Netflix to stream new documentary on Steven Avery - #5

[diesel]

The CADAVER dog... and her walking.... that dog is not good at it's job if that is the case, just sayin... LOL

The dog did hit on other vehicles.... but there is vehicles there that were in accidents.... some possibly fatal.

A cadaver dog, to my understanding, only hits on human remains or the smell. Tracking dogs only follow scents they are given to find and I haven't heard a tracking dog was used. If not, a real missed opportunity to see where she walked or if she was even in the trailer.

 

[missy1974]

The state and the defense enters evidence... and then they give different possibilities... the state has one idea, the defense has another. Sometimes, they are limited in what they can present, but I think that is why you see questions that lead to someone think that is a "hey, is that possible". Example: the key..... it's possible that Lenk or Colburn dropped that key there. Can't prove it... but it's still a possibility IMO Another Example: the *67... there are different possible reasons why he did that, depending on who was presenting it in the case.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

That's the only scenario you assume -- one that somehow uses lack of knowledge about a busted light to mean it's connected to a conspiracy to convict an innocent man?

How do you know there is no information? There's no information we, the public, have found, but that doesn't mean no one knows what happened to TH's vehicle.

I think that is the biggest problem with the conspiracy theory. There is so much evidence left out of the series. It was written to support their theory not with all truth and then let the chips fall where they may.

 

[MysticJynx]

That's the only scenario you assume -- one that somehow uses lack of knowledge about a busted light to mean it's connected to a conspiracy to convict an innocent man?

How do you know there is no information? There's no information we, the public, have found, but that doesn't mean no one knows what happened to TH's vehicle.

You are right, I do not know. But neither do you. So for you to spout out about how it could have happened longer ago then the 31st. I will spout how it could have happened that day. Truth is You don't know anymore than I do. Without knowing creates questions, And questions that are not answered causes me to have DOUBT. Reasonable doubt to the who investigation.

 

[Jaiddie]

Possibilities are not evidence. JMO.

Depends on one's definition of evidence. Cause in my definition, bones that are "supposedly" found in a burn site or burn barrel without any crime scene photos taken to corroborate that is actually where they were found shouldn't be considered as evidence either, IMHO.

 

[Madeleine74]

I see arguments proposed that not even the defense team believes happened, that's one problem with "conspiracy *advertiser censored*" as another poster very aptly called it.

It starts with the premise that the only truth is a conspiracy occurred and then every bit of evidence must have a story created around it to explain how the evidence got there through conspiracy/planting/framing. The scenarios don't have to fit together, there can be a separate one for each item, and each scenario can involve 1- n humans, which can be the same people, but don't have to be the same people. The only 2 rules are the accused/convicted person absolutely cannot be thought guilty, and there must be corruption in proposed scenarios.

 

[MysticJynx]

I see arguments proposed that not even the defense team believes happened, that's one problem with "conspiracy *advertiser censored*" as another poster very aptly called it.

It starts with the premise that the only truth is a conspiracy occurred and then every bit of evidence must have a story created around it to explain how the evidence got there through conspiracy/planting/framing. The scenarios don't have to fit together. The only 2 rules are the accused/convicted person absolutely cannot be thought guilty, and there must be corruption in proposed scenarios.

I'm here to find the truth. If he happens to be guilty fine. but as far as I can see the state did not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. And the Defense put up a great defense at showing us how corrupted Manitowoc county is. and how they should have maintained being recused from the case as Sheriff Pagel states in his press conference. The whole investigation was botched. None of the evidence that his enemy collected should have been admissible. Meaning the case would never have even been presented to a jury. So this what I'm looking at is to find the truth in light of the manitowoc county sheriffs office TAINTING EVERYTHING! Find something that isn't tainted or circumstantial that points either way.

 

[Jaiddie]

I think that is the biggest problem with the conspiracy theory. There is so much evidence left out of the series. It was written to support their theory not with all truth and then let the chips fall where they may.

You are right, there was quite a lot left out of the series. But what the anti-conspiracy people fail to expound on that subject (other than the totally debunked Kratz list) is that there is ACTUALLY more left out from the defense side of things. I have been reading transcripts and looking at the so called "evidence" for over a month now and I am 100% convinced that that investigation was the most tainted thing I have ever seen. It made the first frame job done in '85 look like a child's play compared to what they turned the investigation in to what happened to TH. To this day, NO ONE can say what actually happened to that young woman, because they were too busy making sure they put SA away for good this time. Too bad they didn't see what that documentary would bring to light, or that SA would someday have someone like KZ in his corner. Bet there are some nervous people in Manitowoc now, because they know what they did.

