Season 2 Episode 10

[Karinna]

When did SA first cut his finger? I know from what i have read he reopened the cut again on the trailer, and that was before his trip to Menards.
So he dripped blood in the sink and wherever else and re taped it to stop it bleeding i imagine.
So if his finger was taped up after opening the cut again, how could the blood from his finger drip onto anything after that? Once a cut is taped up it doesn't drip anywhere because the taping of a cut stems the bleeding, as we know any kind of compression on a bleeding wound stops the bleeding. And there certainly wouldn't be any flakes coming from it either.

 

[proudfootz]

I'm not finding anything with an exact date for the cut.

Rollie Johnson (owner of the trailer Jodie and Steven lived in) observed a cut on Steven's hand in the week before Teresa's disappearance.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Exhibit-7-Affidavit-of-Roland-Johnson.pdf

Someone on another site did a comparison between photos of Steven's cut and a photographic record of how a cut heals and estimated the original cut might have occurred about October 25th.

Did Avery cut his finger around 10/25? : TickTockManitowoc

Steven explained the cut was from handling metal roofing.

https://www.milwaukeemag.com/blood-simple/

 

[Karinna]

I'm not finding anything with an exact date for the cut.

Rollie Johnson (owner of the trailer Jodie and Steven lived in) observed a cut on Steven's hand in the week before Teresa's disappearance.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Exhibit-7-Affidavit-of-Roland-Johnson.pdf

Someone on another site did a comparison between photos of Steven's cut and a photographic record of how a cut heals and estimated the original cut might have occurred about October 25th.

Did Avery cut his finger around 10/25? : TickTockManitowoc

Steven explained the cut was from handling metal roofing.

https://www.milwaukeemag.com/blood-simple/

Thanks for posting up the info. & links proudfootz.
So if the initial cut to SA's finger occurred around October 25th. around a week before TH went missing, then that cut was not the one he would of left blood in TH's vehicle.
A cut depending how deep it was would be fairly well healed in about a week.
So the blood that SA supposedly left in the RAV would be when he reopened the cut on November 3rd., the day SA went to Menards with his brother Chuck at around 7:30 and got home around 10:00, and went straight to bed.
If that is correct, then i'm not sure how SA could leave any blood evidence in the RAV belonging to TH? It's not like anyone is going around bleeding all over the place with a cut, because we would bandage it or tape it to make sure that didn't happen.

 

[missy1974]

Thanks for posting up the info. & links proudfootz.
So if the initial cut to SA's finger occurred around October 25th. around a week before TH went missing, then that cut was not the one he would of left blood in TH's vehicle.
A cut depending how deep it was would be fairly well healed in about a week.
So the blood that SA supposedly left in the RAV would be when he reopened the cut on November 3rd., the day SA went to Menards with his brother Chuck at around 7:30 and got home around 10:00, and went straight to bed.
If that is correct, then i'm not sure how SA could leave any blood evidence in the RAV belonging to TH?

I'm not sure I follow Karinna? You don't think it would have opened on the 31st, but would on the 3rd?

Just from experience... actually my hubby's experience lol ... He is an electrician, he gets cuts and gashes all the time. They always seem to take forever to heal because he always seems to open it again within a few days. I also understand the "tape" on the cut thing... not unusual to see tape around some of my hubby's fingers when he gets home.

I have to head to work but will check in later Nice to see you continue to post @Karinna

 

[proudfootz]

I work with my hands and re-opening a serious cut on them is a hazard for sure.

Anyone who had contact with Steven could see that he had wounds on his hands which could explain his blood being found.

 

[Karinna]

I'm not sure I follow Karinna? You don't think it would have opened on the 31st, but would on the 3rd?

Just from experience... actually my hubby's experience lol ... He is an electrician, he gets cuts and gashes all the time. They always seem to take forever to heal because he always seems to open it again within a few days. I also understand the "tape" on the cut thing... not unusual to see tape around some of my hubby's fingers when he gets home.

I have to head to work but will check in later Nice to see you continue to post @Karinna

Hi missy, no i said if he obtained the cut on the 25th. of October, around approx. a week before the cut opened up again on the 3rd. November.
The initial cut would of been pretty well healed from the 25th. Oct.- 3rd. Nov., when SA opened it up again before going to Menards with Chuck.
I wasn't aware it opened up on the 31st. as well??

 

[Karinna]

I work with my hands and re-opening a serious cut on them is a hazard for sure.

Anyone who had contact with Steven could see that he had wounds on his hands which could explain his blood being found.

