Hippiemomof5
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Messages
- 1,109
- Reaction score
- 1,342
LOL So it is used for fishing? It just was not located on ice when SA stayed there??
Sightings of Ms. Halbach's SUV (the bus driver, et al)
- Thread starter MaxManning
- Start date
LOL So it is used for fishing? It just was not located on ice when SA stayed there??
BigCityAccountant
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 245
Zool this is the berm is was talking about up thread. Some of the pictures on stevenavery.org show it (burn pit pictures) There are better pictures of it in the video. Posting link as well. [video=youtube;1RlGLTkSpVg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RlGLTkSpVg[/video] or https://youtu.be/1RlGLTkSpVg
I don't think it would be that easy to drive up along that berm, looks pretty high to me.
I don't think it would be that easy to drive up along that berm, looks pretty high to me.
Attachments
BigCityAccountant
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 245
Correct. Let me see if I can find the video with him in it. I recall an interview by a reporter where he is actually inside it, but when I tried to find it again, I couldn't. (Par for the course)
I haven't found the video, but here is a picture of it.
http://host.madison.com/avery-ice-shanty/image_d998708e-ad81-11e5-9384-5756945cfe67.html
I can't seem to find the video. I believe it was with a Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter in December of 2003.
Good follow up link/picutre BAC ~ That image definitely eliminates the GIS Viewer #209 image as a candidate for the "ice house". The #209 is much larger, and seems to have white sidewalls. So the image posted by Missy (of the shack next to Janda's residence) must definitely be the ice shack.
BigCityAccountant
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 245
No, I don't think so. The ice shanty has windows, but the shed next to the Janda's house doesn't.
If you look in the picture I posted in post #56, you can see it doesn't have windows. Also, I think I found the "other trailer" in that photo also--way in the background in the upper left hand side.
BigCityAccountant
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 245
Oh....I finally found it again. Here is the video of the ice shack that has a glimpse of the inside.
http://wbay.com/2016/01/11/video-sept-11-2004-steven-avery-1-year-after-his-freedom/
http://wbay.com/2016/01/11/video-sept-11-2004-steven-avery-1-year-after-his-freedom/
Attachments
BigCityAccountant
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 245
The fact that it doesn't seem to be on the property in 2005 and it has WHEELS, is why I've always questioned it. As you can see from the inside it clearly has bedding. I've always wondered if TH was locked in there.
Good to be back here and catching up on what I've missed.
Unfortunately, some sudden illness in the family forced a little break from being online, but wow you've all been busy while I've been gone. :loveyou:
I wanted to jump back into this thread first because just before I disappeared there were a few thoughts I wanted to share on the bus driver sighting.
I'll pick those up in a separate post though because I'm currently distracted by the ice shack.
@BCA I know that something about that ice shack has bothered you from the beginning and it's not something that I've picked up on because I don't think I ever really understood what an 'ice shack' really was. For anyone wondering, there's another still from that video attached showing the exterior of the shack.
I'm not convinced that I can see anything resembling it in the images further up thread, but the thing is a lot smaller than I'd envisaged and probably not very easy to pick out in aerial images. Also I hadn't really appreciated that it was on wheels like that.
It's an intriguing detail and yep, I've finally bitten. Going to see whether I can find any mention of it elsewhere :lol:
Unfortunately, some sudden illness in the family forced a little break from being online, but wow you've all been busy while I've been gone. :loveyou:
I wanted to jump back into this thread first because just before I disappeared there were a few thoughts I wanted to share on the bus driver sighting.
I'll pick those up in a separate post though because I'm currently distracted by the ice shack.
@BCA I know that something about that ice shack has bothered you from the beginning and it's not something that I've picked up on because I don't think I ever really understood what an 'ice shack' really was. For anyone wondering, there's another still from that video attached showing the exterior of the shack.
I'm not convinced that I can see anything resembling it in the images further up thread, but the thing is a lot smaller than I'd envisaged and probably not very easy to pick out in aerial images. Also I hadn't really appreciated that it was on wheels like that.
