Making a Murderer

[ancoats]

Manchester33 said:
I'm certain someone with an IQ as low as his couldn't have come up with this much false information, and the fact that it matches up to physical evidence they found speaks volumes

what
(the fact that it matches up to physical evidence) so no DNA in the bedroom or house small drops of his blood in her car but no blood or DNA of hers could have the police planted the DNA to right they could. but going back to evidence the bones was burnt so how could you say she was killed by cutting her throat and raped in the house

1st question
the body is made up of blood and water and organs and many bones so if you are going to chop somebody up there is going to be 1 hell of a mess
2nd question
could you rape and kill somebody and then chop them up then clean up the mess to a point that NO DNA of hers is found in the house or anywhere else even her own car
3rd question
when the police did there search no key was found but then 4 days later it turns up in his house with only stevie avery DNA on it after the Manitowoc police was told not to enter his house

 

[geoff clipp]

Manchester33 said:
I'm certain someone with an IQ as low as his couldn't have come up with this much false information, and the fact that it matches up to physical evidence they found speaks volumes

what
(the fact that it matches up to physical evidence) so no DNA in the bedroom or house small drops of his blood in her car but no blood or DNA of hers could have the police planted the DNA to right they could. but going back to evidence the bones was burnt so how could you say she was killed by cutting her throat and raped in the house

1st question
the body is made up of blood and water and organs and many bones so if you are going to chop somebody up there is going to be 1 hell of a mess
2nd question
could you rape and kill somebody and then chop them up then clean up the mess to a point that NO DNA of hers is found in the house or anywhere else even her own car
3rd question
when the police did there search no key was found but then 4 days later it turns up in his house with only stevie avery DNA on it after the Manitowoc police was told not to enter his house

This was another thing that I found a little bit misleading in the show. In reality nobody told Manitowoc not to enter the house. Nobody told them not to do anything. Manitowoc police voluntarily invited the neighbouring police force to investigate the case so as to avoid any accusations of conflict of interest. I accept they didn't stick to that self imposed rule and i also accept they acted improperly, but it's not true that they weren't "allowed" on the scene. (That said, there probably should be a change in the law regarding that kind of thing)

 

[Manchester33]

Manchester33 said:
I'm certain someone with an IQ as low as his couldn't have come up with this much false information, and the fact that it matches up to physical evidence they found speaks volumes

what
(the fact that it matches up to physical evidence) so no DNA in the bedroom or house small drops of his blood in her car but no blood or DNA of hers could have the police planted the DNA to right they could. but going back to evidence the bones was burnt so how could you say she was killed by cutting her throat and raped in the house

1st question
the body is made up of blood and water and organs and many bones so if you are going to chop somebody up there is going to be 1 hell of a mess
2nd question
could you rape and kill somebody and then chop them up then clean up the mess to a point that NO DNA of hers is found in the house or anywhere else even her own car
3rd question
when the police did there search no key was found but then 4 days later it turns up in his house with only stevie avery DNA on it after the Manitowoc police was told not to enter his house

Physical evidence means something tangible they have that they could use to incriminate Avery.

Handcuffs were mentioned, him being sweaty and removing the car battery, them transporting the body to the pond in the back of the RAV4 etc. That is physical evidence that helps build the story the prosecution thought best fits this murder case. They found physical evidence to back this up (Avery ordering handcuffs of the internet/sweat under the hood hatch/Blood in the back of the RAV4).

1st question wasn't a question, it was a statement. To humour you, yes, a body is made up of blood, water, organs and bones. They never chopped her up (Or not in the house/garage necessarily). Their alibi was that they spent the whole evening cleaning the garage so anything is possible.

2nd question, yes, that is possible if you knew what you were doing. I agree with the idea that Avery probably isn't smart enough to leave a fool proof trail, hence why he left certain clues. He had been cleaning, he had a good few days to clear up his mess so it is theoretically possible. There isn't much in the way of evidence about how gorey the death was, the idea of all this blood and guts is just speculation.

3rd question, the key was hidden, Avery had attempted to clean it but left his own DNA on the key in the process.

