Bobby lied about sleeping when he was actually on the porn computer, and also lied that the porn computer was not in his wank room.

It's no big stretch to suggest the prosecution helped him with those lies in exchange for a lie implicating Steven, the man they wanted everyone to believe was guilty of some heinous crime.

Apparently Bryan reported Bobby's statement about Bobby's admission that Teresa left ASY in 2005 (not ten years after as falsely reported by guilters).

"Bobby and Brendan’s older brother Bryan Dassey told Department of Justice officials in November 2005 that Bobby had told him that he did see Halbach leave the property that day."

The confirmation bias is unbelievable.

Has your funding been cut off Bro?

I ask because your last few posts seem as if there's not a lot of effort in them.

I heard gofundme.com is good for conservatives for legal funds.

All very well and good, except the evidence indicates Teresa left ASY while Steven stayed put.

Until we have some convincing evidence that Steven can be in two places at once, the only logical conclusion is that Steven did not commit any crime against Teresa as they were in different places.

This is true,, Bryan did make this statement, above in 2005

Excellent!

It will be interesting to learn things about the case from someone who is knowledgeable about the law and the facts.

From Ticktock poster... Kaboomblamzoom.

As you say, Proudzzz probably better left to the expert's.....And why we can't trust Bobby's statements.......

The Truth About Bobby's Timeline On November 4th & 5th, 2005
Sorry user (known from here on out as this user) who posted this...I didn't want to have to do this but there is too much misinformation being floated around in your Bobby Timeline post. You rely too much on the lies told in Bobby's testimony. His entire testimony should be chewed up and spit in the garbage. It's utterly useless.

The user who posted Bobby's timeline claims

This user claims the possibility of 2 deers. She also claims that there is 2 accounts of a deer being claimed (one of the 3rd & another on the 4th). I will prove this user's claims about 2 deers to be false. I will also prove that the true accounts of the deer incident is the one claimed on the night of the 4th.

This user claims Bobby came home around 11:30 with Mike O. She is basing this off of faulty questions by Strang and testimony by Bobby at trial. I told this user that if Mike O was there JD would interview him because JD wouldn't know whether Mike O was on the property the 31st or not. JD wouldn't know whether or not Mike O even lived on the property or not. This would lead him to question everyone that he doesn't know trying to get onto the property. At this point JD would want to know everything from the 31st up until the very minute he interviews Bobby & Mike O. This user claims they were let go because an officer by the name of O'Connor was by himself trying to catch vehicles leaving the property. That doesn't even make much sense to me but whatever. I asked this user to provide me with proof Bobby was with Mike in the morning other than the faulty testimony he gave then I would concede. I never received it because it doesn't exist. Let's look at the faulty questions by Stang & testimony by Bobby at trial now. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...15.pdf#page=29 As you can see Strang and Bobby are confused to the actual time when Bobby comes home to get his dog and is stopped at the blockade. He is interviewed for 1hr and then given his dog. There is no mention of him coming home that night to the blockade and that's because Strang goofed up in his questioning and I don't know if Bobby was distracted, nervous, not listening to the questions but then he gives false responses to these two questions. I will prove below that Bobby came home alone on the 5th at around 6pm.

Everyone here is a factual (with a bit of speculation to fill the gaps) account of what happened on Friday, November 4th & Saturday, November 5th 2005.

Friday, November 4th 2005

Bobby gets off work at 6pm. Bobby according to Google Maps would get home between 6:20-6:30am (It takes about 20mins to get from his work to ASY...I add a couple minutes factoring him having to get his lunchbag/jacket, walk to car etc...) He probably goes to sleep until around lunchtime 12-1pm. He makes himself some lunch. According to Mr. Drumm's testimony he was asked by Sheriff Pagel & Investigator Wendy Baldwin to fly around some residences and the like to look for a missing person and/or teal coloured RAV4. He claims that he took flight between 1:30-2pm. He flew over the Zipperer's property, worked his way up to Avery Salvage Yard and then off towards Green Bay. He states they ended their flight at around 5pm. Now when looking at Bobby's statement to Wisconsin State Public Defender's office he claims that the reason Mike O is interviewed on November 14th,2005 is because there was a flyover that caught Mike O there. So from this we can conclude that Mike O is at Bobby's from anywhere between 1pm-5pm. Between 4pm-5pm (Probably closer to 4pm because it is still light out) media rolls up in the Avery Salvage Yard to interview Steven for the 6pm news. In the background you can see Bobby or Mike O pull out on an ATV. There doesn't seem to be another vehicle in Bobby's driveway. Somewhere between 5-7pm more news media interviews Steven once again about TH's disappearance. Steven in his statements in Maribel claims to have been with Bobby riding around on their ATV's when Chuck called him to check out taillights near his trailer. This occured around 7:30pm. Steven & Bobby get into Steven's truck and they head up to Chuck's and neither of them see anything so they go back to Steven's and Steven calls Chuck back to say he didn't see anything. Shortly after this Barb comes home claiming a deer was hit down the road. This is confirmed in Steven's statements, Barb's statements, Brendan & Chuck's statements. This user is claiming that Barb is coming home from work when the deer is struck. This is not true and honestly I have no idea where she got this idea from. Barb doesn't work Friday - Sunday. She works 6:30am-4:30pm Monday-Thursday. Therefore, Barb doesn't see the deer on her way home from work. In Barb's statement she tries to give the impression that it was 3rd however, by the end of her statement she says to look at the date of the deer tag for the actual date of this incident. If that isn't concrete enough at the beginning of Barb's statement she says she told Bobby to call Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department and he did. Bobby did call and this can be verified by looking at Bobby's frequency cell phone report. There is a # ending in 4201 on 11/4/05 which is the Sheriff's Department. The deer being hit can also be confirmed by looking at the Incident Report involving the driver of the car that hit the deer calling it in and officers responding. The officers report that the car may not be driveable and the deer is laying in the westbound lane just east of Larrabee eastbound. Barb then states they go to Mobile 310 to get the deer tag and then they come home to hang it up and skin it together. She makes a claim that Steven's garage lights were on so he was home. She doesn't mention Steven coming over to her garage that night. In Bobby's second statement to police in CASO on 11/9/05 he states the only deer is the one hanging in his garage.