How many wounds did SA have on his hands?
And yes if he had various wounds on his hands, then at least one of them would have dripped blood into the RAV if it wasn't bandaged and such a wound was actively bleeding. Although to me that whole story is questionable.

 

[Karinna]

And SA says this in an affadavit
(quote)
After reviewing more case documents and thinking about what happened on November 3, 2005, I do not believe that law enforcement broke into my trailer and took blood from my sink and planted it in Ms. Halbach’s vehicle. I believe that Bobby removed the blood from my sink and planted it in the RAV-4. Law enforcement would not remove the blood from the sink because would not know that the blood belonged to me and would believe that it belonged to Ms. Halbach. Only the killer would know that the blood did not belong to Ms. Halbach and only someone who saw my finger bleeding would know that the blood was mine, so I think that person who was there and knew my finger was bleeding and could have gotten into my trailer was Bobby. He would have taken the blood to frame me and save himself.
In New Filing, Steven Avery, of ‘Making a Murderer,’ Names Two Others As Possible Killers

 

[proudfootz]

How many wounds did SA have on his hands?
And yes if he had various wounds on his hands, then at least one of them would have dripped blood into the RAV if it wasn't bandaged and such a wound was actively bleeding. Although to me that whole story is questionable.

I'm only aware of the one, but was just covering the possibilities.

 

[Karinna]

I'm only aware of the one, but was just covering the possibilities.

Fair enough, and thanks for clarifying,

 

[Saul Vesalot]

So, I have been trying to look into the legal literature about evidence planting. So far, mostly on frequency.
Fun fact: According to an article from 2004, there is virtually no real research on evidence tampering as a whole. Partially because the phrase can be construed in very broad ways. A witness lying in court can be considered evidence tampering by some. What the article did state was that, according to one past study said that 60%+ of lawyers felt evidence tampering was endemic.

But again, that is broad and includes perjury, changing/manufacturing documents, and withholding evidence during discovery, among other things. And I believe that this perception of rampant tampering is held both by defense and prosecution. So, in order to actually research the subject, researchers generally focus their research on one category of tampering at a time.

"An uncharitable assessment might characterize the field was more concerned whether the declarant herself testifies than whether what she says is truthful....Evidence tampering has been something of a Medusa in evidence scholarship. Though recognizing its presence, the field has largely been reluctant to stare directly at the problem."

One judge said that if lies were water, everyone in the courtroom would drown. [paraphrased]

The article is called Evidence Tampering by Chris William Sanchirico. Published in Duke Law Journal. 2004.

Interesting, but very limited. I might spend a few more days poking around on this subject and unless I find a gold mine, I'll move on to something else.

Fun fact: I have looked very briefly at coerced confessions in the literature, (titles of articles mainly) and have found references to coerced confessions being suppressed (prevented from being used in court) as far back as 1947, maybe different wording will result in even older research.

 

[proudfootz]

I consider law enforcement employees who encouraged Brendan to lie to be manufacturing 'evidence'.

They should be taking down what the witness says, and not suggesting to witnesses what they should say.

 

[guruagain]

And SA says this in an affadavit
(quote)
After reviewing more case documents and thinking about what happened on November 3, 2005, I do not believe that law enforcement broke into my trailer and took blood from my sink and planted it in Ms. Halbach’s vehicle. I believe that Bobby removed the blood from my sink and planted it in the RAV-4. Law enforcement would not remove the blood from the sink because would not know that the blood belonged to me and would believe that it belonged to Ms. Halbach. Only the killer would know that the blood did not belong to Ms. Halbach and only someone who saw my finger bleeding would know that the blood was mine, so I think that person who was there and knew my finger was bleeding and could have gotten into my trailer was Bobby. He would have taken the blood to frame me and save himself.
In New Filing, Steven Avery, of ‘Making a Murderer,’ Names Two Others As Possible Killers

Unless some of the Police already knew what had happened to Teresa.

 

[Maznblu1]

I can't buy the blood story at all. Avery said “I saw that most of the blood on my sink, which I had not cleaned up the previous night, was gone. It seemed to me that the blood had been cleaned up,” Even if Bobby took some of the blood, why would he clean up the rest of it? He's not going to whip out the Clorox and tidy up for Steven.

 

[Saul Vesalot]

I can't buy the blood story at all. Avery said “I saw that most of the blood on my sink, which I had not cleaned up the previous night, was gone. It seemed to me that the blood had been cleaned up,” Even if Bobby took some of the blood, why would he clean up the rest of it? He's not going to whip out the Clorox and tidy up for Steven.

Trying to acquire it in any way would smear it. And that could be photographed.

