|
Post by ¡Twist Of Cinnamon! on Jan 27, 2016 8:53:45 GMT -5
The show that everyone is talking about. If you haven't checked it out then do so immediately. It's worth the price of Netflix alone. Obviously there will be spoilers ahead.
What's your stance in Steven Avery? Is he guilty or innocent?
I'm not sure what to believe. Whether Steven and / or Brendan done it or not, they were not given a fair trial. The documentary is clearly one sided but the actions of the cops are difficult to overlook. The way Dean Strang and Jerry Buting are constantly pointing out contradictions and flaws in the prosecution's case, only for the judge to shoot them down shortly after, was infuriating at times. It's an insane cover up to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Jan 27, 2016 9:38:52 GMT -5
I've said this to pretty much everyone I've spoken to about the subject. Regardless if Steve Avery murdered Teresa Halbach or not, there is so much reasonable doubt in that trial that he shouldn't be in jail. The jury decided the outcome of the trial before it started and Ken Kratz is the kind of guy that proves why our legal system is so broken. Brendan Dassey being in prison is pretty sickening imo. I feel he's a moderately handicapped kid that should have been acquitted after no evidence was found in Avery's case based on the story he fabricated.
I primarily lean towards the belief that Steve didn't do it. He 100% had evidence planted on him but the car and the way the bones were moved around is what gets me the most. They didn't find Teresa's finger prints on the car or the keys. However, they conveniently found Steve's blood in the car, but no finger prints, and his finger prints were conveniently on the completely wiped key? Plus, he would have used the crusher on the car since he would of had to drive by it to go hide it where he supposedly did. The single key was an absolute plant. It was removed from the ring and placed in his home, period.
I also feel the brother and the x-boyfriend helped plant and hide evidence. I think they both played a part in deleting Teresa's voice mails and potentially emails or other evidence that could have easily generated a suspect other than Avery. The problem I have is figuring out who did kill her. I've read the theory about Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey and I think it's plausible, and explains her bones being moved around, which is entirely strange in and of itself. However, the cops completely ignored the idea of other suspects and that to me makes it hard to decipher who else was in play.
I do know that Kratz didn't ever establish a motive, which is something I struggled with through the entire documentary. Why did Steve Avery kill her and what did he have to gain from it? If we rule out the rape through DNA, which they did imo based on Teresa's DNA not being anywhere, then what reason does Steve have to kill or even hurt her? I can't answer that question.
The silver lining for me is that Kathleen Zellner now has his case and I believe she's going to get him a new, fair, trial, which is what I believe he deserves, regardless if he's guilty or innocent.
|
|
Gigante Kinzer Keel
Mid-Carder
WF 10+ Year Member
Joined on: Apr 26, 2011 13:31:33 GMT -5
Posts: 338
|
Post by Gigante Kinzer Keel on Jan 27, 2016 10:15:34 GMT -5
My opinion flips every day over whether he did it or not. However that trial should have never been held in that county.
|
|
|
Post by J12 on Jan 27, 2016 10:54:22 GMT -5
I'm of the mindset that he more than likely did it, but that they didn't really have the evidence to properly convict him.
It's worth nothing that the documentary leaves out several pieces of rather damning info about Avery, whether they be directly related to the case or not. The guy has shown a propensity for violence in the past on more than one occasion and, to me, is undoubtedly capable of the crime he was accused of.
It's worth checking out the podcast series Rebutting A Murderer, which presents the flip side in about ten minutes or so per episode. It's done by a guy who was a reporter in the area at the time the case was going on.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 6:53:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2016 13:23:24 GMT -5
My issue is that I'm 100% sure that Brendan had nothing to do with it. The kid is clearly mentally handicapped and was taken advantage of. It pisses me off.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Mar 28, 2024 6:53:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2016 14:27:36 GMT -5
He did it. The entire social media crapstorm it's created is so ridiculous. And I'm not sure how many people here are aware, but over 350,000 who watched this, took to Facebook and signed a petition for the President to grant him pardon. Not realizing that's not possible. Which is hilarious. Shows out of 350,000 people, not a single ing one knows a thing about anything, but they love to bitch about it. Sums up our society perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by Suckasays on Jan 27, 2016 16:56:02 GMT -5
I totally think he did it. I do, however, think the cops made sure it looked like he did it to definitively lock him away. I also think it should be tried again due to so much reasonable doubt. Brendan Dassey on the other hand, has no business being in jail. He walked right into a confession that absolutely doesn't add up. He was in no shape mentally to even be interrogated on his own like that.
