Wait for the new Adam Sandler movie:cop baby-sitter. Where he is job is following dirty cops to be sure they dont frame.

" nono Johnny i ve seen that bag of coke coming out of your pocket. Dont be naughty or i tell the lieutnant"

lol

We have to be careful though otherwise we'll be accused of having a conspiracy to, uh, make PoorSkillz look dumb, I guess? I haven't worked out my conspiracy manifesto yet but good thing nobody believes in them anyhow.

Here's the map btw; I only searched it because I was curious if my memory has gone to **** fully (I know it has slightly) but it was working this time:

The other fun thing about reading long threads straight through is you catch all the little gems without even having to dig:

Things that were left out of the doc:

The bullet that had TH dna on it was matched to a gun avery keeps above his bed.

TH cell phone and PDA were found 20 ft from Avery's front door.. Burned.

SA DNA was found on the hood latch of the car

There was a blood stain in avery's grand prix that a blood expert testified was consistent with the blood stain by the ignition in the rav 4.

There were actually several places in the rav 4 that had avery's blood.. Most of which were caused by dripping.

SA made 3 phone calls to TH on the day she went missing. 2 were from a blocked number before she arrived at his property and one was made unblocked around 430, this is important because TH did not make any calls on her own after that time. Meaning she was likely either already dead or under false imprisonment

That is off the top of my head a few examples of stuff they left out..

Now the stuff they did tell was technically true but a lot of it was misleading imo such as:

SA criminal history

The stuff with the vial of blood

Portraying lenk as a man who was frightened of the lawsuit even though he played no part in SA wrongful conviction or his continued arrest

Claiming that the county's insurance was denying to pay avery when it was in fact just one of the insurance companies of the sheriff who denied to pay initially. Not the county.

The stuff with the discovery of the key was misrepresented. There were several searches in the trailer before but the key was located on the 2nd day of a full scale search of the trailer. The previous searches were either to recover specific items or were quick searches to make sure TH wasn't inside the trailer.

There are a lot more I am sure but that is what comes to mind initially.

This has already been explained to you why they had to do a lot of the searching. They were evidence techs and both coutnies were pretty small.

Even if you decide to throw out all the evidence, he was the last person seen with the victim, he had a bonfire the night she disappeared, and her body was later found burned on his property. Add all these up and even if it's not enough on its own for proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but enough to make him a very serious suspect.

None of the points that you raise take away from this. They don't provide him an alibi. They don't provide evidence that someone else did it. All they do is cast question on the other pieces of evidence that substantiate his guilt.

There's no way the evidence in the case supports the degree of confidence you are claiming in Avery's innocence. A case can be made for reasonable doubt, but claiming that the evidence shows him to be innocent is completely absurd.

Lost and 5ive,

Can you provide me with an example of a murder trial where the defense did not present reasonable doubt iyo?

I'm going to say there is approximately 0% chance these guys weren't there because of their interest in this case.

The irony is if you believe they are 100% honest then they are there to make sure "things get done right" because they don't want Steve Avery to get loose again.

I'm going to say they were there because they were asked to be there.


Wat.

Ya, not sure what he means by that

I like how all pretense of doubt is now gone from the SA supporters itt. No more, "I'm not saying he's innocent, only that there was enough reasonable doubt". No one was fooled anyway.

All you've got is a gut suspicion that the cops framed Avery. No evidence to back it up, but team Avery's gut is never wrong. And the frame job includes multiple officers, the state crime lab, the prosecution, and possibly the FBI. Sorry, that's a conspiracy. Any comparisons to 9/11 are just to point out how dumb it is.

But hey did you see how big that salvage yard is? That proves... something. Probably dirty cops.

Right,

If all they found was that one bullet, or even the bullet plus the key id be like **** that, this is fishy.. We have much more than that though.

So they might do something if they find no evidence, but they wouldn't add evidence to help their case?

I'm still here saying I'm not sure. I don't really know how anyone could advocate that they are sure one way or another. I'm also saying it looks like her clearly did not receive due process.



No. It does not. It includes Lenk and/or Colborn. It includes a DNA tech that is bad/sloppy/lazy at her job (which she clearly is), and that the FBI test wasn't necessarily sound in its science. Also, we assume SA and BD aren't dexter and dexter's apprentice when it comes to cleaning up a crime scene.

Just out of curiosity, what's your opinion on why these items were not fully burned beyond recognition? Did Steven or the perpetrator just do a very poor job of disposing of this evidence or were these items really that difficult to fully burn to a crisp? Personally I assumed they would burn quite easily so was a bit stumped when their remains were found in this case.

Well sure. The only confusion is why you people keep saying it like that's what it means. Maybe this chain got pulled in the subsequent few thousand posts.

And that's just one of your posts on that page.

Very good post and counter to Lostinthesauce's way of thought in this case. I can understand people being suspicious in the way the investigation was conducted and went down and even believing that it might be possible that Avery is innocent but to deny Steven Avery as the prime suspect in this case based on your suspicions when so much of the circumstantial evidence points in his direction is just insane.

In b4 debating the synonymy of 'twist' and 'spin'

I don't think too many people denied SA should have been a suspect.

They were burned pretty well, someone like me or you wouldn't be able to recognize them imo.

LOL what's going on here? This is like months old stuff.

Then you should have reached a rational conclusion months ago I guess.

What is going on here? What does "Even if" mean. Why would I ignore all the evidence? I've admitted many times that it is absolutely legit to think he should be the "prime" suspect given just the cherry picked evidence you mentioned. Unfortunately, since we are thinking human beings, we don't simply toss out the other evidence. I have no idea why that would be a part of your equation.

He does have an alibi...he has several actually. He has recorded phone calls the night of. He has Scott Tadych saying his fire was only 3 feet high. He has Brendan Dassey admitting many times that nothing like this occurred (although this is after his coerced confession). Why are we talking about an alibi when there is virtually no DNA evidence to support any of the prosecution's claims? There's no motive. There's no means to carry out what is supposed to have happened. What tiny amount of DNA they do have is completely suspect...like investigators-need-to-be-investigated suspect. It's off the charts types of circumstantial evidence that minimally warrants an independent investigation as to what has happened here. There's is a factual, admitted conflict of interest that was supposed to have been avoided by MC's retraction from the investigation. However, on the contrary, MC personnel were the most heavily utilized personnel on the scene. Somehow, this is now being justified by Calumet's lack of resources. Even if we didn't have Calumet personnel testifying that they in fact are more qualified than most of MC's investigators and in fact had very little involvement during key evidence discovery, we have a flat out conflicting information coming from Sheriff Pagel vs what actually happened.

It has been posted multiple times (fraleyight is still campaigning on this page) about the main evidence that points to Avery as a suspect and his subsequent guilt. But I have posted more than enough reasons why this main evidence is not only questionable, in several cases it points towards planting and even of his innocence. Again, all it would take is simply one piece of evidence that I simply cannot refute and my needle would be moved. On the contrary though every single piece of evidence has a relatively high chance of being false, planted or otherwise illegitimate. So, being a person that utilizes probabilities for a living, for me it's still not even close that he's innocent.