Bones

New Posts

Also, the 3 locations is important to consider when theorizing which of the 3 is the burn location.

But take into account what might have been used to move the bones.

Is it reasonable to suggest that the janda burn barrel might have been used to move the bones ?

So, would that mean the burn barrel was used, and then returned to that location. Meaning one of the other two locations was the burn site ?

Is it possible the body was burned in the quarry ? Killer gets janda burn barrel, puts remains into the burn barrel, ooops left one.

Killer moves bones to Steve Avery burn pit dumps them out.

Next the burn barrel is returned to the janda residence. ooops left a few in that pesky burn barrel again.

That would explain 3 locations. However, is there anything in that quarry that is consistent with a fire ?
 
LOL Max I just posted this in another thread... by accident :( I will copy it here...
\So if we believe that her body was burned in the firepit behind SA's garage, what is a reasonable explanation for finding bone fragments in the quarry (I'm not exactly sure where in the quarry, does anyone?), and what is a reasonable explanation for finding bone fragments in a barrel behind BD's/Barbs/ST's home?

I'm seriously trying to rationalize this in my own mind and welcome any feedback. I can't think of a reason why there would be fragments elsewhere.

As I see it right now, it's reasonable TO ME that she was burned somewhere else.... the barrel (from BD's) was used to move the ashes/bones and that is why there is fragments left in there (by accident). It still doesn't explain the fragments found in the quarry though... maybe going to dump them there and then changed their mind?
 
MaxManning said:
What am I missing here ? or is this purely about it not being EXACT wording ?
Click to expand...

It's a misinterpretation of testimony.

It's like if I stated that the EDTA test proved the blood wasn't planted; that is obviously not the case.

Let's analyze the statement:

I've been involved in cases where human cremains have been burned in one location and moved to another location. And in those cases, in fact, the actual location where the bones have been moved to, tends to be the location where most of the remains are."
Click to expand...
What Fairgrieve says is that in cases with bones in more than one spot it "tends" to be the spot with most bones is where the bones were moved to, not that it always is.

He doesn't say the bones were moved to the firepit.

In fact, according to this article, "On cross examination, (Fairgrieve) said he couldn't rule out the body being burned in the pit."

He doesn't even say it's his opinion that the bones were moved to the firepit, at least not in the sentence Tawny provides.

Merely that in most cases it tends to be the place with the most bones was the place they were moved to.

Here is the opinion I see: "Fairgrieve said it was his opinion that it was not possible to make any positive determination on whether the bones were moved because the initial recovery efforts were poorly documented. "

If there's another statement of his where he specifically states it's his opinion that the bones weren't burned in the pit, then please provide it.

If there's anything you disagree with or don't understand, let me know.
 
Madeleine74 said:
If you're willing to consider Brendan's answer to that: he said his uncle used a bucket to scatter some of TH's remains/bones. He said the uncle 'buried' some of them (i.e. folded them under some existing dirt about 3 or 4 ft in front of the fire pit), and removed 1 or more bucket loads over to the quarry. As to why SA did a half-arsed job of it, no one knows. Maybe he intended to do more and ran out of time. Maybe he thought he removed enough so the pile of stuff wouldn't be obvious, and by spreading it around people would not easily find any remains.

If one is not willing to consider Brendan's answer, then ... dunno.
Click to expand...

He also said, only consistent thing he said I might add, that Avery put the knife under a seat in Halbach's SUV yet there was zero evidence of that so no, I'm not willing to even consider his answer.
 
Sleuther87 said:
It's a misinterpretation of testimony.

It's like if I stated that the EDTA test proved the blood wasn't planted; that is obviously not the case.

Let's analyze the statement:
What Fairgrieve says is that in cases with bones in more than one spot it "tends" to be the spot with most bones is where the bones were moved to, not that it always is.

He doesn't say the bones were moved to the firepit.

In fact, according to this article, "On cross examination, (Fairgrieve) said he couldn't rule out the body being burned in the pit."

He doesn't even say it's his opinion that the bones were moved to the firepit, at least not in the sentence Tawny provides.

Merely that in most cases it tends to be the place with the most bones was the place they were moved to.

Here is the opinion I see: "Fairgrieve said it was his opinion that it was not possible to make any positive determination on whether the bones were moved because the initial recovery efforts were poorly documented. "

If there's another statement of his where he specifically states it's his opinion that the bones weren't burned in the pit, then please provide it.

If there's anything you disagree with or don't understand, let me know.
Click to expand...

Ok, I guess for myself, I assume everyone here has an opinion , and might word it a given way to bolster a point-- you know, how lawyers tend to do and then it gets nixed in cross examination. haha

I agree, we can't be certain. But I think the main takeaway point that I have, is that it's consistent with a different burn site, and using the word "tends", means more probable ?