Anyone else listen to the podcast "Serial"? If you like Making a Murderer or The Staircase or other true crime docs you'd like Serial. Especially season one that covers a murder case.
|
|
|
Post by ¡Twist Of Cinnamon! on Jan 27, 2016 17:09:07 GMT -5
I've said this to pretty much everyone I've spoken to about the subject. Regardless if Steve Avery murdered Teresa Halbach or not, there is so much reasonable doubt in that trial that he shouldn't be in jail. The jury decided the outcome of the trial before it started and Ken Kratz is the kind of guy that proves why our legal system is so broken. Brendan Dassey being in prison is pretty sickening imo. I feel he's a moderately handicapped kid that should have been acquitted after no evidence was found in Avery's case based on the story he fabricated. I primarily lean towards the belief that Steve didn't do it. He 100% had evidence planted on him but the car and the way the bones were moved around is what gets me the most. They didn't find Teresa's finger prints on the car or the keys. However, they conveniently found Steve's blood in the car, but no finger prints, and his finger prints were conveniently on the completely wiped key? Plus, he would have used the crusher on the car since he would of had to drive by it to go hide it where he supposedly did. The single key was an absolute plant. It was removed from the ring and placed in his home, period. I also feel the brother and the x-boyfriend helped plant and hide evidence. I think they both played a part in deleting Teresa's voice mails and potentially emails or other evidence that could have easily generated a suspect other than Avery. The problem I have is figuring out who did kill her. I've read the theory about Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey and I think it's plausible, and explains her bones being moved around, which is entirely strange in and of itself. However, the cops completely ignored the idea of other suspects and that to me makes it hard to decipher who else was in play. I do know that Kratz didn't ever establish a motive, which is something I struggled with through the entire documentary. Why did Steve Avery kill her and what did he have to gain from it? If we rule out the rape through DNA, which they did imo based on Teresa's DNA not being anywhere, then what reason does Steve have to kill or even hurt her? I can't answer that question. The silver lining for me is that Kathleen Zellner now has his case and I believe she's going to get him a new, fair, trial, which is what I believe he deserves, regardless if he's guilty or innocent. The evidence towards Steven just doesn't add up. Teresa was supposedly shot in the garage yet there was no blood and even if there was, his garage was a mess and couldn't be 100% cleaned. The key just 'appearing' as well as Steven's blood being in her truck yet no fingerprints should have raised multiple red flags. I do think her brother is involved somehow. Dean and Jerry were constantly finding holes in the prosecution's story yet he couldn't be convinced that it could have been someone else. Wasn't he referring to her as being dead before the body had even been found as well? My issue is that I'm 100% sure that Brendan had nothing to do with it. The kid is clearly mentally handicapped and was taken advantage of. It pisses me off. Definitely. The way the two detectives were basically hinting at Brandon to say what they wanted was wrong. Even worse when he had no clue so Fassbender told Brandon what to say, knowing Brandon would agree. Poor kid, he didn't even get to watch Wrestlemania either.
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Jan 27, 2016 17:16:18 GMT -5
Like others I am of the opinion that he may very well be guilty, but the trial and detective work was just a total cluster and he should absolutely be given a new trial. Even if I thought someone was guilty I would have a hard time putting someone in jail with that case as there was absolutely reasonable doubt. Brendan being in jail is the real travesty that doesn't get as much talk, because good lord I can't believe they actually took him to trial and that he was found guilty. How can you watch that confession and then convict him I will never know.
|
|
|
Post by Himmy! on Jan 28, 2016 10:18:09 GMT -5
Fantastic show. Very interesting indeed. I'm unsure of whether he did it as I'm keeping an open mind but that trial was an absolute joke.
|
|
|
Post by Patrick Bateman (original) on Jan 28, 2016 12:45:50 GMT -5
I think it was Brendans step dad. His story didn't make sense. I think he did it and the police %100 thought it was Steven and planted evidence to make it stick on him. Because if he would of won his lawsuit for 36 million then the police station in that town would be shut down, it would of crippled the town.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jan 28, 2016 22:01:51 GMT -5
I won't say they did or didn't do it but the was more than enough reasonable doubt to not convict them.
