car on the Avery property before having a search warrant, calling it in, immediately running on the assumption it was Steven (before he's even considered anyone else) and it just snowballing from there. The whole investigation is in question if they were looking for evidence that points to Steven, and trying to make evidence fit that theory. The investigation should look at the evidence, and let that lead them to a suspect, not the other way around like I think it did w. Steven's case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what I think happened with LE, too.

 

[joedotnet]

I remember watching a forensic files episode (or it could have been another one of those hour long shows years ago) that profiled this case...does anyone remember what show it was? I'm trying to find it either on Netflix or iTunes.

 

[MaxManning]

The thing that really gets me about this one is how hard it is to apply Occam's Razor. You can get wild with any theories on any case, but usually, the simplest explanation contains the truth. Here? Something wild had to have happened. I don't believe it was SA because I don't think he could have taken her off-site, happened to be in the trailer for a phone call with Jodi at exactly 5:30, gone back off-site and happened to have been back in time to take another phone call from Jodi and have a bonfire with Brendan later. There's just not enough time for all that moving around and it's quite complicated. In order for him to have done that, he would have had to held her somewhere and killed her later. Possible. Unlikely and unsubstantiated by any evidence, but there is an entire 4 days worth of evidence missing, so this is why I would say I'm at #3 on the poll.

For someone else on the compound to have done it, they would have had to have seen her and decided right then to commit a crime, then have the frame of mind to quickly figure out how to frame SA for it. Again, possible, but given the low IQs and poor impulse control, could they have really pulled it off? Especially with the police inadvertently helping them.

Then it's not a huge leap for us to say, well, she's probably told people she's been to the Averys before. If someone outside the compound was stalking her (ex bf, roommate, character we haven't met, or even a total stranger), they could have sort of planned it out, but still would have had to have acted last minute and known the property and comings and goings of other family members. How did no one on that property see or hear absolutely nothing? I can see them not seeing the RAV being up there, but not one of all those people heard screams? Saw a fire down at the quarry? Heard a gunshot? Nothing?

Not to mention other scenarios such as The German or maybe none of the above.

There's really no evidence for anything! I can't figure out which is the most likely scenario. I am thinking the simplest scenario for Colburn finding the vehicle early is that he was on the property and found it. I can't imagine LE set it up so much that they saw her and killed her or found her dead and purposefully framed SA. But who knows? Maybe they did. Makes as much sense as anything, I guess! There are just so many layers and so many people with motive to hurt SA who is not a savory character to begin with, and TH I am afraid has gotten lost in it all, which makes me sad.

I'd say that Steve Avery doing it, is the simplest explanation. It's not nearly as complicated if you don't confine yourself to what the prosecution has said about the crime.
Most don't believe prosecutions narrative of how it went down.

As you said, it's not even a fact that she was killed that night. What real evidence do we have that even says that ?


Jodi's phone call doesn't mean anything imo. If Steve is in the garage and hears the phone ring, he could just go in and answer it, and come right back to the garage. So that aspect is not a big deal to me.


But I also don't think it's complicated to rape her in the house, move her to the garage and kill her via pillow on head (no splatter), move her to the rav4 to transport her to the fire (back it up to firepit), clean garage, move rav4 to location, gather tires or whatever for the fire, and go to bed.

Not saying I believe that's what happened, but that's relatively simple and doesn't take any great complication and doesn't require her to be taken offsite.

It's just a flow of events. Rape, Kill, move body, clean, burn, hide car.

I think Chuck/Earl/Scott/Tadych/ex boyfriend/roommate/stranger would all seem to add complication to the process.


What complicates this case is that they wanted Dassey to be the evidence and so they were using what they coerced out of his mouth to create a narrative that doesn't make alot of sense imo. Trying to frame someone could get very complicated. But it doesn't erase that the crime itself could have been very simple, right ?

I think the simplest explanation above makes sense. Add to my above theory that Dassey helps him clean the garage, not knowing what the blood was from, and then helping him with a bonfire and maybe seeing body parts in the fire.