It's an intriguing detail and yep, I've finally bitten. Going to see whether I can find any mention of it elsewhere :lol:
And this is what I originally wanted to post in here 
I know that things have moved with new information since I intended posting, I've read the other posts in this thread with interest and looked at the video Jaiddie posted in the "framing thread".
I haven't changed my mind though - I think I'm alone with this as it seems to have been dismissed by posters on both sides of the fence - but I still believe that the TH sighting by Lisa Buchner (bus driver lady) is credible. I think perhaps things are a little muddled in her memory, I think maybe the pressure of giving testimony caused her to start doubting her own recollections but essentially I believe it's likely that she did see TH that day.
1) The biggest factor in me believing her is the way that her testimony / timing dovetails with the propane guy seeing a truck matching the description of the RAV4 leaving the property. I know that eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable, but when two completely independent witnesses appear to corroborate one another's stories I have to give it some consideration.
2) Line of sight. When I read the posts up thread about trees obscuring the view, I was almost ready to give up on this idea but I think the video Jaiddie posted shows that there was a clear line of sight between the locations.
3) Distance. I don't think that looking at images on a computer screen is directly comparable to the amount of detail that you'd get with the naked eye and your entire field of vision filled - and that's without factoring in the effects of the focal lengths of camera lenses etc.
So a little (not massively scientific) experiment for UK readers. In the UK, junctions on Motorways are flagged in advance with 100 yard markers to notify drivers that an exit road is up ahead. On a fairly straight stretch of motorway, take a look at cars already at the junction when you're at the 300 yard marker. Obviously if you're the driver, don't do this at the expense of distracting yourself from the road and putting yourself/others in danger!!!
I tried this while caught in stationery traffic because of a breakdown on the exit road, which was also helpful because I could also see people out of their car to give some perspective.
While I certainly wouldn't be able to identify a specific individual at that distance and only make an educated guess at gender, the colour and approximate shape of a vehicle (car/truck/van) is obvious. I'm also very confident that while I couldn't perceive precise details I'd be able to identify a recognisable activity like changing a tyre, looking under the hood or in our case taking photographs.
4) Confusion over days. I've never really been sold on this. By her own admission LB wasn't sure which day that week she thought she'd seen TH - but to me that's a moot point. As far as we know there was only one day that week that anybody was at Avery's photographing cars and only one day that it could have been.
If you really read her testimony in detail, even when she's pressured about the possibility of it being the previous week she seems rather grudging in conceding that it could have been.
And again, to me that's another moot point.
The last time that TH was there was 10th October, a whole 3 weeks earlier and I don't believe that her memory was off by that much.
5) Brendan (and Blaine's) denial of seeing TH when he got off the bus. Guilt or innocence aside, given what happened to SA with the false rape conviction, it would hardly be surprising if that whole family fostered the attitude of not giving any information to LE if at all possible. Brendan IMO though is poorly equipped to deal with pressure and to keep up any sort of deception. Again, if you really listen to that Crivitz interview, at no point does he actually deny seeing TH. It's all "I don't know" or "I can't remember".
So having convinced myself that LB's testimony is at least plausible and worthy of consideration, I find myself throwing another spanner in the works.
We have the conflicting statements about where the van was. LB refers to it as being by the intersection, near to where the boys were dropped off and near the mailboxes - when we know that it was parked much further down the road. We also have an early report of her saying that TH was photographing the Blazer NOT the minivan.
It's been established in a few places that there was indeed a Blazer for sale in the yard at around that time and that it was parked further up by the intersection.
That's now got me thinking about whether that's what LB actually saw she was pressured into doubting herself and changing her recollection to it being the red van.
It's certainly very possible that TH got another hustle shot at the yard that day to photograph another vehicle . . . thoughts anyone? :thinking:
I know that things have moved with new information since I intended posting, I've read the other posts in this thread with interest and looked at the video Jaiddie posted in the "framing thread".
I haven't changed my mind though - I think I'm alone with this as it seems to have been dismissed by posters on both sides of the fence - but I still believe that the TH sighting by Lisa Buchner (bus driver lady) is credible. I think perhaps things are a little muddled in her memory, I think maybe the pressure of giving testimony caused her to start doubting her own recollections but essentially I believe it's likely that she did see TH that day.
