Must see on Netflix...

[GeauxLSU]

You surely need to read between the lines in this. Here's the way I see it.

The DA wants you to believe that he stabbed, raped, and shot this lady in his ****ty trailer and messy garage with no DNA, blood spatter or brain matter that got on anything else. So he meticulously cleaned up everything? Yet at the same time he's on a property with a car crusher and a smelter and figured leaving the car in plain view and burning the body in a fire pit 10 yard from his house was a good idea. The Avery's are not likable for sure, but there are so many things wrong with this case it amazes me that 12 people could conclude "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that these guys did it. For gods sake the only thing they had on the kid was his own words, that changed every time they talked to him. Anyone that knows anything about psychology and interrogation would tell you they could have gotten that kid to swear he was out riding unicorns that night. Then his own lawyer sends an investigator to get him to confess again with an incredibly "leading" interview, while setting up a interview with Detectives to come and question him with no counsel present? Is that what you'd want to happen to your kid?

Yep, that "inbred idiot" clearly missed a lucrative career in forensic pathology with his skills.
And they only had to conclude by a 'reasonable' doubt. The verdict is beyond bizarre and the comments of the dismissed juror very disturbing. But I'm sure it goes on every day in court rooms all around the country.

 

[Jump211]

You posted a link from someone who says they thought he WAS guilty and is now not sure after further investigation. There is absolutely nothing in that link that changes the facts of a crooked DA's office and LEO.
I am confused about ONE thing in your link though. Did the mysteriously appearing bullet that was found in the garage that had no trace of blood even after digging up the concrete actually have the victim's DNA on it? I didn't recall that being mentioned only that it was a 'bullet fragment from his gun'. If it did contain her DNA obviously it's relevant evidence. The validity of it being found under those absurd circumstances (like the key) is up to the observer I suppose.
The key has HIS DNA on it but NOT hers. Yeah, OK, that wasn't washed.

I didn't mean to highlight his point of view so much, but rather illustrate the various pieces of evidence he was shedding light on which Netflix omitted in telling their story. Rest assured that every iota of sloppy/questionable investigation performed by the police (and I agree there appears at least on the surface to be quite a bit), was presented in a way that would steer the viewer of the mini-series to believe the entire thing was a set-up. My biggest gripe is that they failed to come across as unbiased, and did not paint a truly clear picture of Steven Avery which may have steered a lot of viewers sympathies away from believing he was a victim, and see him for being the disgusting, predatory, deviant that he had been since his teenage years.

As for your question about the bullet, all I know is what I read...a bullet which specifically corresponds to one of Avery's guns, was found to contain DNA matching the victim.

 

[GeauxLSU]

I didn't mean to highlight his point of view so much, but rather illustrate the various pieces of evidence he was shedding light on which Netflix omitted in telling their story. Rest assured that every iota of sloppy/questionable investigation performed by the police (and I agree there appears at least on the surface to be quite a bit), was presented in a way that would steer the viewer of the mini-series to believe the entire thing was a set-up. My biggest gripe is that they failed to come across as unbiased, and did not paint a truly clear picture of Steven Avery which may have steered a lot of viewers sympathies away from believing he was a victim, and see him for being the disgusting, predatory, deviant that he had been since his teenage years.

As for your question about the bullet, all I know is what I read...a bullet which specifically corresponds to one of Avery's guns, was found to contain DNA matching the victim.

We just left the viewing with different perspectives (obviously). The items in your list honestly wouldn't have added anything but filler and I assume if you are trying to keep the story to 10 hours some things get cut. They don't seem relevant to me at all. They weren't allowed to discuss the DA's botched (being kind obviously) prosecution of him the first time because it was deemed 'irrelevant' but you want his past highlighted? Why wasn't more made of the fact some bone fragments were found at the quarry site over a mile away?
If I was a betting man, he was 100% framed. Is he a saint? Nope. Is he a murderer? I seriously doubt it. When the DA actually said "it didn't matter if the key was planted" that told me all I needed to know about the prosecution.

 

[Jump211]

We just left the viewing with different perspectives (obviously). The items in your list honestly wouldn't have added anything but filler and I assume if you are trying to keep the story to 10 hours some things get cut. They don't seem relevant to me at all. They weren't allowed to discuss the DA's botched (being kind obviously) prosecution of him the first time because it was deemed 'irrelevant' but you want his past highlighted? Why wasn't more made of the fact some bone fragments were found at the quarry site over a mile away?
If I was a betting man, he was 100% framed. Is he a saint? Nope. Is he a murderer? I seriously doubt it. When the DA actually said "it didn't matter if the key was planted" that told me all I needed to know about the prosecution.