Again, not saying that's what I believe, because there might be an even simpler explanation with a proper investigation of all these characters.

 

[Soulmagent]

I can see a scenario w. Colburn seeing the car on the Avery property before having a search warrant, calling it in, immediately running on the assumption it was Steven (before he's even considered anyone else) and it just snowballing from there. The whole investigation is in question if they were looking for evidence that points to Steven, and trying to make evidence fit that theory. The investigation should look at the evidence, and let that lead them to a suspect, not the other way around like I think it did w. Steven's case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would believe that IF I wasnt aware of the Helicopter searches over his property but the use of the choppers and (on the 5th) and them not finding the car is really making me believe it was not there when they were looking for it. So if he found it is was not on the Avery property IMO.

 

[Lamima]

I'd say that Steve Avery doing it, is the simplest explanation. It's not nearly as complicated if you don't confine yourself to what the prosecution has said about the crime.
Most don't believe prosecutions narrative of how it went down.

As you said, it's not even a fact that she was killed that night. What real evidence do we have that even says that ?


Jodi's phone call doesn't mean anything imo. If Steve is in the garage and hears the phone ring, he could just go in and answer it, and come right back to the garage. So that aspect is not a big deal to me.


But I also don't think it's complicated to rape her in the house, move her to the garage and kill her via pillow on head (no splatter), move her to the rav4 to transport her to the fire (back it up to firepit), clean garage, move rav4 to location, gather tires or whatever for the fire, and go to bed.

Not saying I believe that's what happened, but that's relatively simple and doesn't take any great complication and doesn't require her to be taken offsite.

It's just a flow of events. Rape, Kill, move body, clean, burn, hide car.

I think Chuck/Earl/Scott/Tadych/ex boyfriend/roommate/stranger would all seem to add complication to the process.


What complicates this case is that they wanted Dassey to be the evidence and so they were using what they coerced out of his mouth to create a narrative that doesn't make alot of sense imo. Trying to frame someone could get very complicated. But it doesn't erase that the crime itself could have been very simple, right ?

I think the simplest explanation above makes sense. Add to my above theory that Dassey helps him clean the garage, not knowing what the blood was from, and then helping him with a bonfire and maybe seeing body parts in the fire.


Again, not saying that's what I believe, because there might be an even simpler explanation with a proper investigation of all these characters.

I agree to bolded. We should remember he spent 18 years in prison and may have learned some things about how to cover up crimes. Just MOO! And I am at #2.

 

[Tawny]

Evidence being planted does not mean someone ON the property did NOT commit the murder. What it tells me is that those who planted the evidence were convinced of SA's guilt and wanted to strengthen the case against him. They gave no *#(@s who actually murdered Teresa and that is the biggest tragedy of all. These men didn't care in the least in 1985 who actually raped Beerfdnfsten or whatever her name was, why would they care who murdered Teresa? All they cared about was silencing this dude they had a problem with. They did not bother to do proper investigation work because they were all convinced it was SA.

All it takes is 1 or 2 to plant the evidence and the others will have no reason to believe that evidence isn't real. It doesn't take hundreds to cover up a conspiracy, just people with no reason NOT to believe the conspirators. Or at least not enough of a reason to care.

The biggest thing we can ALL agree on, and that everyone SHOULD be outraged about whether you believe SA is guilty or innocent, is that LE did not properly investigate in 1985 and they did not properly investigate in 2005. That's glaringly evident in the testimonies of everyone involved, from LE to the roommate to the witnesses.