 

[Madeleine74]

Denying the existence of evidence, denying that Avery could well be culpable in TH's murder, or only considering scenarios of framing, planting, and conspiracy is not a search for the truth.

The defense were not under any illusions about their client -- they knew he could be factually guilty.

 

[RANCH]

I don't need to have all the questions answered and all doubt removed before believing that the jury got it right in this case.

JMO.

 

[Madeleine74]

You are right, I do not know. But neither do you. So for you to spout out about how it could have happened longer ago then the 31st. I will spout how it could have happened that day. Truth is You don't know anymore than I do. Without knowing creates questions, And questions that are not answered causes me to have DOUBT. Reasonable doubt to the who investigation.

How does damage to TH's SUV help SA? How does it hurt SA? How exactly does it fit into the case? Right, we don't know, we might never know. Could the damage have happened before? Yes. Could the damage have happened that particular day? Yes. Could TH have damaged her own SUV? Yes. Could someone else have damaged the SUV? Yes.

 

[Madeleine74]

I don't need to have all the questions answered and all doubt removed before believing that the jury got it right in this case.

JMO.

Excellent point, Ranch. The law the jury is instructed for proof is: 'beyond a reasonable doubt,' not 'beyond any and all possible doubt' or 'beyond any doubt I can think of whether it actually occurred or not,' or 'totally and completely 100% no doubt.'

Judges in fact instruct jurors that one can never totally and absolutely be without *any* possible doubt, as there is always something unknown. That's why the law is written the way it is.

 

[RANCH]

Excellent point, Ranch. The law the jury is instructed for proof is: 'beyond a reasonable doubt,' not 'beyond any and all possible doubt' or 'beyond any doubt I can think of whether it actually occurred or not,' or 'totally and completely 100% no doubt.'

Judges in fact instruct jurors that one can never totally and absolutely be without *any* possible doubt, as there is always something unknown. That's why the law is written the way it is.

I use the same reasoning in looking at this case even though this site is not a court of law. It makes sense for me to use the same standards. JMO.

 

[MysticJynx]

How does damage to TH's SUV help SA? How does it hurt SA? How exactly does it fit into the case? Right, we don't know, we might never know. Could the damage have happened before? Yes. Could the damage have happened that particular day? Yes. Could TH have damaged her own SUV? Yes. Could someone else have damaged the SUV? Yes.

EXACTLY a lot of I don't knows. And that's what I am trying to figure out. Cold cases can be solved 30 years later. why not a wrongful conviction. The only way to get answers is to ask questions. The fact that you don't know these answers and ask no questions, what are you here for? we already know he is in jail and was found guilty by a jury of his peers. We already know the facts that pointed to guilt, hwat we are finding is that these facts that pointed to guilt also points to reasonable doubt. There is no way to say that bullet came for sure from that .22, there is no way to conclusively include Th's dna on that bullet since the analyst was contaminating things. Including her own control panel. if she contamintated that there is chance she contaminated the vial the bullet was in. or had the bullet next to her pap smear. We dont know. SHE DEVIATED. It is not ok to deviate when you are playing with someones liberties. their freedom. That is my opinion. Not like Gahn would have me believe. That sometimes you do have to deviate to make sense. NO if you cant make sense without deviating then throw it out. You are talking about a mans LIFE! DEVIATED from all the protocols. If they were so sure he was guilty why didnt they play this investigation BY THE BOOK. because they are hiding something. Like how the bones were not really in the pit but off to the side in the debris. The bones in more than one location 3 on the property and one site at the quarry. Or how the bookshelf never moved from the wall but it was shaken so hard it dislodged this key. PFFTT. JE the one who usually does all the piccture documentation couldn't do that on the BOnes. cause they were already ALTERED, the plates in that car, he couldnt cause they were already ALTERED. why was so much ALTERED before pictures were taken? The fact is this investigation in my opinion was messed up and there is nothing you can say that would make me believe one word of KK's theory of how this horrible crime took place. Jury or not, I think they are wrong. And KK proved himself to be one who abused his status as DA. And since he was sitting on the post trial motions of SA and BD at this time when he was an admitted drug addict should also give the two gentlemen another chance at their appeals that were denied while KK was on the case.

 

[Madeleine74]

There is nothing about the damage to TH's SUV that is going to remove any of the other circumstantial evidence in the case. It was not part of the evidence in the case other than the damage appeared in pictures of the vehicle taken after the SUV was seized. The damage can not be dated without someone corroborating when they saw the damage occur. It's not needed to prove guilt, it's an artifact.

Again, you're assuming a wrongful conviction and are working backwards to try and pin the blame on someone else to solve a cold case. You're assuming the case was not solved. That's working off of belief first instead of having no beliefs about anyone and just following where the evidence leads. And that's fine, but it's not going to get you knowledge about 'the truth,' when you've predetermined what the truth is.