The strange thing is they never found her full remains. The cops claim he burned her but they only found fragments of her in the fire pit. They used that phony story from Branden that he saw her toes but never found her feet.
That's just one of the many, many inconsistencies in this case.
|
|
jakksking1
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 2, 2011 14:45:41 GMT -5
Posts: 2,843
|
Post by jakksking1 on Jan 29, 2016 23:52:30 GMT -5
Take a look at some of the evidence the filmmakers left out:
1) His saliva was found under the hood of her car. In part of the unaired confession, Dassey stated they moved her vehicle to the junk yard and Avery lifted the hood and disconnected the battery. Did they have viles of his saliva too? 2) He was basically stalking Teresa and kept calling specifically asking for her to come over to take pictures, and called her requesting her multiple times the day of her death using a fake name and number block. He answered the door half naked on another occasion when she last visited, and she confessed to her boss she didn't want to go there anymore. 3) Teresa's phone and camera were found in Averys house. This was completely omitted from the show. 4) investigators found bondage chains on site at Averys house.
That, along with the other evidence presented, is way more than enough to convict Avery. While I believe Avery is guilty, I believe Dassey was railroaded. Dassey is a far more sympathetic figure than Avery.
|
|
jakksking1
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 2, 2011 14:45:41 GMT -5
Posts: 2,843
|
Post by jakksking1 on Jan 30, 2016 0:08:51 GMT -5
Also, for those too young to remember, this was almost shot for shot the exact same defense that got OJ off. OJ's DNA was at the crime scene on a Nicole Brown. However, the lead investigator used the N word in the early 80s, and Johnny Cochran convinced a jury that the LAPD had a history of racism and planted evidence that OJ did it.
No one buys that crap, but it's interesting that we have 2 similar trials, 2 different results, and we complain about both of them not being just.
|
|
|
Post by Robert69 on Jan 30, 2016 1:40:34 GMT -5
I've said this to pretty much everyone I've spoken to about the subject. Regardless if Steve Avery murdered Teresa Halbach or not, there is so much reasonable doubt in that trial that he shouldn't be in jail. The jury decided the outcome of the trial before it started and Ken Kratz is the kind of guy that proves why our legal system is so broken. Brendan Dassey being in prison is pretty sickening imo. I feel he's a moderately handicapped kid that should have been acquitted after no evidence was found in Avery's case based on the story he fabricated. I primarily lean towards the belief that Steve didn't do it. He 100% had evidence planted on him but the car and the way the bones were moved around is what gets me the most. They didn't find Teresa's finger prints on the car or the keys. However, they conveniently found Steve's blood in the car, but no finger prints, and his finger prints were conveniently on the completely wiped key? Plus, he would have used the crusher on the car since he would of had to drive by it to go hide it where he supposedly did. The single key was an absolute plant. It was removed from the ring and placed in his home, period. I also feel the brother and the x-boyfriend helped plant and hide evidence. I think they both played a part in deleting Teresa's voice mails and potentially emails or other evidence that could have easily generated a suspect other than Avery. The problem I have is figuring out who did kill her. I've read the theory about Scott Tadych and Bobby Dassey and I think it's plausible, and explains her bones being moved around, which is entirely strange in and of itself. However, the cops completely ignored the idea of other suspects and that to me makes it hard to decipher who else was in play. I do know that Kratz didn't ever establish a motive, which is something I struggled with through the entire documentary. Why did Steve Avery kill her and what did he have to gain from it? If we rule out the rape through DNA, which they did imo based on Teresa's DNA not being anywhere, then what reason does Steve have to kill or even hurt her? I can't answer that question. The silver lining for me is that Kathleen Zellner now has his case and I believe she's going to get him a new, fair, trial, which is what I believe he deserves, regardless if he's guilty or innocent. The way the documentary was cut did as much bad for Avery as it did good. There had to have been some compelling evidence for him to be found guilty, to some extent. That wasn't presented adequately in the documentary. Also of note, in public documents, there were FOUR men (all related somehow to Avery) that were possible suspects, and not a single one was looked into as the possible killer. Not one. Why wasn't this mentioned in the documentary? Because it would have ruined the family bond that the doc worked so hard to build up. Documentaries should be unbiased, and show both sides, to adequately make a judgement call. This one was so far skewed in Avery's favor you can't help but be pissed off at everyone else. The fact stands that he should at least get a fair trial, based on the reasonable doubt presented. Certainly. But they should have given more information from the other side of this. Why weren't any of these 4 men taken in for questioning, at the very least? All 4 of them testified against Steven on the stand. And all very readily threw him under the bus. But none were seen as suspects? Interesting. Especially considering the first half of the doc built them up as this tight family unit...