 

[Phil1]

Physical evidence means something tangible they have that they could use to incriminate Avery.

Handcuffs were mentioned, him being sweaty and removing the car battery, them transporting the body to the pond in the back of the RAV4 etc. That is physical evidence that helps build the story the prosecution thought best fits this murder case. They found physical evidence to back this up (Avery ordering handcuffs of the internet/sweat under the hood hatch/Blood in the back of the RAV4).

1st question wasn't a question, it was a statement. To humour you, yes, a body is made up of blood, water, organs and bones. They never chopped her up (Or not in the house/garage necessarily). Their alibi was that they spent the whole evening cleaning the garage so anything is possible.

2nd question, yes, that is possible if you knew what you were doing. I agree with the idea that Avery probably isn't smart enough to leave a fool proof trail, hence why he left certain clues. He had been cleaning, he had a good few days to clear up his mess so it is theoretically possible. There isn't much in the way of evidence about how gorey the death was, the idea of all this blood and guts is just speculation.

3rd question, the key was hidden, Avery had attempted to clean it but left his own DNA on the key in the process.

So,(third point) he managed to wipe the key so meticulously that not a single trace of her DNA was anywhere on it but traces of his happened to be? It want hidden either - it was found in plain sight by 'shock horror' one of the bent cops after several searches had previously uncovered nothing.
The Police had him off from the start and even if he did it the conviction shouldn't have been upheld due to the negligence and corruption of the officers involved.

 

[TCIB]

In the slow minded cousins testimony he said they cut her throat whilst alive on the bed, the arterial spray would be everywhere. Especially with her blood pressure at such a stressful time.
It would hit the roof no problem.

A trained FBI CSI team would struggle to clean it so well that no dna of hers was found at all and leave no trace of cleaning agents all over the room (no cleaning agents were found). In fact it was a pretty tatty room that had not seen a duster in a while from what i saw, not filthy but not shiny clean by any stretch.

She used that same key for 6-7 years, non of her dna was found at all on the key.
Not one bit even ground into the nylon webbing attaching the key to the fob.
That would make an amoeba hold his cell up and say "hey wtf this is proper dodgy"

 

[Ghandi's Flip Flops]

One part of defence's case that gets over looked (mainly because it wasn't featured in MaM) is regarding the condition of the victim's remains.
To reduce a body down to the bone fragments that were found actually takes some doing. It would require either a massive amount of heat (something like an industrial incinerator) or exposure to a conventional fire over a considerable length of time (like 5-6 days).

Having seen pictures of some of the kids bodies that were actually pulled out of the 'Waco Siege' fire after it ended, with them still resembling actual bodies, i honestly can't believe the fire pit next to Avery's trailer was the place where the body was burned.

Strangely, i am pretty sure there was an industrial incinerator on the Avery property which was thoroughly examined and no bone fragments found.
So, bone fragments found in the 'burn barrel' and the 'burn pit' (and possibly at the quarry) but none in an incinerator they could have used. hmmm


Also the other thing i have difficulty understanding is the allegations of sexual abuse by Steven Avery towards Brendan and some of the other cousins. When is this supposed to have happened?

Maybe i'm being dumb, but Brendan wasn't even born when Steven Avery started his 18 year stretch for the rape he didn't commit. Same goes for most of the other cousins. So his only window of opportunity would have been when he got his eventual release from prison (and Brendan would have been at least 14). Is this when he went on his supposed rampage of mass child sex abuse?

Other than heresay and wild allegations by the anti-Steven Avery mob, i haven't been able to find anything that shows Steven Avery abused anyone within his family. (Although there does seem to be some evidence that another Avery family member might have done).