Teresa deserved justice and she did not get it. JMO

 

[SCHMAE]

The thing that really gets me about this one is how hard it is to apply Occam's Razor. You can g, then have the frame of mind to quickly figure out how to frame SA for it. Again, possible, but given the low IQs and poor impulse control, could they have really pulled it off? Especially with the police inadvertently helping them.
et wild with any theories on any case, but usually, the simplest explanation contains the truth. Here? Something wild had to have happened. I don't believe it was SA because I don't think he could have taken her off-site, happened to be in the trailer for a phone call with Jodi at exactly 5:30, gone back off-site and happened to have been back in time to take another phone call from Jodi and have a bonfire with Brendan later. There's just not enough time for all that moving around and it's quite complicated. In order for him to have done that, he would have had to held her somewhere and killed her later. Possible. Unlikely and unsubstantiated by any evidence, but there is an entire 4 days worth of evidence missing, so this is why I would say I'm at #3 on the poll.

For someone else on the compound to have done it, they would have had to have seen her and decided right then to commit a crime
Then it's not a huge leap for us to say, well, she's probably told people she's been to the Averys before. If someone outside the compound was stalking her (ex bf, roommate, character we haven't met, or even a total stranger), they could have sort of planned it out, but still would have had to have acted last minute and known the property and comings and goings of other family members. How did no one on that property see or hear absolutely nothing? I can see them not seeing the RAV being up there, but not one of all those people heard screams? Saw a fire down at the quarry? Heard a gunshot? Nothing?

Not to mention other scenarios such as The German or maybe none of the above.

There's really no evidence for anything! I can't figure out which is the most likely scenario. I am thinking the simplest scenario for Colburn finding the vehicle early is that he was on the property and found it. I can't imagine LE set it up so much that they saw her and killed her or found her dead and purposefully framed SA. But who knows? Maybe they did. Makes as much sense as anything, I guess! There are just so many layers and so many people with motive to hurt SA who is not a savory character to begin with, and TH I am afraid has gotten lost in it all, which makes me sad.

BBM, I don't know that is necessarily the case. If someone else on the property did it, say the brothers or the bil, I don't know that they thought at that time to ' frame SA". I would imagine as quickly as LE pounced on SA, they were quite relieved and thought ' wow this is working out quite nicely for me '.

 

[Tawny]

BBM, I don't know that is necessarily the case. If someone else on the property did it, say the brothers or the bil, I don't know that they thought at that time to ' frame SA". I would imagine as quickly as LE pounced on SA, they were quite relieved and thought ' wow this is working out quite nicely for me '.

Exactly how I feel. If it was someone on the property, as soon as LE latched onto SA, they would have been super relieved and SUPER helpful. JMO.

 

[MaxManning]

If there is sweat on his hands that got on the key, then he would have been wearing gloves and his fingerprints should be all over the car, too. That's why I don't really think much of the sweat DNA on the hood, either. If his gloves were off, he would have gotten fingerprints everywhere. The hood, the battery, the car itself. (And he wiped off the fingerprints but not the blood? I think not!)

I have seen many people assuming that if you have a glove on, it's keeps anything from soaking through.

I posted earlier on this thread an example of typical work gloves. Some have cloth around the knuckles, and some even are completely cloth.

If you are bleeding on your knuckle, it's going to be absorbed in the the cloth of the glove. If you are bleeding really badly, it might still drip, but far less since the glove itself is absorbing the blood.

Now, in terms of sweat DNA. I have used work gloves and wiped my brow with the gloves on. That sweat will be on the outside of the glove. Either the back of the hand or on the inside of the fingers, depending on how you wipe your brow. Yes, your sweat will be absorbed by the fabric of the glove. If you touch something with a wet or bloody glove, yes, that will transfer to a surface. Try it yourself.

So if someone grabs the latch, yes, maybe some sweat DNA transfers and leaves no print.

So I see no inconsistency.

Nothing complicated here, try it yourself with a cloth work glove.


Not using this to say this is what happened, but I don't think you can discount it happening this way and using it as a "See, it's impossible, because there are no prints yet there is blood and sweat evidence".

But I find it odd that they don't test the battery cables etc. It's not like they wouldn't have discovered the battery was disconnected until questioning brendan 6 months later. They likely knew the battery was disconnected day one. Isn't it kind of obvious that the killer likely disconnected them !?!?