My understanding is that the moving seems likely. I just don't understand going all the way to the quarry or going to the janda burn barrel to drop a few bone fragments. Makes no sense to me. If you are looking to hide bones, you don't leave the major bulk of them in your own fire pit.

Seems far more consistent with them being moved to that location, and accidentally leaving a few behind. The bones at the Janda residence, further the theory imo, because it means they might have used the barrel itself to move the bones.

The quarry bone is very curious, if it's a TH bone. I have to admit. Had they found a bunch more there, I'd be more prone to see it as an attempt to hide it. 1 bone ? He goes to the quarry to drop 1 bone ?

Only thing I could think of is that if somehow that 1 bone is in the janda barrel, and gets accidentally taken there by someone completely without knowledge of the human bones. For example someone kills a deer, cooks it at janda residence. Barrel has a few TH bones left in bottom of it. Deer bones get put on top of that. Goes to the quarry to drop off the deer bones, and 1 TH bone drops out too. Makes alot more sense, since someone who doesn't comprehend there is human bones are in there, isn't making sure they get all the bones out of the bottom of the barrel. So 2 bones go back to the janda residence.

Might be assuming too much to think the bone was KNOWINGLY brought to the quarry.

just a thought.
 
missy1974 said:
LOL Max I just posted this in another thread... by accident :( I will copy it here...
\So if we believe that her body was burned in the firepit behind SA's garage, what is a reasonable explanation for finding bone fragments in the quarry (I'm not exactly sure where in the quarry, does anyone?), and what is a reasonable explanation for finding bone fragments in a barrel behind BD's/Barbs/ST's home?

I'm seriously trying to rationalize this in my own mind and welcome any feedback. I can't think of a reason why there would be fragments elsewhere.

As I see it right now, it's reasonable TO ME that she was burned somewhere else.... the barrel (from BD's) was used to move the ashes/bones and that is why there is fragments left in there (by accident). It still doesn't explain the fragments found in the quarry though... maybe going to dump them there and then changed their mind?
Click to expand...


Ok, in short what I am thinking as 1 possibility now.

Bones are burned "somewhere"

Janda Barrel is used to move the bones to Steve Avery fire pit

Janda Barrel still has a few bones in the bottom

Tadych and/or Dassey burn a deer down to bones in their pit.

Put deer bones into barrel - TH bones still on bottom.

Dassey/Tadych take barrel to the quarry to get rid of the deer bones.

Since hallbach bones are on the bottom, 1 falls out.

Several remain in the barrel. Their goal was not to make sure the barrel was empty, hell, maybe some deer bones were left in barrel too.

The bring barrel back to the janda residence.

Now we have 1 bone in quarry, few bones in janda barrel, and majority of bones in Steve Avery fire pit.


So... Do we know what averys/tadych/dassey do after killing a deer an butchering it ? Do those bones end up at quarry ?
 
Here is what Fairgrieve testified: based on the info, he doesn't know where the bones were burnt
 
Sleuther87 said:
Here is what Fairgrieve testified: based on the info, he doesn't know where the bones were burnt
Click to expand...

You can't conveniently ignore that he also testified that based on the info, and his experience, the bones were very likely moved.
 
missy1974 said:
LOL Max I just posted this in another thread... by accident :( I will copy it here...
\So if we believe that her body was burned in the firepit behind SA's garage, what is a reasonable explanation for finding bone fragments in the quarry (I'm not exactly sure where in the quarry, does anyone?), and what is a reasonable explanation for finding bone fragments in a barrel behind BD's/Barbs/ST's home?

I'm seriously trying to rationalize this in my own mind and welcome any feedback. I can't think of a reason why there would be fragments elsewhere.

As I see it right now, it's reasonable TO ME that she was burned somewhere else.... the barrel (from BD's) was used to move the ashes/bones and that is why there is fragments left in there (by accident). It still doesn't explain the fragments found in the quarry though... maybe going to dump them there and then changed their mind?
Click to expand...

My theory... She was burned in the pit. Her bones were moved to Avery's fire pit (oops... Missed the pelvic bone though). Worrying the bones might get overlooked, some were placed in the burn barrel as well. The rest were either sprinkled around like bread crumbs for added measure or legitimately dropped by accident from whatever vessel they were being transported in. As for using the barrel to transport the bones? Naa... 55 gallon drums are already heavy enough. Carting it around with ash from other burns and ash from a body burn? Too much weight for one person to carry.