 

[bluemc1]

he might have done it but it was bent as fuck, without doubt stuff was planted or hidden to make sure he was found guilty

the bit that stuck out was copper stand who had his phone call taped of him reading out her reg plate 2 days before car was found, he was clearly stood looking at that car and when it was found it had no reg plates on WTF

also if I've got this right, how can Steve Avery get found guilty for killing her in the garage with a gun and his nephew found guilty of killing the same woman in the trailer by slitting her throat ??? don't the justice system have to say " we've got 1 person in prison here who clearly didn't do what they've been found guilty of

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

I got as far as the third one and while there are good points, pretty much all of them can be easily debunked and they are debunked by people in the comments section. It makes me laugh how so much is made of him answering the door to Theresa Halbach wearing "only a towel". So what - it's his house and does that automatically make him a murderer? Not only that, how much evidence is there that Theresa never wanted to go up to his property again? After all, she went there of her own accord on October 31st 2005 so she can't have been that freaked out by him.

One inescapable fact is that this was never a fair trial in a million years.

So do you didnt read all of them as you have a closed mind to it. Therein lies the problem with all this

 

[geoff clipp]

he might have done it but it was bent as fuck, without doubt stuff was planted or hidden to make sure he was found guilty

the bit that stuck out was copper stand who had his phone call taped of him reading out her reg plate 2 days before car was found, he was clearly stood looking at that car and when it was found it had no reg plates on WTF

Yeah that bit looked very suspect though a few people have said it might well have been Colborn simply checking through his list of things to do/look out for that day. One theory I quite liked which somebody posted a link to on here, was that maybe the brother and ex boyfriend had taken matters in their own hands and trespassed at the salvage yard to look for the car, found it and then called the police. The police then had to make it look as though it had been found in a more legitimate way hence it all looking a bit shifty.

 

[ancoats]

One part of defence's case that gets over looked (mainly because it wasn't featured in MaM) is regarding the condition of the victim's remains.
To reduce a body down to the bone fragments that were found actually takes some doing. It would require either a massive amount of heat (something like an industrial incinerator) or exposure to a conventional fire over a considerable length of time (like 5-6 days).

Having seen pictures of some of the kids bodies that were actually pulled out of the 'Waco Siege' fire after it ended, with them still resembling actual bodies, i honestly can't believe the fire pit next to Avery's trailer was the place where the body was burned.

Strangely, i am pretty sure there was an industrial incinerator on the Avery property which was thoroughly examined and no bone fragments found. So, bone fragments found in the 'burn barrel' and the 'burn pit' (and possibly at the quarry) but none in an incinerator they could have used. hmmm


Also the other thing i have difficulty understanding is the allegations of sexual abuse by Steven Avery towards Brendan and some of the other cousins. When is this supposed to have happened?

Maybe i'm being dumb, but Brendan wasn't even born when Steven Avery started his 18 year stretch for the rape he didn't commit. Same goes for most of the other cousins. So his only window of opportunity would have been when he got his eventual release from prison (and Brendan would have been at least 14). Is this when he went on his supposed rampage of mass child sex abuse?

Other than heresay and wild allegations by the anti-Steven Avery mob, i haven't been able to find anything that shows Steven Avery abused anyone within his family. (Although there does seem to be some evidence that another Avery family member might have done).

I did say early on in this its would take 1 hell of a fire to burn a body to small bones like they had. could they have been somebody else bones the police used to fake her death at the avery home. could they have faked the DNA YES. could they and planted avery blood YES. could they planted the key YES. could her DNA be cleaned to a point that nothing remains NOPE. so if her DNA was not found in or on thing that links them to steven avery even the blood spots in the car are not really any uses if hers are not there aswell

so the BIG mistake here is the none DNA of hers they must be DNA from something hair nails blood skin saliva body fluids from a woman fighting for her life

 

[bluemc1]

Yeah that bit looked very suspect though a few people have said it might well have been Colborn simply checking through his list of things to do/look out for that day. One theory I quite liked which somebody posted a link to on here, was that maybe the brother and ex boyfriend had taken matters in their own hands and trespassed at the salvage yard to look for the car, found it and then called the police. The police then had to make it look as though it had been found in a more legitimate way hence it all looking a bit shifty.

nothing would surprise me to be honest mate

 

[M18CTID]

So do you didnt read all of them as you have a closed mind to it. Therein lies the problem with all this

To be fair, the same could be said about you mate ;)

In my defence, I was at work and I really didn't have time to read them all this afternoon but I will get round to it at some point. I have read other articles that are on the side of the prosecution so I'm not looking at this with a totally closed mind. And I've stressed previously that I'm not totally convinced that he didn't do it. I am convinced that the police fucked him over though, regardless of whether he did it or not.

