Discussion in 'Netflix Series: Making A Murderer' started by Tawny, Jan 14, 2016.
I think there was more than enough time for SA to get rid of any evidence without being seen, IMO
But he threw TH's body into a bonfire and invited others to be there? Yeah, right.
In an earlier blog article, I highlighted the fact that none of the many initial witnesses interviewed recalled a bonfire that night, but the statements evolved in subsequent interviews. This is one of the clearest examples of an organized effort to coerce the witnesses to offer statements consistent with the official story — that bones were found in the burn pit. Investigators needed the bonfire for their story to work. In later interviews, witnesses changed their statements to reflect observation of a fire in the burn pit, and the fire grew in size on third and fourth interviews. Ultimately everyone accepted that there was a bonfire that night. In fact, in Brendan Dassey’s first interrogation interview, the police told him there was a bonfire that night. It had become a “fact” by then. Please read more about the evolution of statements in this detailed summary here.
Inconsistencies with “discovery” of bones in burn pit – Steven Avery case
And from the same article:
This is really important, because the absence of a bonfire that night changes everything. It goes a long way toward refuting the claim that Halbach’s body was burned behind Avery’s trailer, and the lie becomes circumstantial evidence that the discovery of remains on the property was manufactured evidence, just like the key. Many like to claim that the bones were planted, but I go one step further and suggest that they didn’t even need to be planted. Maybe they were never there at all. There is no proof. Someone simply supplied Dr. Eisenberg with a box of bones from who knows where. Done. There is a reason that courts require documentation of evidence and chain of custody. It is too easy for fraud to occur, but no one objected to the inclusion of the evidence, so all of the bonfire/bones testimonies were in.
He invited BD to come over - no one else was home.
Why would Avery host a bonfire and invite family -- while he supposedly was burning a body?
Why would Avery host a bonfire and invite family -- while he supposedly was burning a body? : MakingaMurderer
As SA admitted there was a fire later and Josh Radandt saw a large fire by SA's house on 10/31, that's good enough for me. Seems like all of them came around and admitted there was a fire after awhile including Blaine and Kayla. ST was never asked about a fire in his 11/10 interview. Not sure if they were protecting BD at first, or just didn't notice. And BD repeated numerous times that they got the golf cart and retrieved stuff for the fire, including a van seat.
Bobby was home. He didn't leave for work until 11:30pm.
DASSEY indicated he stayed home until 2330 hours on 10/31/05 and then left for work at HAMILTON MANUFACTURING.
ETA: Also, Delores was home, Chuck was home, Barb was coming and going with Scott, Blaine left and came back)
Radandt makes it clear in his affidavit that he felt like LE wanted him to make the fire larger than it was. He believed the fire he saw was in a burn barrel, not the burn pit.
I thought he said the same in MaM2 as well.
You just finished saying in a very recent post that you think the entire Avery clan are liars.
How do you pick and choose which statements to believe?
This is an example of what i am saying. Nobody remembers exactly what day or night or time they did something a week or so ago. In fact, I recall SA turning that question back onto Wiegert i think... "Do you remember what YOU did last Monday?" LOL
SA's story about his encounter with TH on Oct. 31 2005 has been 100% consistent since he was first questioned about it on Nov. 3 2005.
Forgetting which days he had a fire is not an inconsistency in his story. That is absurd.
This post right here explains everything with regards to your views on this case.
You have read Griesbachs book. Am I right or am I right?
FWIW I never heard of KZ before MaM2. I think that's the case for the vast majority of people.
That doesn't mean there aren't half truth woven into the lies. On 10/31, Brendon got Steven's mail/Delores got Steven's mail, Blaine didn't see a fire/Blaine did see a fire, ST saw a small fire/ST saw flames 10 feet high, TH left the property, TH's vehicle was still there at 3:45.
None of us have any idea what was said between family members before the interviews in Crivitz. But I'd bet all of them know who killed Teresa and what actually happened that day and now support the release of SA/BD even know they know the truth.
Yes and I also saw MaM1 and MaM2 - you read Griesbach's book - am I right ?
This may be true or maybe not - but SA said he did not burn anything on 10/31.
Strange Bobby would stay home until 2330 as it was mentioned somewhere else his normal hours were 2200-0600.
IMO it doesn't matter if there was any fire or not.
Since the scene wasn't documented there is no proof that any bones were ever on the Avery property.
Plus the Manitowoc County coroner was forbidden from entering the scene and none of the forensic experts were summoned until after the bones had been removed.
The bones should have been inadmissable because of the absence of chain of custody and nothing about them was really proven.
So I guess Tom Sturdivant lied on the stand ?
As i maintain IMO, the whole botched investigation was a farce, as were SA & BD's Trials also a farce. Nothing about the case can be trusted.
Deduce from that what you will.