1) The biggest factor in me believing her is the way that her testimony / timing dovetails with the propane guy seeing a truck matching the description of the RAV4 leaving the property. I know that eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable, but when two completely independent witnesses appear to corroborate one another's stories I have to give it some consideration.
2) Line of sight. When I read the posts up thread about trees obscuring the view, I was almost ready to give up on this idea but I think the video Jaiddie posted shows that there was a clear line of sight between the locations.
3) Distance. I don't think that looking at images on a computer screen is directly comparable to the amount of detail that you'd get with the naked eye and your entire field of vision filled - and that's without factoring in the effects of the focal lengths of camera lenses etc.
So a little (not massively scientific) experiment for UK readers. In the UK, junctions on Motorways are flagged in advance with 100 yard markers to notify drivers that an exit road is up ahead. On a fairly straight stretch of motorway, take a look at cars already at the junction when you're at the 300 yard marker. Obviously if you're the driver, don't do this at the expense of distracting yourself from the road and putting yourself/others in danger!!!
I tried this while caught in stationery traffic because of a breakdown on the exit road, which was also helpful because I could also see people out of their car to give some perspective.
While I certainly wouldn't be able to identify a specific individual at that distance and only make an educated guess at gender, the colour and approximate shape of a vehicle (car/truck/van) is obvious. I'm also very confident that while I couldn't perceive precise details I'd be able to identify a recognisable activity like changing a tyre, looking under the hood or in our case taking photographs.
4) Confusion over days. I've never really been sold on this. By her own admission LB wasn't sure which day that week she thought she'd seen TH - but to me that's a moot point. As far as we know there was only one day that week that anybody was at Avery's photographing cars and only one day that it could have been.
If you really read her testimony in detail, even when she's pressured about the possibility of it being the previous week she seems rather grudging in conceding that it could have been.
And again, to me that's another moot point.
The last time that TH was there was 10th October, a whole 3 weeks earlier and I don't believe that her memory was off by that much.
5) Brendan (and Blaine's) denial of seeing TH when he got off the bus. Guilt or innocence aside, given what happened to SA with the false rape conviction, it would hardly be surprising if that whole family fostered the attitude of not giving any information to LE if at all possible. Brendan IMO though is poorly equipped to deal with pressure and to keep up any sort of deception. Again, if you really listen to that Crivitz interview, at no point does he actually deny seeing TH. It's all "I don't know" or "I can't remember".
So having convinced myself that LB's testimony is at least plausible and worthy of consideration, I find myself throwing another spanner in the works.
We have the conflicting statements about where the van was. LB refers to it as being by the intersection, near to where the boys were dropped off and near the mailboxes - when we know that it was parked much further down the road. We also have an early report of her saying that TH was photographing the Blazer NOT the minivan.
It's been established in a few places that there was indeed a Blazer for sale in the yard at around that time and that it was parked further up by the intersection.
That's now got me thinking about whether that's what LB actually saw she was pressured into doubting herself and changing her recollection to it being the red van.
It's certainly very possible that TH got another hustle shot at the yard that day to photograph another vehicle . . . thoughts anyone? :thinking:
missy1974
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 10,142
- Reaction score
- 31,355
Hi Sarah! Welcome back Sorry to hear about the family emergency but glad you are back!
Something I didn't think of until I read your post. LB not being sure of what day it was that week, is it possible she saw a news reporter talking to SA near the van after it was reported that TH was missing? Just a thought. But her saying it was at the intersection where she drops the kids off still casts some doubts on it all.
The Blazer... I can't recall at the moment, but was that the vehicle she was there for 2 weeks earlier?
Hustle shot.... possibly? but who? CA? EA? BoD?
I really think the bus driver was trying to help, and maybe she was confused on days, but in the moment convinced herself it was the van and it was Monday and it was TH. The propane guy, it's not that I don't believe him, but he was quite clear that it was a vehicle "like" TH's, not hers for sure, didn't see the driver, etc., he never tried to make it something that it wasn't (unlike the bus drivers story which seemed to morph into seeing her standing by the van down the road taking pictures) I would have liked more information about the customers that were there that day and what vehicles they all drove.
