Steven Avery: Guilty of Teresa Halbach's Murder?

[Tawny]

I voted a new trial is needed but honestly I'm not sure that would even suffice. It's basically impossible to do at this point but the entire investigation would need a do-over. If it's a new trial, it would be with all the same tainted questionable evidence. :gaah:

 

[bessie]

What say you?

ETA: I couldn't edit the first poll to revise the options, so I had to start a new one. My apologies. You may vote on more than one choice in this thread.

 

[mommylicious]

At this point, I'm leaning that he did it but that there was definitely questionable activity on the part of a few members of LE. I think they decided to help the investigation along to "make sure a conviction stuck" - which is kind of ironic now....

 

[rocket_girl]

I think I'm on the "he's guilty but the investigation was a mess".

 

[Swirlz]

I think it was someone the victim knew well.

 

[Desertwind]

I am convinced he committed the murder; and that he intimidated his nephew into participating. I also think the police wanted to be darn sure that he was convicted, so helped out with some evidence. The main concern at this point for me is what I feel is unfair tactics with Brendan.

 

[Rivernh]

I think he probably did it, but I can't be sure. At this point the reasonable doubt is big enough to drive a RAV4 through it.

Also if a killer goes free, it will be entirely the fault of the investigating agencies for muddling things so much that a conviction is impossible.

 

[MaxManning]

I think if there are too many options and it gets all muddled


I think there are absolutes that can be pinpointed in the poll.

for example :

What do you believe right now ?

Guilty
Innocent
Undecided - need more information


Another might be :

Do you believe police planted evidence :

Yes
No
Undecided - willing to consider this could have happened.



Personally, I think that's cleaner. If there was only one user per vote, that they could change at any time, you could even track how overall impressions changed over time and cross reference with new details that emerge.


I voted "looks guilty", but I also think that he needs a new trial, because I have tons of questions and suspicion.


"looks guilty" is an impression, but not as definitive.

 

[Wysteria]

I selected option 5, based on using reasonable doubt as a compass.
I don't think though at this point a new trial would be possible?
Has too much time passed?
What about the DNA that was completely used up in testing?
If I went with my gut feeling, I think that he is most likely guilty.

 

[SoBeCzar]

I think he probably did it, but I can't be sure. At this point the reasonable doubt is big enough to drive a RAV4 through it.

Also if a killer goes free, it will be entirely the fault of the investigating agencies for muddling things so much that a conviction is impossible.

I agree. Our justice system depends on fair trials. If SA gets a new trial there will be almost no evidence of forensic value allowed back in due to the improprieties of LE. Nobodies fault but their own. And we know some of the testimony is even questionable. If anything, the defense can prepare an even better defense. TH's family are the real losers. This has to be putting them through even more hell. I am sure they feel SA is still guilty and may have to deal with him being freed. And if SA gets a new trial and goes free it seems unlikely many of us will ever be sure of who killed her.

 

[wendybtn]

If anyone can find who buried her where she was found, that is not an Avery relative or friend of some sort, I would consider a new trial. Otherwise, this is a serial mini-series with an agenda. There are plenty of those out there.

 

[Cricket99]

He did it along with several others that also need to be in prison.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

guilty.

 

[Safeguard]

Inoccent.

I think a lot of people will believe he did it based on his past, and not the evidence.

( The "Just Look At Him" conviction. " Of course he's guilty just look at him!")

Imo, The saddest , most troubling aspect of discussing this case, are the people who say;

"So what if evidence WAS planted, he did it, and he's right were he belongs."

Like one of the lawyers said; " You might know for certain you'll never commit a crime, but you can never be sure you won't be accused of one, and to stand accused, is to be considered guily."

 

[BethInAK]

I don't actually see any evidence that Avery killed Halbach that I don't believe was planted. For the many of you who think he did it, which evidence do you think points to him?

 

[ArianeEmory]

I don't actually see any evidence that Avery killed Halbach that I don't believe was planted. For the many of you who think he did it, which evidence do you think points to him?

I'll pose the opposite question: for those who believe he is innocent, how do you believe Teresa ended up dead and burned on his property? That question specifically.

 

[Safeguard]

I doubt she was burned on his property. It make no sense, that she was burned on his property and then some of her remains were carried to various other sites. Every time I try to envision, just how SA could have killed her, moved her around, hid her car, cleaned up *whatever*, put her in the fire, and did all that he would've had to do, ( plus took a couple relaxed sounding calls from his incarcerated girl friend.), with no one seeing a thing, even though plenty of people knew she was there taking pictures...

I can't see how that was possible. I mean, you have people who saw him before she got there, you have people who saw her there, taking pictures, you have people who saw him after she left...but no one saw anything when all this was going down? I find that very hard to believe. No one saw, heard, or smelled a thing? Really? How would that be possible?

Because the crime didn't take place on his property. That's how.

He's gonna kill someone, then have a big ol bon fire, roast marshmallows perhaps, call over family?!! There are just SO many better ways to dispose of a body, no matter your IQ.

I mean really, how would that even work; there he is, tending the fire, and eventually he thinks to himself; hey this isn't working. I should move some of these remains... so he gets a burn barrel, puts her remains in it, puts them in a vehicle and yet not one person, saw any of this stuff... yeah. No. She wasn't killed there.

 

[Swirlz]

I’ve spent time in India, and there they do outside cremations. They smell *extremely* strongly – with a distinctive and unpleasant odor. I can’t believe anyone would actually burn body parts in a pit located a few dozen yards from where Barb and the kids lived (unless the whole family was in on it). If that’s the case, then it seems likely the body was burned at the gravel quarry (which would explain the blood stain from Teresa’s hair in the SUV), but then it seems fairly conclusive to me that the killer *can’t* be Steven – unless you can come up with a reason why anyone would burn a body a half mile away and then transfer most of the evidence back to a pit behind his house.

 

[KayCerynPage1990]

Throughout the TV show and since I have found myself between a rock and a hard place as tow whether he is guilty or not but I've ALWAYS terrible for Dassey. Either way - whether he is 100% innocent (which I think he is) or he was manipulated - I think he is a victim in this too.

I have come to the conclusion that I do think both are innocent of the crime but I can see why other people would think otherwise.

 

[Swirlz]

Statistically when a woman is murdered it is MORE likely that a family member or intimate partner are the perpetrators more than 60% of the time.

” Although the overall risk of homicide for women was substantially lower than that of men (rate ratio [RR] = 0.27), their risk of being killed by a spouse or intimate acquaintance was higher (RR = 1.23). In contrast to men, the killing of a woman by a stranger was rare (RR = 0.18). More than twice as many women were shot and killed by their husband or intimate acquaintance than were murdered by strangers using guns, knives, or any other means” (source http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1635092)

I would hope that if I ever turn up missing, my husband would be questioned along with a myriad of other people I had recent close contact with. And that my husband, brother or any other civilian would not be escorted into the crime scene where my remains and other physical evidence will be found. No law or film school degree or police academy training needed to conclude that’s reasonable.