Her burned possessions are interesting. It they were burned in the barrel with an active fire they would have been destroyed beyond recognition. If they were placed in the barrel a few hours after an active fire it would have resulted in some melting but the possessions would have been identifiable which, coincidentally, they were.
 
Can we all just agree that the bones could have been moved ? Even likely, given he said "tends" ?

Nothing factual. I think we can all agree on that right ?

Even "tends" doesn't mean the opposite couldn't have been the case as well.

No need for us to fight, when I think we can agree there was no definitive statement. Anyone is free to state that they believe they were moved, based on the expert opinion, because they used "tends". A juror likely comes away with that opinion, if they hear to the word "tends". Understanding that it's not a fact.
 
MaxManning said:
Can we all just agree that the bones could have been moved ? Even likely, given he said "tends" ?

Nothing factual. I think we can all agree on that right ?

Even "tends" doesn't mean the opposite couldn't have been the case as well.

No need for us to fight, when I think we can agree there was no definitive statement. Anyone is free to state that they believe they were moved, based on the expert opinion, because they used "tends". A juror likely comes away with that opinion, if they hear to the word "tends". Understanding that it's not a fact.
Click to expand...

Thanks Max.

I definitely agree there are different ways to interpret testimony. I don't appreciate being told my opinion is "wrong" and that me stating my opinion is harmful to people seeking the truth. That's not discussion, that's insulting, IMHO.
 
MaxManning said:
Can we all just agree that the bones could have been moved ? Even likely, given he said "tends" ?

Nothing factual. I think we can all agree on that right ?

Even "tends" doesn't mean the opposite couldn't have been the case as well.

No need for us to fight, when I think we can agree there was no definitive statement. Anyone is free to state that they believe they were moved, based on the expert opinion, because they used "tends". A juror likely comes away with that opinion, if they hear to the word "tends". Understanding that it's not a fact.
Click to expand...

The fact the bones were moved shouldn't even be an issue for debate. The debatable issue where the original burn location was. If it was Avery's pit the evidence doesn't fit unless you go with Dassey's version which makes no sense. The other option is that the quarry was the original burn site. Whoever burned her there missed the pelvic bone by accident but transported the rest to Avery's place to throw LEO off the trail.

Quick question for the people who believe Dassey. Why didn't the investigators find the bucket that was used to move the bones around with?
 
Sinsaint said:
The fact the bones were moved shouldn't even be an issue for debate. The debatable issue where the original burn location was. If it was Avery's pit the evidence doesn't fit unless you go with Dassey's version which makes no sense. The other option is that the quarry was the original burn site. Whoever burned her there missed the pelvic bone by accident but transported the rest to Avery's place to throw LEO off the trail.

Quick question for the people who believe Dassey. Why didn't the investigators find the bucket that was used to move the bones around with?
Click to expand...

You are correct, I wasn't explicit enough, I apologize.

We know factually that some bones were moved. The burn site is in question, and the expert says that the burn site "tends" to NOT be the site with the most bones/remains. So quarry and janda residence, are possible burn sites given that opinion.


I am starting to feel like the quarry bone got there on accident. Here's why :

I think that if the body was brought there to burn, it would seem unlikely based on the descriptions I have read about all kinds of animal bones in a pile, to manage keeping all the human bones separate.

I could be wrong, have been searching for pictures of where that bone was found. Haven't found any yet. anyone ?

Also, on the reddit, I saw the "cook shed" mentioned, but I've not heard of that. Anyone know of this ??
 
Apparently the cook shed is new to everyone on Reddit as well. It was just stated that the "cook shed" in the woods near the averys was another location that was used for bonfires.... The person who posted that statement was discussing other possible burn pits where the body could have originally been burned. I believe it was just a theory and the discussion was similar to this one...as in speculating other possible locations for the main burn spot. The theory was that the golf cart was used to move the bones to different locations. The discussion was trying to match Brendan's story about riding around on the golf cart with SA. At least that's what I got from their discussion. It was an interesting read on Reddit. Thanks Maxmanning for your thoughts and sharing information. I always enjoy reading your posts!
 
If only Avery didn't throw at least 5 tires
and a carseat
into his bonfire
and tend it for several hours that night
making the fire strong enough to destroy TH's bones
(not an easy task)
we wouldn't be having this debate
and he would be free right now :thinking:
 
Sleuther87 said:
If only Avery didn't throw at least 5 tires
and a carseat
into his bonfire
and tend it for several hours that night
making the fire strong enough to destroy TH's bones
(not an easy task)
we wouldn't be having this debate
and he would be free right now :thinking:
Click to expand...

so what is your theory about the bones fragments found in the other burn barrel and at the quarry?
 
missy1974 said:
so what is your theory about the bones fragments found in the other burn barrel and at the quarry?
Click to expand...

