Yeah. There were minor problems with it such as LE asking Dassey who shot Ms Halbach in the head, as was already covered itt but it wasn't problematic enough to make the confession & certainly not the investigation unsound, nor did it even come close to meeting actual coercion. It was by the book as nothing illegal occurred & standard as Reid is a standard accepted technique. Neither the jury or ultimately the courts found it unacceptable either after scrutiny.

So yeah it was standard acceptable & by the book in accordance with the permitted standards.

And now it's over.

MaM aside, you should watch Staircase. I'd love to hear your thoughts on the criminal justice system.

I'd rather not tbh as it's very probably the same biased bs every other defence pov documentary I've seen re murder has been so far.
https://www.refinery29.com/2018/06/2...of-documentary

https://www.sheknows.com/entertainme...rcase-left-out

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/repo...-money-motive/

^^


The victim's sister thinks Peterson's guilty though.

https://www.cbs17.com/news/michael-p...lea/1016922555

(an Alford plea is actually a guilty plea where defendant claims innocence while acknowledging that the state has enough evidence to more than likely convict but the plea itself is a guilty plea)

As for the criminal justice system it's a fallible system that can always do with positive reform & where wrongful convictions can & do occur due to it being inherently flawed because it isn't infallible. LE has it corrupt elements as does the judicial system. None of these things occurred in either Dassey or Avery's case though. Both are guilty & justice was done & has now been upheld as far as I'm concerned.

I heard and owl did it.

Avery now blames two relatives as the possible killers in yet another new & yet another doomed filing as part of his "Anyone but me!" defence.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile...sible-killers/

I guess it's no longer Ninja Ryan huh?

Much more plausible than Peterson doing it, defo. Like those West Memphis Three snapping turtles which is much more likely than Baldwin castrating one of the victims...

Btw what do Avery's supporters now think of his abrupt U-turn re LE framing him?

Indeed they wouldn't.

So do Avery's supporters now agree with Cuddly Bear Steve? It wasn't LE or Ninja Ryan? Now it was Bobby Dassey & Scott Tadych?? Would respectfully appreciate just a teensy bit of clarification on this issue from supporters if it's not too much trouble & thoughts would be very much appreciated. Thanks in advance

AFAICT you are the only person who talks about Steven Avery this way.

It's entirely possible your passion about this case hinges on some unresolved feelings you can't hide however much you try to deny them.

As it happens, England has a major owl problem...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/790609.stm

Let's pretend for a second that:

1. Avery is guilty (could be, as far as i'm concerned) and that
2. Dassey is COMPLICIT (he can't possibly be more than that right?)

How life in prison could possibly be "justice" when

1. The kid is half ******ed
2. The kid was 16 (!) at the time

If you sentence him with life in prison, what sentence to give an adult that's not borderline ******ed and principal in a crime ?

Loudz, I've taken you off ignore, now that both your little icons are clearly doomed.

But Loudz, I'm completely disinterested in your musings on little old me. All I'm interested in is whether or not you agree with Cuddly Bear when he emphatically states that LE didn't frame him. Do you agree with him or do you think that LE did in fact frame him & it isn't Bobby Dassey or Scott Tadych? Or Ninja Ryan? Or whoever else Avery & his shyster lawyer is blaming this week?

Do you still suspect LE or possibly Ryan Hillegas still? Or is it now Dassey and/or Tadych? Would love to hear your thoughts mate, thanks in advance.

Legally he can be & is just as culpable of murder as his scummy misogynist uncle even if he personally didn't kill Ms Halbach. You don't even have to be present at a crime scene to be found legally guilty of murder or manslaughter, in some cases. Robert Noel was convicted of manslaughter when his dog killed a neighbour while he was in work at the time.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...duncancampbell
Rudy Guede in Italy was convicted of the murder of Meredith Kercher despite the court decreeing he wasn't the actual killer but was just as legally culpable due to being present at the murder, preventing the victim's escape & not informing the authorities.

No he isn't & he has a higher IQ than Avery & was well able to hold his own on the stand under far harder prosecution questioning conditions than his actual LE interrogation. Also his IQ was already thoroughly covered itt & doesn't need rehashing again. Nor is Dassey a kid, he's 28 last I checked.

Minors can be tried as adults in the US. Whether this is ethical or should be permitted is another thing altogether & an entirely separate issue but his being tried as an adult is permitted within the US judiciary.