Sorry to hear about the family emergency but glad you are back!Something I didn't think of until I read your post. LB not being sure of what day it was that week, is it possible she saw a news reporter talking to SA near the van after it was reported that TH was missing? Just a thought. But her saying it was at the intersection where she drops the kids off still casts some doubts on it all.
The Blazer... I can't recall at the moment, but was that the vehicle she was there for 2 weeks earlier?
Hustle shot.... possibly? but who? CA? EA? BoD?
I really think the bus driver was trying to help, and maybe she was confused on days, but in the moment convinced herself it was the van and it was Monday and it was TH. The propane guy, it's not that I don't believe him, but he was quite clear that it was a vehicle "like" TH's, not hers for sure, didn't see the driver, etc., he never tried to make it something that it wasn't (unlike the bus drivers story which seemed to morph into seeing her standing by the van down the road taking pictures) I would have liked more information about the customers that were there that day and what vehicles they all drove.
BigCityAccountant
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 245
Good to be back here and catching up on what I've missed.
Unfortunately, some sudden illness in the family forced a little break from being online, but wow you've all been busy while I've been gone. :loveyou:
I wanted to jump back into this thread first because just before I disappeared there were a few thoughts I wanted to share on the bus driver sighting.
I'll pick those up in a separate post though because I'm currently distracted by the ice shack.
@BCA I know that something about that ice shack has bothered you from the beginning and it's not something that I've picked up on because I don't think I ever really understood what an 'ice shack' really was. For anyone wondering, there's another still from that video attached showing the exterior of the shack.
I'm not convinced that I can see anything resembling it in the images further up thread, but the thing is a lot smaller than I'd envisaged and probably not very easy to pick out in aerial images. Also I hadn't really appreciated that it was on wheels like that.
It's an intriguing detail and yep, I've finally bitten. Going to see whether I can find any mention of it elsewhere :lol:
:welcomeback: We've missed you Sarah! Hope everything is ok!
BigCityAccountant
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2015
- Messages
- 3,436
- Reaction score
- 245
Hi Sarah! Welcome back
Something I didn't think of until I read your post. LB not being sure of what day it was that week, is it possible she saw a news reporter talking to SA near the van after it was reported that TH was missing? Just a thought. But her saying it was at the intersection where she drops the kids off still casts some doubts on it all.
The Blazer... I can't recall at the moment, but was that the vehicle she was there for 2 weeks earlier?
Hustle shot.... possibly? but who? CA? EA? BoD?
I really think the bus driver was trying to help, and maybe she was confused on days, but in the moment convinced herself it was the van and it was Monday and it was TH. The propane guy, it's not that I don't believe him, but he was quite clear that it was a vehicle "like" TH's, not hers for sure, didn't see the driver, etc., he never tried to make it something that it wasn't (unlike the bus drivers story which seemed to morph into seeing her standing by the van down the road taking pictures) I would have liked more information about the customers that were there that day and what vehicles they all drove.
I do believe you are correct Missy about the Blazer...I believe it was the vehicle she was there for 2 weeks earlier?
Yep - I knew you two would put me back on the straight & narrow !!!
I think you're right that the blazer / a blazer was one of the photographs from prior jobs submitted into evidence.
Was it only 2 weeks earlier though?
I have it in my mind that the previous job she'd done at Avery's was 10th October (@Missy I know you'll know if I'm mis-remembering)
I don't know LOL
I have no vested interest in the sighting being accurate. In fact, whichever side of the fence you're on, it kind of helps if she was mistaken . . . Just can't quite let it go though.
@BCA It's good to be back thanks
I think you're right that the blazer / a blazer was one of the photographs from prior jobs submitted into evidence.
Was it only 2 weeks earlier though?
