Oh That Kayla..... The one that when she WAS in a MCPD wrote the statement then RETRACTED the statement in COURT crying her eyes out. KAYLA, the one who hates steven but when asked by Buting/Strang if the statement was a LIE she tells the jury/judge "Yeah I made THAT statement up"

Got it thx......

I don't think the judge gets enough derision for being an incompetent f-wit. He was and is horrible.

I think it is horrible Steven forst Brandon to do things.

Only one explanation.

Kayla coerced BD into making these statements.

Mr D.Strang on wgn radio...
http://wgnradio.com/2016/01/18/makin...rives-me-nuts/

The statement that SHE retracted in court?

Why did kayla tell 2 diff stories under oath? Which 1 is true. Court? MCPD?

lol is it not obvious that her family pressured her to retract the statement?

Plus she liked BD. She basically told on him and set off the chain of events which led them there. Any kids gonna cry on the stand in her situation. I'm surprised she did as well as she did.

Not sure what you're not getting. Timeline is something like this:

-BD tells Kayla exactly what she wrote in the statement
-Kayla tells parents which prompts police to question her and get statement.
-Police interview BD but can tell he's only giving bits and pieces of truth.
-After buying him pizza, they sufficiently earn BD's trust. He admits to rape, murder, disposing of a dead body.

I thinks he's right. He was essentially forst into what he did. I bet a few conversations like this went down,

SA: Hey you know that pretty lady who takes pictures of our cars?
BD: yeeeeaahhh
SA: I think I'm going to tie her up and rape her. I missed out on 18 years of pussy.
BD: yeeeeaahhh
SA: Hey you want to **** her too?
BD: yeeeeaahhh
SA: Great you can help me get rid of the body too
BD: yeeeeaahhh
SA: Sounds good, I'll call you over when every things ready.
BD: yeeeeaahhh

fruit,

Please respond.

Yeah the New Yorker critique of the filmmakers is absurd. Since when is it the purvey of a documentary of a criminal case to go out on their own and line up their own suspects and theories and tell their story. The author of that article misses the entire point of the documentary.

If you think the documentary told the story of Avery being innocent you fail at tv watching.

If kayla liked BD why lie in the 1st place?

Also if the MCPD & the MS Crime Lab searched the trailer were SA lived, ripping the WHOLE place apart, carpets up-all the items removed to test & scan for DNA ect, how did all the items & carpet get exactly back in place when the KEY was found? (see my earlier post for photo evidence)

And why did colborn & the other 3 deputies think that THIS key was a significant find when there are over 3800 cars on the lot & a bunch of keys on the dresser next to were the key was found?

Also why did the bullet that was in the garage become so flattened?

So flat that it did not contain anything to suggest what it hit to become so flat & no trace anywhere on or around SA trailer/garage?

Pretty cynical,view. Yeah they are well paid attorneys but they fought hard for Avery. The original attorneys almost never represent clients in appeals because ineffective counsel is one of the potential avenues for an appeal. So this is standard.

+1

^^From the horses mouth Golfnut.
^^Sadly for the vast majority of lawyers this is the case & also why the Doc was Made & why this case needs revisited.
IMO & others ITT This CASE/DOC will set a president either way because "DNA EVIDENCE IS SO REFUTABLE IT IS A 100% Conviction" Think about it, WHY-cause Your DNA can be gathered from anything you own/touch.ANYTHING!!!!

Agreed.

Agreed.

Agreed.

I think she was choked to death in the bedroom, stabbed in the garage and shot outside before being placed in the fire. I think it was a small enough amount of blood in the garage that bleach and paint thinner removed enough evidence. I don't think SA was so dumb that he was stabbing and shooting women in ways that would make for a difficult clean up. He planned this for a long time.

I'm willing to entertain some theories like they put her in the car and took her somewhere to shoot and burn her. BD clammed up when asked why she was in the car in the final interview. It pissed off the cops because after interviewing him for a few hours (and my listening to it) it was clear as day when he was being truthful and when he was lying.

I'm not concerned with the police evidence inconsistencies. It's pretty obvious they were just planting evidence left and right because they wanted a conviction. They're lucky their BS didn't lead to a rapist murderer getting off. If BD didn't have enough of a conscious to confess it very well may have.

From looking at the Avery yard, it appears nobody there knows how to use the car crusher.

Maybe Brendan raped her ability to write at a higher level than an 8 year old.

Is "he head skreming in(s) house" even admissible for anything?

Kinda seemed like a yard full of crushed cars. Except for one's they could still scrap parts from, of course.

hahaha

By the way, even Kayla Avery doesn't spell "forced" as forst.

I'm not sure which one of these statements is more absurd.

Glad to see you finally coming around. You're almost home, it's okay to admit that you didn't quite understand all the facts at first, but now you do. You don't need to be right, no matter what the costs. That's what shady ass slime like MC Law does.

You are also making me think that you believe BDs confession to be the strongest part of the case and all the planting was done to support that. Is that about right?

Shouldn't be. Especially when the cops berate BD for hours because they know a certain bus driver with absolutely no interest is going to testify that she saw them at this time outside, plus some rando filling up his truck is going to attest that he saw the Rav 4 shortly after, plus there's absolutely not a single bit of evidence she was ever in the house, so another round of fine police work needs to go down to change the story.

I cant tell if you are being sarcastic. A few hours ago you were commending Weigert and Truthbender for the damn fine police work, but now you are saying it's obvious they were planting left and right.

Brendan Dassey 'confessed' before she said anything to the police, so she didn't 'set off' anything.

I find it interesting that he's not able to sue for the prior false conviction. Is there a law that says if you're found guilty of an unrelated felony, you can't continue with a civil suit?