While I can agree that some of the points could be regarded as filler information, others are quite significant in my opinion. For starters, Avery seemed to have some type of infatuation with the victim. He had been arrested for exposing himself to her on a separate occasion, called her cell phone or business number multiple times from a blocked number, and specifically asked for her to come and visit his property to photograph vehicles at the time she went missing and was ultimately murdered. Do you really believe it is more plausible that the cops in that town said to themselves- "Hey see that girl visiting Steve Avery's property... let's go grab her, slaughter her, then mutilate her body and frame Steve for all of it...who's with me?", or, maybe Steve, the town's sexual deviant and career dirtbag might have actually done this awful thing.

The fact that the entire documentary is prefaced by Steve Avery being wrongly convicted of an unrelated crime for which he spent 18 years in jail (terrible as that may be, I believe he needed to be put in the ground when he ran his cousin off the road then pointed a gun at her), should have no bearing whatsoever on what actually occurred in this case. I believe you stated in an earlier post, this entire thing was a "cluster". I couldn't agree more, but since the only thing I am 100% sure of is that an innocent young girl was murdered for absolutely no reason, and the preponderance of evidence points to Steve Avery and/or his bizarre family members, the fact that he and the nitwit nephew are in prison for the time being is OK with me.

 

[albatros43]

How was Dassey convicted when the DA in his closing statement in the Avery trial say that Avery was the one and only person responsible for the murder? I guess statements from another case can't be brought up? And the "framing" doesn't mean that the cops killed her. I think it was weird as crap that the brother and/or ex-boyfriend were reviewing and deleting her voice-mails. I think the roommate and ex-boyfriend probably were involved somehow. I can agree that Avery was probably presented too positively but calling her cell phone, requesting her to come by, etc. does not make one guilty of murder.

 

[GeauxLSU]

While I can agree that some of the points could be regarded as filler information, others are quite significant in my opinion. For starters, Avery seemed to have some type of infatuation with the victim. He had been arrested for exposing himself to her on a separate occasion, called her cell phone or business number multiple times from a blocked number, and specifically asked for her to come and visit his property to photograph vehicles at the time she went missing and was ultimately murdered. Do you really believe it is more plausible that the cops in that town said to themselves- "Hey see that girl visiting Steve Avery's property... let's go grab her, slaughter her, then mutilate her body and frame Steve for all of it...who's with me?", or, maybe Steve, the town's sexual deviant and career dirtbag might have actually done this awful thing.

The fact that the entire documentary is prefaced by Steve Avery being wrongly convicted of an unrelated crime for which he spent 18 years in jail (terrible as that may be, I believe he needed to be put in the ground when he ran his cousin off the road then pointed a gun at her), should have no bearing whatsoever on what actually occurred in this case. I believe you stated in an earlier post, this entire thing was a "cluster". I couldn't agree more, but since the only thing I am 100% sure of is that an innocent young girl was murdered for absolutely no reason, and the preponderance of evidence points to Steve Avery and/or his bizarre family members, the fact that he and the nitwit nephew are in prison for the time being is OK with me.

When was he arrested for "exposing himself to her"? I thought he "answered the door with a towel on"? In either case, why would you go back there if you were her? You are drawing a huge conclusion based on this 'blocked number'. They are very common. People call me all the time from 'blocked numbers'. Not a single one has wanted to murder me.
There are far more things that do NOT add up than do add up to form a conviction and the only juror talking supports the side of "should not have been convicted".
I doubt your italics is what happened. More than likely she was murdered by someone (cop or not, doesn't matter) and when found local LEO said "had to be Avery. He embarassed us once, it's not happening again." They obviously were incompetent in their first erroneous prosecution what makes you think the same bad actors would suddenly change their ways?
There is NO DEFENSE for having the same cops being sued involved in the case and even less acceptance of them just 'happening' to find evidence after multiple searches by supposedly neutral parties. That entire case could not stink worse. I don't care how disgusting the entire clan is. Prosecute a clean case or don't prosecute. I expect criminals to be dirty. It's what they do. Sworn officers of the law being dirty are a special kind of disgusting. I can fight criminals that come after me. It's infinitely harder to fight corrupt LE.
Closing in on 200k signatures. For whatever that's worth (meaning nothing). https://www.change.org/p/president-of-the-united-states-free-steven-avery