I have it in my mind that the previous job she'd done at Avery's was 10th October (@Missy I know you'll know if I'm mis-remembering)
I don't know LOL
I have no vested interest in the sighting being accurate. In fact, whichever side of the fence you're on, it kind of helps if she was mistaken . . . Just can't quite let it go though.
@BCA It's good to be back thanks
missy1974
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2008
- Messages
- 10,142
- Reaction score
- 31,355
Yep - I knew you two would put me back on the straight & narrow !!!
I think you're right that the blazer / a blazer was one of the photographs from prior jobs submitted into evidence.
Was it only 2 weeks earlier though?
I have it in my mind that the previous job she'd done at Avery's was 10th October (@Missy I know you'll know if I'm mis-remembering)
I don't know LOL
I have no vested interest in the sighting being accurate. In fact, whichever side of the fence you're on, it kind of helps if she was mistaken . . . Just can't quite let it go though.
@BCA It's good to be back thanks
The previous photo shoot was on October 10th, I never did go and look to see if it was the blazer or a different vehicle (I will do that after I have something to eat lol). The Oct. 10th visit was also a hustle shot and he called her directly and didn't go through AutoTrader like he did on the 31st, which is one of my reasons for doubting his guilt. Kratz tried his hardest to make it seem like she was targeted and lured there that day, and I can't help but think if that was the case, why did he call AutoTrader and leave any sort of trail when he could have and had in the past called her directly? Using B. Janda isn't a huge disguise either when it's her van, she lives right next door, and Tom Janda also had called AutoTrader out in September 2005.
And I agree with you Sarah, whether the bus driver saw her or not, I'm not sure it does anything for either side LOL
Thanks Missy - I knew you'd know.
I did look, but really wasn't 100% clear on what was photographed on 10th October.
Also agree with you re: the luring.
IMO there's absolutely no basis for that assumption.
You make a good point about calling her direct if he wanted to cover things up, but it also makes no sense that he would plan to lure her there on a day when as far as he knew at the time, he had other arrangements with Jodi.
IF SA is guilty and I still believe that he probably is, then IMO it was an impulsive crime of opportunity rather than something pre-planned.
I did look, but really wasn't 100% clear on what was photographed on 10th October.
Also agree with you re: the luring.
IMO there's absolutely no basis for that assumption.
You make a good point about calling her direct if he wanted to cover things up, but it also makes no sense that he would plan to lure her there on a day when as far as he knew at the time, he had other arrangements with Jodi.
IF SA is guilty and I still believe that he probably is, then IMO it was an impulsive crime of opportunity rather than something pre-planned.
Limaes
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2011
- Messages
- 1,389
- Reaction score
- 1,228
Respectfully disagree about the luring. I have never came across any information that BJ, or any of her sons, really cared about getting the van sold. Nor have I seen a plausible explanation for SA to give BJ's name when booking the job. He was wholely and solely the only person involved in getting Teresa to the property and he had to lie to do so. Jmo
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
wasnt_me
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2010
- Messages
- 5,417
- Reaction score
- 10,985
Respectfully disagree about the luring. I have never came across any information that BJ, or any of her sons, really cared about getting the van sold. Nor have I seen a plausible explanation for SA to give BJ's name when booking the job. He was wholely and solely the only person involved in getting Teresa to the property and he had to lie to do so. Jmo
Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk
I know this thread is old, but the way I see it, if JB asked him to call and he knew JB had done work with them before, then maybe that's why he left the job in JB's name. That way, it's associated with her account. He called the main number because JB handed it to him or told him to call that one.
These are just guesses, but I do have problems believing he set up for her to come out to his property or near it if he had planned to do her harm.
As for the bus driver and the petrol man, I have a hard time believing that the bus came and went around the same time as the Rav4 left, and that was no something the petrol man took note of. If TH was there and Petrol man didn't see her arrive, then she was there before 330pm. If the bus driver saw her at 340pm and made a u-turn and left, then it seems to me that the Rav4 would have been just minutes behind the bus.
The petrol man doesn't discern how long he sat there before he saw the rav4. Could TH have stayed at Avery's till about 4pm? Maybe. Then it would make sense that he called her to come back, because she hadn't been gone for long.
IDK.