Clearly states in the DOJ's investigation that there was no corruption or any wrong doing by police. That is now two agencies DOJ and the innocence project who have reached this conclusion.

Just hrs after they got the information that a young woman was missing, got it.

Why was a Sgt. who supervises even on patrol that NT going to a property that SA lived on when he was just out of COURT days before dealing with SA civil suit?
Just helping the boys out I guess. But that's a hard 1 too because he told 2/3 different versions of events that NT, forgot about a call me made about the missing person's car & rushed back to the station because his shift finished at 8pm, forgetting about Mr Zipperer with 1/1.15 hrs unaccounted for.....

Poorskillz What Connection to L.E do you have?

Indeed saus, I agree it goes all the way to the DOJ. ITSUNFKUCINGREALMAN#

COLBORN AND LENK WERE NOT BEING SUED. It was thomas Kocureck and vogel.

FYP

Fact is, they weren't being sued. Saying they were going to be sued is based on nothing but speculation.. Unwarranted speculation at that. Considering neither did anything remotely wrong.

Nobody was being sued the first time.

Lenk/Colburn had links to those people and its not clear to me much changed since the first time. The **** that happened the first time doesn't just happen one time.

Do you at least agree there was a conspiracy the first time around?

I posted the link above http://static1.squarespace.com/stati..._multidocs.pdf showing who was sued. What link to Lenk have to either defendant? Lenk was employed 3 years after this happened.

I believe the cops could have did a better job yes, I do not believe they knowingly framed avery, just that they didn't want to pursue other options.. Confirmation bias if you will. They should have included a picture of Greg allen in the line up for example..

This is horrible police work and a clear big ****ing issue. Let's say you lived in Town X and Town X's sheriff department was investigating a crime and you were the only person they investigated even though their was a guy who is much more likely to do it that they were already tailing. That's corruption and horrible police work. Cops are not supposed to focus on one suspect unless they had some definitive evidence like a video or something. The fact that you think that something like this is alright is the entire problem with your arguments. I can't believe you think this is fine. If you think this is the only time they've done something similar, I got another thing coming to you.

I have no idea if the murder is really an issue but I know there is some serious issues with the justice system from the first case. The fact that the state investigated and discovered nothing is a huge issue that they can't see what's right in front of their face. They can't be trusted much like the sheriff's can't be trusted and neither can many of the lawyers from the the area.

Wtf? When did I say this wasn't a problem? I clearly said the opposite. It should have been handled better, ive said that before.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007Feb20.pdf

pg.163

Strang: My question, though, was whether you had concern,
the thought crossed your mind, that you might be
added as a defendant in that civil lawsuit?

Colborn: Yes, the thought crossed my mind that I might be
added as the defendant.

um ok? Why wouldn't the thought "cross his mind" lol.. Holy **** you are reaching.

has the thought ever crossed your mind that you might be added as a defendant in a lawsuit that has nothing to do with you?

truckonfire.jpg

http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/mag...ct_and_fraudu/


Still say um ok?

Or do you see the F***ing problem.

I know, right? Obviously it crossed his mind and probably multiple times. Especially because

Colborn was running for Sheriff! But hey, the documentary left that out because they had an agenda.

I'm sitting here wondering how much money it would take to get me to set a cat on fire and watch it burn.

That's not something well adjusted humans do.

You wrote the word "just." It's one of their biggest responsibilities to be fair and to follow procedure and they ignored it. Do you think this is the only time they have ignored being fair and just? LOL, it's the only time we have good evidence that they have. Corrupt cops/justice systems are a monstrous problem for everyone b/c the people who are supposed to be overseeing the law aren't following their OWN laws/rules--they are writing their own and as you can see they do WHATEVER the **** they want. They don't log-in. They lie UNDER oath. The list goes on and on. So it is really a leap to say they could plant evidence. With no rules to play by they are capable of anything. Did they? Who knows, but they have a clear history of ignoring their own rules and protocol and they can't be in trusted position much less be in position of power.

So, I just red the DNA lady's testimony in full.

Fraley and Skills, have you guys both read that in full? I don't know how you could have read that and thought "yeah, definitely no issues with that bullet or the DNA collected on in"

It does have something to do with him. He worked for two of the people being sued who are now retired and works for the agency being sued.

Don't see what that article has to do with the post you quoted.

Some things I will be looking up:

Did you know that they also impounded another vehicle of SA's that had only his DNA, prints and blood from the cut on his finger inside? Did you know that Sherry C. from Crime Lab is the one that used the same swabs to collect samples of this blood as the swabs used to collect from TH's car? The blood by the ignition does look like it could have been put there with a cotton swab:



There is a list of which swabs from which stains were tested by FBI for EDTA. Gotta research though...

If he was alone and did it in private that's one thing, to do it when you're drinking with friends who would find it funny or amusing is another. BTW, my cats seem scared of me right now for some reason.

Right so iyo the best way to handle this when someone murders and burns a body is what? Just assume by default it is reasonable that evidence was planted?