 

[missy1974]

I can't buy the blood story at all. Avery said “I saw that most of the blood on my sink, which I had not cleaned up the previous night, was gone. It seemed to me that the blood had been cleaned up,” Even if Bobby took some of the blood, why would he clean up the rest of it? He's not going to whip out the Clorox and tidy up for Steven.

But he didn't say it was all gone? I'm a bit confused by your post. You quote part of his affidavit that clearly says "most of the blood", not all. Doesn't seem like Clorox was used at all, or even implied.

 

[leslievernon]

you know what's the problem with framing? it's not the how.. i think a jury could buy that somebody could do this or that, undetected.. no, the problem is why? why the hell would somebody do it. cause it's such a risk. for citizens as well as for cops, and it shows so much contempt, hatred.

if they can't show that...
LE did not, or didn't want to explore that, they focused on avery.
and all the possible suspects, did not want to talk in MaM2.

 

[proudfootz]

you know what's the problem with framing? it's not the how.. i think a jury could buy that somebody could do this or that, undetected.. no, the problem is why? why the hell would somebody do it. cause it's such a risk. for citizens as well as for cops, and it shows so much contempt, hatred.

if they can't show that...
LE did not, or didn't want to explore that, they focused on avery.
and all the possible suspects, did not want to talk in MaM2.

I suppose motive to frame someone varies according to the person.

Suppose it was a murderer. Killers already put themselves at risk by committing such a serious crime. One very good way to throw investigators off your trail is to put them on the scent of someone else. So framing another is actually a tactic to reduce risk to oneself.

On the other hand it could be someone with some rationale to frame a person they have some kind of hatred and contempt toward. For instance we have seen no end of videos where police have planted evidence on people they were arresting and one case where a law enforcement employee planted a weapon on an unarmed person who was running away. It seems to give some people in that profession a sense of immunity since they are often the person doing the investigation, or one of their friends is. They may feel the risk is relatively low.

 

[JMarsh]

I can't figure out how to delete an accidental post, so this was an accident---

I suppose motive to frame someone varies according to the person.

Suppose it was a murderer. Killers already put themselves at risk by committing such a serious crime. One very good way to throw investigators off your trail is to put them on the scent of someone else. So framing another is actually a tactic to reduce risk to oneself.

On the other hand it could be someone with some rationale to frame a person they have some kind of hatred and contempt toward. For instance we have seen no end of videos where police have planted evidence on people they were arresting and one case where a law enforcement employee planted a weapon on an unarmed person who was running away. It seems to give some people in that profession a sense of immunity since they are often the person doing the investigation, or one of their friends is. They may feel the risk is relatively low.

 

[JMarsh]

This next is out there but bear with me, try this theory on for size:

You have a group of people who seriously messed up, and they are sued for a lot of money-and if this lawsuit prevails, in addition to the loss of finances, they might also lose their jobs, their standing in the community, etc. Plus the person suing them, is someone they despise.

Perhaps if placed in this position, one might lie in wait for for the person suing to screw up. Maybe in that position someone might even employ a sort of "spy" from within that target person's close social network, to watch for that person to make a mistake, one that might render a victorious lawsuit impossible.

But here's the hitch, the target person lives clean. They have a girlfriend who they don't cheat on. They don't drink, do drugs, gamble or so much as fail to stop at a red light.


What if Scott Tadych was paid to alert LE if Avery committed any act that would discredit him? When Avery fails to do produce this, either Scott on his own, or under the guidance of whoever he is helping, sees Teresa on the property one day and gets a big idea-Approach her! Offer Teresa money to say she was molested or raped by Avery on a photo-shoot, presto, now Avery is a rapist again-lawsuit impeded or gone. And in Scott's mind, since he is being paid, others will sign on just for the money.

But Scott can't just call Teresa, he needs to meet her in person, so there is no phone record of his having spoken to her. So, by way of Barb he arranges for Teresa to come out to the property and take pics of Barb's vehicle (it was Avery's sister, not Avery, who had a vehicle to be photographed-Avery was just facilitating the shoot)

And Teresa does show up, but after she takes the pics and makes her exit, Scott follows her, waves her down, and engineers a place off the road, out of general view, for them to stop. He approaches her with the offer. She not only declines, she is angered. There is an altercation, and she is killed at the back of her vehicle. Ergo, the blood splatter on the rear door.

And then the rest is just in keeping with the original plan, only now the entire scenario is in the control of those anxious to frame Avery. Tadych would have had easy access to Avery's trailer. Maybe Bobby was part of the plan as well, or was brought in later and assisted...

Again, this theory is a little elaborate. But what if...