|
|
|
Post by snatch on Feb 2, 2016 19:52:08 GMT -5
I didn't see the Netflix doc. I did watch the Dateline special. I think it was a plant by detectives. I've seen and watched to many stories, not quite like this. But I have no faith in the judicial system.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Feb 3, 2016 20:41:47 GMT -5
I'm really on the fence with Steven. Part of me thinks he killed her, but the police still planted evidence because they wanted to guarantee a conviction.
One the other I think things don't add up. Like the officer calling in the license plate days earlier as if he found the car beforehand. Or that no DNA was found in the house. There is NO way anyone could clean that 100%. Or that her DNA was not on her own key-chain. To be clear, I don't believe the cops murdered an innocent women, but I think they could have found her body in her car and they planted it on the Avery property.
Without a doubt I believe Brendan is just a confused kid. He would have admitted to killing Kennedy had they ask him to.
|
|
jakksking1
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 2, 2011 14:45:41 GMT -5
Posts: 2,843
|
Post by jakksking1 on Feb 4, 2016 5:51:30 GMT -5
I'm really on the fence with Steven. Part of me thinks he killed her, but the police still planted evidence because they wanted to guarantee a conviction. One the other I think things don't add up. Like the officer calling in the license plate days earlier as if he found the car beforehand. Or that no DNA was found in the house. There is NO way anyone could clean that 100%. Or that her DNA was not on her own key-chain. To be clear, I don't believe the cops murdered an innocent women, but I think they could have found her body in her car and they planted it on the Avery property. Without a doubt I believe Brendan is just a confused kid. He would have admitted to killing Kennedy had they ask him to. The key is interesting because her DNA wasn't found on her key, but Averys DNA via sweat was. How does that happen? Note they left out Averys sweat was in it in the documentary, mainly because you can't plant sweat.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Feb 4, 2016 9:37:11 GMT -5
I'm really on the fence with Steven. Part of me thinks he killed her, but the police still planted evidence because they wanted to guarantee a conviction. One the other I think things don't add up. Like the officer calling in the license plate days earlier as if he found the car beforehand. Or that no DNA was found in the house. There is NO way anyone could clean that 100%. Or that her DNA was not on her own key-chain. To be clear, I don't believe the cops murdered an innocent women, but I think they could have found her body in her car and they planted it on the Avery property. Without a doubt I believe Brendan is just a confused kid. He would have admitted to killing Kennedy had they ask him to. The key is interesting because her DNA wasn't found on her key, but Averys DNA via sweat was. How does that happen? Note they left out Averys sweat was in it in the documentary, mainly because you can't plant sweat. That's why I'm not committing to whether he is guilty or innocent. Because a handful of things don't line up, like missing DNA. But I also know the story was a bit one sided.
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Feb 4, 2016 10:20:21 GMT -5
I'm really on the fence with Steven. Part of me thinks he killed her, but the police still planted evidence because they wanted to guarantee a conviction. One the other I think things don't add up. Like the officer calling in the license plate days earlier as if he found the car beforehand. Or that no DNA was found in the house. There is NO way anyone could clean that 100%. Or that her DNA was not on her own key-chain. To be clear, I don't believe the cops murdered an innocent women, but I think they could have found her body in her car and they planted it on the Avery property. Without a doubt I believe Brendan is just a confused kid. He would have admitted to killing Kennedy had they ask him to. That is kind of how I was leaning about everything too. Odds are he probably did it but I am pretty sure those cops tainted that investigation. I still would like an explanation for how that vial of blood was tampered with. And his house just doesn't match how they said the murder occurred, because they were going by what Brendan said, which was all made up. Is the right guy in jail for it? Possibly. But how they got him there seems to be a travesty.
|
|