1) He's not border line ******ed & having a low IQ doesn't exempt you from committing crimes such as murder anyway. Avery has an IQ of 70, (and doesn't come across as borderline ******ed, despite having a lower IQ than Dassey) like convicted child murderer Jesse Miskelley & serial killer Otis Toole who also doesn't come across as borderline ******ed in interviews & comes across as rather crafty actually. Anthony Porter has an IQ of 59. Gary Ridgeway/Green River Killer has an IQ of 90. Serial killer Robert Pickton's IQ is 86 which is considered low average- Dassey's IQ is between 81-87 according to his own defence. So he isn't borderline ******ed & it would be irrelevant if he was ultimately anyway as people, regardless of high/low IQ can & do commit murder. Long as his due process was fair which it was.

2) The sentence the adult gets is life without parole such as Avery got. Dassey has a shot of parole in 2048. Had he had have taken the original plea deal he'd have been out at 36, plenty of time to make a life for himself & plenty of years left to live in freedom, which is more than his victim got.

We're not in the 80s anymore, we now understand the limits of IQ tests. I'm not saying they mean ****, but it's not the graal of intelligence defining anymore. There is more to it.

You could argue that MAM is biased - and it actually is imo - but there is no argument that Dassey isn't completly with us when you watch the documentary. Unless you want to pretend that he was drilled to appear ******ed (but I doubt even you would go there) it's impossible to argue in good faith that he's "just another kid". Please, you like to talk IQ, don't insult mine.

Speaking of good faith, mentionning that he's NOW 28 obviously mean ****. What kind of weak ass point is that ?

And because you can come up with exemples of other bull**** justice decisions doesn't mean that what happened to Dassey is fine, it just means that you americans have a serious problem with your justice system. I can't think of a worse one in occident tbh. I mean, you live in a country where death penalty for murderers suffering of paranoid schizophrenia is still on the table WTF. And I feel it's not going to get better any soon pending today's upcoming Trump decision btw, but like you said, it's another topic.

By the standards of 11 years ago he wasn't deemed mentally ******ed or borderline & again his IQ has already been thoroughly discussed itt & is not getting rehashed yet again ad nauseam or not by me anyway.

You mean the biased documentary which you just opined was biased in fairness. Therefore not a valid point with respect. What's your point re not completely with us? Nobody said he's Stephen Hawking or above average intelligence but he wasn't borderline ******ed & it's utterly false to say he was.

Let's get one thing straight right here & now- Dassey is only ******ed when it suits his supporters. He's ******ed but can read regular novels & newspapers. (Or else he lied on stand under oath which isn't a particularly valid explanation). He's ******ed but can also be coached to withstand tough prosecution cross examination. He's ******ed but can make "logical guesses" & masterfully store info in order to fool two seasoned investigators for reasons best known to himself. He's ******ed but goes to science class & only needs help with one class, rest being regular.
It's complete contrary bs & yet more rehashing of what was already covered where it mattered most, in a court of law & doesn't bear entertaining by anyone rational for so much as a nanosecond.

You were speaking in the present tense about him, I'm merely going by what you wrote.

A) You're missing the point- there is a standard definition of what's considered sufficient evidence to convict & a standard definition of what's considered fair due process & Dassey met those standards. He isn't special. He doesn't get such standards raised higher just for him & just cuz he's Innocent Brendan, that's not how the system or indeed reality works. Whether such defined standards should be more stringent than beyond a reasonable doubt & what's currently considered as fair due process is a completely separate issue. Ditto on minors being tried as adults.

B) Gosh. All those examples bs huh? Just like that? Just cuz you have issues with a verdict& conviction & sentence? Ergo dismissed automatically? Under the apparent belief that this suffices & is actual objectively valid dismissal? I'm not entertaining such magical thinking via flat out assertions, okay? Sorry.

Yeah it is. And in yet another topic still, I'm not American so it's not my system & you shouldn't be so presumptive, with all due respect.

And btw:
Nobody is arguing any judicial system be it American or otherwise is infallible. Positive viable valid reforms can always be made to such systems & in such systems wrongful convictions can & indeed do occur.