 

[MysticJynx]

There is nothing about the damage to TH's SUV that is going to remove any of the other circumstantial evidence in the case. It was not part of the evidence in the case other than the damage appeared in pictures of the vehicle taken after the SUV was seized. The damage can not be dated without someone corroborating when they saw the damage occur. It's not needed to prove guilt, it's an artifact.

Again, you're assuming a wrongful conviction and are working backwards to try and pin the blame on someone else to solve a cold case. You're assuming the case was not solved. That's working off of belief first instead of having no beliefs about anyone and just following where the evidence leads. And that's fine, but it's not going to get you knowledge about 'the truth,' when you've predetermined what the truth is.

The TRUTH is The whole INVESTIGATION WAS CONTAMINATED. that should be enough proof for anyone to be outraged. I hope to god that my worst enemies never frame me for murder, then collect all the evidence that proves it. The Manitowoc County Sheriff's office should never have been on that property the moment they heard STEVEN AVERY! Them not recusing themselves as they TOLD THE PUBLIC, is proof enough to me that the COUNTY is a bunch of liars. ANd any evidence or testimony they are responsible for is NULL to me. So the circumstances you talk of are moot in my opinion since they were collected by the enemy. KK the prize should have had made sure of them not being involved. If they didnt think they were wrong for being on the scene. why is it that the first warrant after they found that car does not LIST LENK or COLBORN as being out by his home on the 3rd and 4th of november. HIDING CONCEALING I do not trust that county, the evidence they collected or the testimony of lies they presented. That is my truth. I believe he was framed guilty or not. HE WAS FRAMED! and that is against the law, except when its the LAW doing the framing.

And I will continue to discuss possibilities as to what happened. Maybe I wont happen upon the truth that proves him guilty or innocent but I do believe he deserves a fair trial and just maybe some of this evidence that was not discussed then will be connected to something in the future. Who knows. Here is to hoping for at least a Fair trial.

 

[Madeleine74]

The TRUTH is The whole INVESTIGATION WAS CONTAMINATED.

Alrighty then. Good luck with your 'search for the truth.'

 

[SophieRose]

EXACTLY a lot of I don't knows. And that's what I am trying to figure out. Cold cases can be solved 30 years later. why not a wrongful conviction. The only way to get answers is to ask questions. The fact that you don't know these answers and ask no questions, what are you here for? we already know he is in jail and was found guilty by a jury of his peers. We already know the facts that pointed to guilt, hwat we are finding is that these facts that pointed to guilt also points to reasonable doubt. There is no way to say that bullet came for sure from that .22, there is no way to conclusively include Th's dna on that bullet since the analyst was contaminating things. Including her own control panel. if she contamintated that there is chance she contaminated the vial the bullet was in. or had the bullet next to her pap smear. We dont know. SHE DEVIATED. It is not ok to deviate when you are playing with someones liberties. their freedom. That is my opinion. Not like Gahn would have me believe. That sometimes you do have to deviate to make sense. NO if you cant make sense without deviating then throw it out. You are talking about a mans LIFE! DEVIATED from all the protocols. If they were so sure he was guilty why didnt they play this investigation BY THE BOOK. because they are hiding something. Like how the bones were not really in the pit but off to the side in the debris. The bones in more than one location 3 on the property and one site at the quarry. Or how the bookshelf never moved from the wall but it was shaken so hard it dislodged this key. PFFTT. JE the one who usually does all the piccture documentation couldn't do that on the BOnes. cause they were already ALTERED, the plates in that car, he couldnt cause they were already ALTERED. why was so much ALTERED before pictures were taken? The fact is this investigation in my opinion was messed up and there is nothing you can say that would make me believe one word of KK's theory of how this horrible crime took place. Jury or not, I think they are wrong. And KK proved himself to be one who abused his status as DA. And since he was sitting on the post trial motions of SA and BD at this time when he was an admitted drug addict should also give the two gentlemen another chance at their appeals that were denied while KK was on the case.

Can you give an example of a cold case solved 20 or 30 years later with all the questions answered? Lots of fresh cases don't even have all the answers.

 

[MysticJynx]

Can you give an example of a cold case solved 20 or 30 years later with all the questions answered? Lots of fresh cases don't even have all the answers.

I didnt Say with all the questions answered, I just said cold cases has have been solved after many years where new evidence is found.

 

[MysticJynx]

can you give an example of a cold case solved 20 or 30 years later with all the questions answered? Lots of fresh cases don't even have all the answers.

please do not put words in my mouth