Ok I'll post a theory for fun:

Steven has a bonfire to burn the bones.

Some bones don't destroy as easily as others (such as long arm and leg bones), so after the bonfire some are still left over.

With less bones to destroy, Steven uses the burn barrel to burn/hide these bones.

According to Eisenberg (the forensic anthropologist working the investigation):

Um, the burn barrel identified as Burn Barrel No. 2, there were human --burned human bone fragments from the spine, from the shoulder blade, or what we call the scapula, a possible hand bone fragment, what we call a metacarpal, Um, and fragments of long bones that could have been, uh, from leg bones or from arm bones.
Click to expand...

The pelvic bone is too big and hard to destroy, so he takes it to the quarry to hide it there with the animals bones.

:happydance:
 
Sleuther87 said:
If only Avery didn't throw at least 5 tires
and a carseat
into his bonfire
and tend it for several hours that night
making the fire strong enough to destroy TH's bones
(not an easy task)
we wouldn't be having this debate
and he would be free right now :thinking:
Click to expand...


Do any of us know how common a bonfire is at a junkyard ?

I honestly don't.

I speculate that their job is to take in junked cars, strip them for things of potential worth, such as tires, parts, seats, etc. before crushing.

Anything that is deemed flammable junk or something you can burn away, is likely destroyed in a fire pit.

I know we are calling this a bonfire, but it's not a bonfire in the sense of what a common person might term as such. -- something we do at a beach etc.

This is a part of how they do their business, and likely happens quite regularly. We know the quarry has bones from animals, which I am thinking is deer that they butcher and eat.

So this process of burning away as much flesh etc before disposing of the bones at that quarry, is likely a regular thing.

I'm sure they know exactly how to get the optimum fire to do their job most efficiently.

So as incriminating as that may sound in some ways, that's kind of what likely goes on at any junkyard ALL THE TIME.

Just speculation, but maybe someone can inform us if this bonfire is a common thing, or if they do it as often as the rest of us non junk yard people.

If only he hadn't spent the whole day with his family back in 1985, maybe he wouldn't have been wrongfully been convicted of rape while law enforcement ignored a suspect that other law enforcement bodies informed them of, and gave their opinion they put the wrong guy in prison. Then he'd have been free since 1985 and there'd be no motivation for anyone to avoid a 36 million dollar lawsuit and potential civil cases against themselves or any motivation for the same people with access to his blood and other evidence to even bother investigating the murder case as if there were other suspects than him. Friggin guy just had to go out and spend time with his family, while the rapist did the deed.:thinking:
 
MaxManning said:
Do any of us know how common a bonfire is at a junkyard ?

I honestly don't.

I speculate that their job is to take in junked cars, strip them for things of potential worth, such as tires, parts, seats, etc. before crushing.

Anything that is deemed flammable junk or something you can burn away, is likely destroyed in a fire pit.

I know we are calling this a bonfire, but it's not a bonfire in the sense of what a common person might term as such. -- something we do at a beach etc.

This is a part of how they do their business, and likely happens quite regularly. We know the quarry has bones from animals, which I am thinking is deer that they butcher and eat.

So this process of burning away as much flesh etc before disposing of the bones at that quarry, is likely a regular thing.

I'm sure they know exactly how to get the optimum fire to do their job most efficiently.

So as incriminating as that may sound in some ways, that's kind of what likely goes on at any junkyard ALL THE TIME.

Just speculation, but maybe someone can inform us if this bonfire is a common thing, or if they do it as often as the rest of us non junk yard people.

If only he hadn't spent the whole day with his family back in 1985, maybe he wouldn't have been wrongfully been convicted of rape while law enforcement ignored a suspect that other law enforcement bodies informed them of, and gave their opinion they put the wrong guy in prison. Then he'd have been free since 1985 and there'd be no motivation for anyone to avoid a 36 million dollar lawsuit and potential civil cases against themselves or any motivation for the same people with access to his blood and other evidence to even bother investigating the murder case as if there were other suspects than him. Friggin guy just had to go out and spend time with his family, while the rapist did the deed.:thinking:
Click to expand...


Yes you are right about the difference in all of our views of bonfires and fire pits. Also, it was not coincidental that SA had a fire pit going that night. Not only was it Halloween, but I'm sure fires were a very common occurrence on their property. On another note, the man who actually committed the first crime that Steven was exonerated for (Gregory Allen) will be eligible for parole this October.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 189 more.
Total: 4,580 (members: 190, guests: 4,390)

Online statistics

Members online
190
Guests online
4,390
Total visitors
4,580
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,449
Messages
17,969,080
Members
228,774
Latest member
OccasionalMallard
Back
Top