 

[SCHMAE]

Link to Teresa Halbach's thread. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Teresa-Marie-Halbach-25-Manitowoc-31-Oct-2005

I am still not sure what I think . I think it's more likely than not that SA is her killer. It's just so messy and made extra messy by shoddy and deceptive LE and DA work. The horrible thing is that LE and the DA had the responsibility to place Teresa's murderer behind bars. That person may still be walking the street. Had they done a proper and honest job from day one, this conversation would not be happening today and no one would doubt the outcome of the trial. But I cannot help feel my question SA's guilt seems like a spit on the grave of Teresa Halbach and for that I'm sorry. I want to believe in our system and that the system WANTS to get the bad guy and has no hidden agenda. That's not always the reality and this case has brought attention to a national problem. If Teresa's killer is still at large then Teresa got no justice and an innocent man sits in prison for it. That's two reasons to pursue the truth.

 

[SCHMAE]

Did the Averys also run a ' tow for hire ' service in town ?

 

[stephsb]

I'd say that Steve Avery doing it, is the simplest explanation. It's not nearly as complicated if you don't confine yourself to what the prosecution has said about the crime.
Most don't believe prosecutions narrative of how it went down.

As you said, it's not even a fact that she was killed that night. What real evidence do we have that even says that ?


Jodi's phone call doesn't mean anything imo. If Steve is in the garage and hears the phone ring, he could just go in and answer it, and come right back to the garage. So that aspect is not a big deal to me.


But I also don't think it's complicated to rape her in the house, move her to the garage and kill her via pillow on head (no splatter), move her to the rav4 to transport her to the fire (back it up to firepit), clean garage, move rav4 to location, gather tires or whatever for the fire, and go to bed.

Not saying I believe that's what happened, but that's relatively simple and doesn't take any great complication and doesn't require her to be taken offsite.

It's just a flow of events. Rape, Kill, move body, clean, burn, hide car.

I think Chuck/Earl/Scott/Tadych/ex boyfriend/roommate/stranger would all seem to add complication to the process.


What complicates this case is that they wanted Dassey to be the evidence and so they were using what they coerced out of his mouth to create a narrative that doesn't make alot of sense imo. Trying to frame someone could get very complicated. But it doesn't erase that the crime itself could have been very simple, right ?

I think the simplest explanation above makes sense. Add to my above theory that Dassey helps him clean the garage, not knowing what the blood was from, and then helping him with a bonfire and maybe seeing body parts in the fire.


Again, not saying that's what I believe, because there might be an even simpler explanation with a proper investigation of all these characters.

I don't think it gets more complicated if you say CA did this over Steven. There is no evidence she was in Avery's bedroom. I find it nearly impossible to believe Teresa would have gone in there willingly, so at some point there was probably a struggle. To clean up all the trace evidence, fingerprints, hair that he may not have even known was left behind makes no sense to me. IMO, the simplest explanation is someone on the Avery property murdered Teresa. From there, it's anyone's guess, due to the shoddy investigation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[loveisthemovement]

Out of curiosity... Someone always mentions occam's razor... How would you interpret it when applied to this case?

 

[MaxManning]

Did the Averys also run a ' tow for hire ' service in town ?

I was looking around for that, couldn't find anything.

My reason for looking is that if this murder did occur off the property, where might that be ?

Say Scott/Bobby were involved. They might take her to the woods, as their alibi is hunting. Also not likely someone is going to find that vehicle out in the middle of nowhere.

If Chuck/Earl/Steve did it, where else might they have gone with her ?

Is there somewhere else where they could have had her held captive ?


I believe the propane guy said he saw a SUV leaving the property, but said he couldn't say who was driving. So, that's potential evidence that someone was removing her from the property.

So where would each person go ?

Also, in the documentary I believe it was chuck who said that he saw a vehicle entering the junkyard, can't remember what date that was, but it was at night. That would have been when the vehicle returned to the junkyard ?