I did ask the question earlier to no-one in particular - why did it take 3 days to report her missing?

 

[Ghandi's Flip Flops]

I did say early on in this its would take 1 hell of a fire to burn a body to small bones like they had. could they have been somebody else bones the police used to fake her death at the avery home. could they have faked the DNA YES. could they and planted avery blood YES. could they planted the key YES. could her DNA be cleaned to a point that nothing remains NOPE. so if her DNA was not found in or on thing that links them to steven avery even the blood spots in the car are not really any uses if hers are not there aswell

so the BIG mistake here is the none DNA of hers they must be DNA from something hair nails blood skin saliva body fluids from a woman fighting for her life

Yeah. With burning tires & bits of wood being highly unlikely to produce enough heat it sorta points to that the 'burn pit' was actually just the dump site of the remains and the 'burn barrel' being used to transport the remains.
Following this i find it slightly suspicious that the 'burn barrel' belonged to the Tadych househould and in Scott Tadych's original statements he descibed the fire at the 'burn pit' on that night as about 3 feet high, but in his later statements the fire it changes to being as high as the trailer.

With the exception of the disputable/suspicious evidence like the key & bullet and then with the total lack of any other DNA, blood spatter or hair (they supposedly cut off the victims hair according to Brendan) of the victim within the Steven Avery's trailer/garage, i can only conclude that the murder didn't take place at that location.

So with the murder taking place elsewhere (possibly off the Avery compound), and the burn pit being considered just as the dump site the physical evidence starts to look a bit thin against Steven Avery.

 

[BigJoe#1]

I suppose it's all impossible to explain completely. No one knows for 100% who killed her other than the people who did.

My gripe about the series is that they depict it as this huge mis-carriage of justice, when in reality, Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey are the only suspects in the case.

Read the articles I posted above, they're really interesting.

So many contrasting and legitimate points of view it's almost impossible to say who did kill her.

In my opinion the evidence against Avery isn't compelling.

For starters and just about the act itself. Do you really believe these guys were clever enough to elimante every single trace of DNA from the bedroom and garage? My thoughts are that they are not the most hygienic of people and to deep clean the bedroom and garage adequately would be almost impossible.

So how did she die? Was she shackled to the bed where she was raped, stabbed and gas her throat cur, or was she sot in the head?

If it was the former there would have been blood everywhere, as it happens not a single trace was found anywhere. There WA none on the shackles, there was none on the matress, the bed clothes, the carpet, the floor nothing anywhere. There was no evidence on the bed posts of shackles having been applied and you can be sure there would have been if she was fighting, begging and screaming for her life.

So if it was in the garage there would have been a trail of blood between the bedroom and the garage which would have been almost impossible to elimante totally, there was nothing found. Also if she had been shot at close range there would have been blood and brains everywhere, not a trace was found.

On the shooting. All we have is a bullet with a trace of DNA on it, now there're two things to consider here. The expert that say the bullet was fired from the type of rifle that Avery has could not say that was actually fired from that exact same rifle. Secondly, there was only a trace of her DNA on the bullet - I would have thought or expected there to have been much more. This too tenuous for me for a conviction to stand.

The DNA on the car hood. The detective that inspected the inside of the car has admitted that after handling DNA sample he did not change his gloves when he went and opened the hood - or bonnet for us Brits. That to me causes more doubt. Also, if Avery was sweating profusely whilst removing the battery surely there would be more, much more DNA in and around the area he was working... or they able to deep clean there too?