But no examples for wrongful conviction- proper viable inarguable ones that weren't overturned later- have been made for Dassey judicially or shown in this thread & certainly not for Avery. I'm sure there are probably many genuinely wrongfully convicted & factually innocent people languishing in prison. Those who are bothered by such things to the point where they engage in advocacy should seek out valid cases, rather than go by biased mediums such as netflix docs or podcasts or blogs or whatevs & unwittingly contribute towards potentially freeing factually guilty killers into society. This is serious business. Those who again are bothered by such things should spare their altruism for those who deserve it, such as the victims & genuinely wrongfully convicted innocents rather than the truly guilty.

As I pointed out, and you can't deny, you are the only one here who thinks Steven is 'cuddly'.

Gosh Loudz if I were a raging cynic I'd swear you were attempting to deflect away from the fact that Avery did an abrupt about face from his police frame up claims. (not that I'd blame you mind, as let's face it, such contrary bs is pretty indefensible as well as nonsensical, ludicrous, downright stupid and all manner of other negative-Nelly terms & words one uses to categorize dumb filings such as the one Avery's twitter addicted ambulance chasing lawyer submits )

Happily I'm not a raging cynic though & just know you'll be willing to answer this shocking new revelation from The Railroaded One. Is Avery correct with his new claims & do you agree with him that LE didn't frame him or not? *munches popcorn*

All very bizarre given that the state convicted two people on two completely contradictory theories of the alleged crime. If you had objected to such bs by disgraced prosecutor Ken Kratz, I'd actually have good reason to cared one way or the other about someone changing their position.

Certainly if the prosecution can arbitrarily change their minds about what supposedly happened and who is allegedly responsible, private citizens should be extended the same courtesy.

Nothing in the latest court filings by Zellner, one of the finest legal minds in the United States today according to people who don't have their heads up their asses, changes the fact that LE did frame Steven when they fed Brendan 'facts' for him to confess to. The manufacture of evidence should be considered a serious crime, instead of just shrugged off as 'cops will be cops'.

But I've no need to object as the prosecution are allowed to change their theories as has been thoroughly covered itt already. If you need to raise bars to defend murderers, rapists & mutilators then you have no case to make.

See above & not an apt comparison at all either.

,
Oh man... Keep 'em comin'.

... Okay. But did LE frame Avery or not? Is it now Bobby & Scott?

No evidence was manufactured & you & the rest of your fellow fans have failed miserably to provide a scintilla of proof that it was so its all good.

But if you do think such things then is Avery wrong when he blames more new suspects this week or not? Did LE frame him in your opinion? Yes or no? You seem unwilling or unable to answer this question. Is all.

I think my biggest problem with the Avery case and with the Staircase is all the unanswered questions.

Staircase was a weird one too, Peterson seems like a weird dude to me and there are some pretty suspect things with him and the whole case.

I don't defend any of those people you mention - you continue to misrepresent posters on this thread. Is it because you have no plausible response to what people actually write?

The fact is, you are the one 'raising the bar' suggesting it's OK for the prosecution to change its story whenever it is convenient but somehow not OK for anyone else. Either both can change, or neither should. You seem to prefer the double-standard approach, which is pure unadulterated hypocrisy.

Zellner's record speaks for itself - getting innocent people out of prison is her career. That you have to pretend she's not an accomplished lawyer is more evidence that you prefer to live in a fantasy land of your own creation.

We already have evidence that LE suborned perjury to try and obtain a conviction.

It remains to be seen who all was involved.

You are just flat out wrong (again). LE fed 'facts' to Brendan as everyone can hear, and when he repeats what is suggested to him it is used as 'evidence' of his 'guilty knowledge'. The cops who are interrogating Brendan sound more like they are confessing since they do virtually all the talking. It is simply a fact - yet another one you refuse to deal with in an adult and rational manner.

As I already clearly stated and repeat if your seeing the words a second time will help with your comprehension, LE is definitely involved in framing him for the 2005 case much like they wrongfully accused him in the 1985 case.

These LE leopards don't change their corrupt spots.

It seems like the investigators in both cases cared more about securing a conviction of their chosen suspects than in discovering what actually happened.

Hence the sloppy work and reliance on dubious 'experts' to make their respective cases. Close enough for government work!

Peterson does seem like an odd character.

Both really do raise a lot of questions about lazy police work though

Guy I know that worked at a grocery store and once when checking someone out rang up stool softener and said not joking mind you, "stool softener? Why not just use a cushion?" He's a cop now.

Police organizations don't attract the best and brightest to begin with and on top of that they actively look to weed out high intelligence.

They do?