 

[Dogface]

Wait, wait, wait.....if that key WAS a valet key, and these won't open trunks, then Steven can't have used it to put Theresa in there.

Does anyone know anything about valet keys? Everyone seems sure on Reddit...but I have never even heard of one, let alone seen one.

Anyone?

If there is sweat on his hands that got on the key, then he would have been wearing gloves and his fingerprints should be all over the car, too. That's why I don't really think much of the sweat DNA on the hood, either. If his gloves were off, he would have gotten fingerprints everywhere. The hood, the battery, the car itself. (And he wiped off the fingerprints but not the blood? I think not!)

I'm not on any bandwagon, I'm still not sure where I stand on this, besides standing upwind because the whole thing stinks, but couldn't he have been wearing gloves, and wiped sweat from his brow, then touched other stuff? Thus leaving sweat but no fingerprints.

The blood for me is a strange one, I don't have any good explanation as to how it got there, and wasn't cleaned up if it was indeed SA.

 

[stephsb]

I was looking around for that, couldn't find anything.

My reason for looking is that if this murder did occur off the property, where might that be ?

Say Scott/Bobby were involved. They might take her to the woods, as their alibi is hunting. Also not likely someone is going to find that vehicle out in the middle of nowhere.

If Chuck/Earl/Steve did it, where else might they have gone with her ?

Is there somewhere else where they could have had her held captive ?


I believe the propane guy said he saw a SUV leaving the property, but said he couldn't say who was driving. So, that's potential evidence that someone was removing her from the property.

So where would each person go ?

Also, in the documentary I believe it was chuck who said that he saw a vehicle entering the junkyard, can't remember what date that was, but it was at night. That would have been when the vehicle returned to the junkyard ?

Anything said by CA should be verified by another source. He should have been looked at as a suspect from the beginning, JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lamima]

I'm not on any bandwagon, I'm still not sure where I stand on this, besides standing upwind because the whole thing stinks, but couldn't he have been wearing gloves, and wiped sweat from his brow, then touched other stuff? Thus leaving sweat but no fingerprints.

The blood for me is a strange one, I don't have any good explanation as to how it got there, and wasn't cleaned up if it was indeed SA.

Hmmm, maybe. And maybe he had cloth gloves that would let his blood seep through. People say the blood smear in the SUV near the ignition looks like it was cotton swabbed on...could have smeared through cloth gloves.

 

[MaxManning]

I don't think it gets more complicated if you say CA did this over Steven. There is no evidence she was in Avery's bedroom. I find it nearly impossible to believe Teresa would have gone in there willingly, so at some point there was probably a struggle. To clean up all the trace evidence, fingerprints, hair that he may not have even known was left behind makes no sense to me. IMO, the simplest explanation is someone on the Avery property murdered Teresa. From there, it's anyone's guess, due to the shoddy investigation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, I think complicated in the sense that some would think they (chuck or earl) were planning to frame him.

But I think as others have said, it's possible that Chuck or Earl got really lucky in that the police wanted Steve so they weren't ever given much scrutiny.

You are right though, up to the point of murder it could be incredibly simple for Chuck or Steve or Earl.

 

[MaxManning]

I'm not on any bandwagon, I'm still not sure where I stand on this, besides standing upwind because the whole thing stinks, but couldn't he have been wearing gloves, and wiped sweat from his brow, then touched other stuff? Thus leaving sweat but no fingerprints.

The blood for me is a strange one, I don't have any good explanation as to how it got there, and wasn't cleaned up if it was indeed SA.

I have been saying this about the cloth gloves since very early in this case. I have cloth work gloves and they get wet from me wiping sweat. I have never had a bleeding hand with them, but I have not problem accepting the cloth would absorb blood and seep through to exterior.

It's completely logical imo

 

[TheDuchess]

I'm brain dead today. The RAV4 is an SUV and there is no "trunk." There would likely be button from the inside that lifts the gate in back. But it wouldn't be a problem to get back there even without the regular key.