It's unfortunate that the list of things you don't understand about the legal system grows daily. You don't even understand the point of transcripts.

You are misusing them and misapplying them because you don't understand their purpose in the legal system.

How many convicted people have you exonerated? She has exonerated 17. You look foolish attacking her motivations.

But you do stalk a dead girls family so I guess it should come as no surprise. Your motivation to discuss this case is to become a member of the Halbach clan. That is messed up. Yet you question Zellner's motivation?

Foolish if I am wrong maybe.. However, it doesn't take much to approach her situation with a little critical thinking. We will see how fos she is in the coming months.

Also, I didn't stalk her family. You have reached that conclusion on very little information. I was participating in a group that some of them are members of and talk to them semi regularly.

As a juror, you should have known exactly what transcripts are for and how exactly is he using them incorrectly?? Because he isn't a juror? lol jesus.

Lawyer exonerates innocent people in the past.
Lawyer takes this case.
Lawyer is attention whore.

critical thinking

Eh? You think it would be impossible to determine a cause of death with basically the entire body available for examination?

It's not impossible to have those scenarios and convict people, it is a significantly tougher sell to a jury if you can't weave a coherent story. People have been convicted of murder with no body.

However this all came about simply because poorskillz was making ridicukous arguments as to why the jury did not convict on mutilation. None of it had anything to do with the case just poorskillz and fraleyight wacky imaginations. Since they are epically ignorant about the legal system they don't understand what a compromise verdict is.

On the other hand I do have a problem with prosecutors being allowed to use two completely seperate narratives to try two different people accused of committing the same crime together. That simply should not fly. It is ridiculous. And is what happened in Avery/Dassey.

Back to the point, I doubt very many people have been convicted of murder where a prosecutor says "we have no idea how the person died." It is just never going to work as it is their job to explain to the jury how the person died. So regardless of how strong the physical evidence is they are still going to have a narrative as to what happened even if it's mostly fiction. Then the jury weighs the evidence versus the narrative.

If the prosecutor just goes "well we got a body here but don't really know what happened" that's not going to work. Nor would prosecutor poorskillz saying "well we think they either shot her and burned her or burned her and shot her" would not work either. It would be like having a robbery case where the prosecutor says "There is money missing. The rest is anyone's guess"

There is a problem with your first premise. It ignores all of the cases she has taken where she hasn't had someone exonerated. Be that as it may, you are still ignoring the most important parts here that would lead someone to that conclusion.

1, the steps she is taking that are not usual. Luminol testing on a 10 year old crime scene.

2, the constant #makingamurderer in all of her tweets

3, the recycling of bad tweets

4, she didn't take his case until the doc became popular


and most of all.. My opinion rests on the overwhelming evidence that her client is guilty and I am still confident in that opinion even if she has taken his case and I am even more confident that my opinion will be justified when hes still in prison a few years from now.

You are right, she clearly hates the publicity.

#makingamurderer

Is really all you need to know. All the other nuance is just white noise. A serious attorney doesn't promote a show like that... And now there is a 2nd season? Get wise people.

You're an idiot and obviously don't understand how social media works.

She's trying to reach the broadest audience possible. If people are searching for this case online, what hashtag do you think they're searching for?

#tictocmanitowoc?

I think it's cute

Is Zellner an astroturfer?

zellner is gonna have several ppl with their tails between their legs itt

let's just all agree whichever way it swings, that we man up and admit wrongs instead of hiding.

Lol don't be so naive.

Zellner will almost surely never find anything to show Steven's not guilty, and I guarantee you that if she doesn't a majority of people will not change their opinion one iota.

11/3/2005 at 18.34 Charge homicide non negligent charges.
Thanks for posting this Fraley its you're best work to date. This was the Day that TH was reported missing & endangered with No Car found No Body found & No witnesses reported a verified sighting of TH. but you know SA............



If I don't show up after a verdict 1 way or the other you can PM me to remind me AP & I will come to the thread to discuss the appeal.

Don't be so sure of yourself.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co..._Manitowoc.pdf

TH death certificate says a lot like death undetermined & produced before she was identified & was rushed to get it out on the 10th Nov 2005 because THAT was the day the Big Dog was being deposed.

Yeah this is true. If Zellner somehow found concrete evidence proving SA's innocence, myself and the others would need to admit we were wrong. But if she can't, the other side will just claim they got away with framing him. You can't prove a negative, and nothing is going to change their mind short of a confession. (Actually not even that - as the BD case proves.)

This is going to be so rich when you discover how mislead you have been in the coming months.

Mislead about what?

I've said many times, it's possibly that SA is guilty.

Ya lOl like thats gonna happen....

Doubt it but she got all you're running for cover.

So you're just here playing devils advocate? Ok. got it.

When Zellner does prove Avery's innocence, I bet a majority of the Manitowoc Morons will not admit they were wrong.