 

[albatros43]

When was he arrested for "exposing himself to her"? I thought he "answered the door with a towel on"? In either case, why would you go back there if you were her? You are drawing a huge conclusion based on this 'blocked number'. They are very common. People call me all the time from 'blocked numbers'. Not a single one has wanted to murder me.
There are far more things that do NOT add up than do add up to form a conviction and the only juror talking supports the side of "should not have been convicted".
I doubt your italics is what happened. More than likely she was murdered by someone (cop or not, doesn't matter) and when found local LEO said "had to be Avery. He embarassed us once, it's not happening again." They obviously were incompetent in their first erroneous prosecution what makes you think the same bad actors would suddenly change their ways?
There is NO DEFENSE for having the same cops being sued involved in the case and even less acceptance of them just 'happening' to find evidence after multiple searches by supposedly neutral parties. That entire case could not stink worse. I don't care how disgusting the entire clan is. Prosecute a clean case or don't prosecute. I expect criminals to be dirty. It's what they do. Sworn officers of the law being dirty are a special kind of disgusting. I can fight criminals that come after me. It's infinitely harder to fight corrupt LE.
Closing in on 200k signatures. For whatever that's worth (meaning nothing). https://www.change.org/p/president-of-the-united-states-free-steven-avery

What I find amazing is he hasn't gotten an appeal. Ok, so maybe he is guilty but no appeal is crazy. And how did they ever explain away calling in the plate 2 days before the vehicle was discovered?

 

[GeauxLSU]

How was Dassey convicted when the DA in his closing statement in the Avery trial say that Avery was the one and only person responsible for the murder? I guess statements from another case can't be brought up? And the "framing" doesn't mean that the cops killed her. I think it was weird as crap that the brother and/or ex-boyfriend were reviewing and deleting her voice-mails. I think the roommate and ex-boyfriend probably were involved somehow. I can agree that Avery was probably presented too positively but calling her cell phone, requesting her to come by, etc. does not make one guilty of murder.

When they showed the interrogation of Steven early on and he very consistently kept to his innocence I remember thinking "Dang, a weaker person would cave just to get the onslaught over with. I can see how people confess to things they never did." When they finally brought the kid in I'm surprised it took them THREE AND A HALF HOURS before they could coerce his statement. That was beyond pathetic and transparently useless. How convenient they excluded the tape of him telling his mom they "got to his head" when she asked why he make up such a story. But that of course is on the defense.

 

[GeauxLSU]

What I find amazing is he hasn't gotten an appeal. Ok, so maybe he is guilty but no appeal is crazy. And how did they ever explain away calling in the plate 2 days before the vehicle was discovered?

Exactly. The look on that cop's face when he denied naming the make and model of the car and the tape got replayed was priceless.
Also nice they wouldn't let them re-test the blood with better tech to see if it came form the vile. And zero explanation about the tampering of the vile.
"Beyond a reasonable doubt". Apparently, reasonable means different things to different people.

 

[albatros43]

When they showed the interrogation of Steven early on and he very consistently kept to his innocence I remember thinking "Dang, a weaker person would cave just to get the onslaught over with. I can see how people confess to things they never did." When they finally brought the kid in I'm surprised it took them THREE AND A HALF HOURS before they could coerce his statement. That was beyond pathetic and transparently useless. How convenient they excluded the tape of him telling his mom they "got to his head" when she asked why he make up such a story. But that of course is on the defense.

Exactly. The look on that cop's face when he denied naming the make and model of the car and the tape got replayed was priceless.
Also nice they wouldn't let them re-test the blood with better tech to see if it came form the vile. And zero explanation about the tampering of the vile.
"Beyond a reasonable doubt". Apparently, reasonable means different things to different people.

No doubt Dassey got screwed over and his lawyer was actively trying to convict him. And his "special investigator" was telling Dassey exactly what to draw. His case should have been thrown out immediately for having a lawyer that didn't try to defend his client.

I thought the lawyers for Avery were pretty good, but they did a bad job of hammering home some of the "doubt" that was easily there.