The key is the key for me (pardon the pun). It is almost impossible to remove DNA but it is doable. As it was her keys I would have expected her DNA to be on them somewhere, I just don't think these were clever enough to do such a thorough job of removing, and in any case why would they remove her DNA - to serve what purpose after all there is no dispute it was her key. Finally on the key and whilst I've suggested they're not the sharpest tools in the shed.... I do think they would not be stupid enough to keep the key, it would have been the easiest thing in the world for them to just discard it and I feel that is what any below average intelligence criminal would have done.

The other things that trouble me most, and before I as I wonder if you've ever studied a crematorium and the temperatures their ovens reach? The fire pit in no way, and an expert has said this, would cremate the body and bones to the extent that her alleged bones were found.

Now don't get me wrong am not100% convinced of his innocence however I am even less convinced by the evidence we have seen but I accept we may not have seen it all, that said I think we have a good idea of what the jury were presented with

My firm belief in that in the USA Avery was on the brink of bankrupting the whole county and state and they had to stop him and I don't think there were any lengths they wouldn't go to to achieve this.

There are loads of peripheral questions relating to....

Accessing her mobile phone records and deleting messages
Why her cousin was told randomly to search a specific area of the junk yard where coincidentally the car was found
Why was her cousin the only member of the search team to be given a camera?
Why was her cousin the only person to be given a direct line access to the head of the investigation?

I believe the county and state had to stop him winning the court battle over their previous fuck up and that is what they done sparing no cost.

Will talk about the boyfriend and brother and Brendan Dassey later!

 

[BigJoe#1]

Yes, I am for real. Just read that article I posted above and re-think it.

The fact is this, Avery killed her. We don't know exactly how, but he did.

Think for a moment the amount of effort and risk that would be involved for police to frame Avery. Do you genuinely think they would have gone to those lengths and risked their lives to do all this? Come on it's lunacy. Everyone just gets enraged because the documentary plays some tense music and interviews some passionate conspiracy theorists.

How is it a FACT that he killed her?

For it to be a fact you need proof. Considering you can't say where and you can't say how's he was killed and having come to the conclusion that the key and bullet are evidence when a bus can be driven through the arguments what is your proof, the proof you need to establish a fact?

So if as you say she wasn't killed in the garage, do you think wherever it was that he killed her, he took the time to find the bullet and take it back and leave it in the garage? That doesn't sit too comfortably with me.

The key was found by an unsupervised (at the moment the key was found) officer, that had no right to be there.

Isn't there an element of doubt in your thinking? I have huge doubts about his innocence but so far there has been no solid conclusive evidence that points to his guilt. Just as there wasn't the first time they nabbed him.

 

[bluemc1]

In regards the DNA testing can't even see how it was allowed in court as the the woman carrying out the test admitted it had been contaminated in fact after reading up they are actually investigating in the USA at how bad their testing is for contamination.

They also said they wouldn't let Averys people be in the room as they couldn't take the risk of contamination yet she said she got distracted by the 2 people in there she was training up ?? WTF

 

[cookster]

Funny how Rich Americans, Robert Durst, OJ Simpson and Amanda Know got a different sense of justice.

 

[TonyM]

“This is truly where the devil resides in comfort. I can find no good in any member. These people are pure evil. A friend suggested this is a one-branch family tree. Cut this tree down. We need to end the gene pool here.” —Kachinsky’s defense investigator Michael O’Kelly, in an email to Kachinsky

This from the guy who was shown on video coaching Brendan Dassy to draw pictures of a murder that obviously never occurred as depicted.

And then the judge decides to uphold the guilty verdict? Crazy.

 

[maccadon]

 

[tweetstreet]

A few questions that I may have missed the answers to in the series or in general:

Did the brother/ex boyfriend ever state what the messages on her mobile said? and apparently they deleted 'some' messages not all. so what were the other messages? surely police got access to these?

What temperatures are required for what period of time to fully burn a body? would forensics find residue (i.e. fat) in the pit if a body had been burned there?

When was the ex boyfriend meant to have split from her?

And I remember them saying she was getting phone calls weeks before her death but wouldn't say who from, did they allude any more to who this was? the ex bf maybe if the break was recent?

Any CCTV that she may have passed going to/from the avery premises?