Videos of Steven being interviewed on the 4th - https://youtu.be/5zq-Lmwp6zw?t=69 & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CagRdz3ZA0s

Bobby's WSPD's statement - https://i.imgur.com/xbQeMeU.jpg

Barb's statement - https://www.dropbox.com/s/77le3sq00d...deer.docx?dl=0

Bobby's frequency cellphone report - https://i.imgur.com/0bgCPWp.jpg

Deer Incident Report - https://i.imgur.com/Vk1Mtbl.png

Saturday, November 5th, 2005

On the 5th as per Bobby's statement to the Wisconsin State Public Defender's office's he claims he left his house to go goose hunting with Mike O at about 9am and when he left everything was fine. When he returned home (alone) between 5:30-6pm he was stopped at the blockadge and interviewed. He had asked for his dog and while they decided whether to get it or not he was asked the same questions over and over for about 2-3hrs. However, the truth of the matter is he was only asked questions for 1hr. Where Bobby goes after this is unknown.

Evidence? Also, while you're at it.. Relevance? Lol. Someone lies about watching fisting porn=someone would lie about a murder victim leaving his property?? How does that even follow?

Yes, that is quite the stretch actually.

The police report just says that bryan told police bobby knows she left. It doesn't say how he acquired this information. It doesn't say if someone else told him this, if he overheard bobby say this or if he somehow inferred this. This also does nothing for you to rule out the other 4 much more likely possibilities.

agreed, it is.

Are you saying those other 4 possibilities I mentioned aren't possible? What evaluations have you done on those 4 to determine they are combined less likely than bobby lying?

Learn some bayes theorem bro.

The evidence is in the court documents filed by Zellner. You'd come off better if you paid attention.

Bobby is the last person to see her alive. Definitely a person of interest when they seem to be obsessed with assaulting young women and lie about their activities immediately before a young woman disappears.

Not at all.

Yes, police report in 2005, not ten years after as you falsely posted above.

Yes, in contrast to the false information you provided, Bryan did tell the cops about Bobby during the initial investigation. Your other speculations about what might have happened instead are not 'more likely' nor are they 'much more likely'.

That's your confirmation bias talking. Again.

Where does it show bobby lied about his computer activity? Lol. Please elaborate.

Bobby claims he saw her approaching averys trailer and that her vehicle remained on the property until he went hunting. Why you think a murderer would want to draw suspicion to his own property is beyond me.

**This doesn't allow you to conclude he was the last person to see her alive, in fact avery admits to seeing her so if anything he was the last known person to see her alive even in this fantasy world of yours where he is innocent**


The police report says that bryan told them bobby knows she left the property. It doesn't say how bryan reached this conclusion. To my knowledge the earliest indication we have from bryan that bobby told him this is in zellners brief, ie 10+years later.

I didn't provide any false information. the police report doesn't say that bryan is claiming bobby told him Teresa left.

Right, when we have a fact in this case the fact is this (Bryan claims bobby told him he saw Teresa leave the property) we must examine the reasons why this fact exists before we can draw conclusions. I provided you with 5 reasons, yours is just one of those 5 with no reason to assume yours over the others. Yet you somehow jump to one conclusion and are telling other people that conclusion is fact. This is an illogical way to assimilate information.

Here's an interview with the man himself....

https://www.spreaker.com/user/woodwa...=episode_title

It would do your 'cause' more good if you'd actually watch the documentary that this thread is about.

That's a good argument to show why Steven couldn't possibly have killed Teresa since he told everyone she was coming, and told everyone she arrived.

Another score on your own goal.

There's been no end of claims that Steven was 'the last person to see Teresa alive' to support this bizarre fantasy that Steven is guilty. But there is no evidence to support that contention.

More pretzel logic from you. How else would Bryan know Bobby saw Teresa leave other than by word of mouth? Pantomime?

I'm sure you can come up with half a dozen goofy 'alternative realities' instead of the obvious.

Bryan supplied his information to LE about Bobby in 2005, not ten years after.

The most likely reason this fact exists is because someone employed in law enforcement questioned Bryan, and Bryan answered the questions. Most likely Bryan told the truth as he has no reason to lie.

There is zero evidence to suggest Bryan lied to police, zero evidence to suggest the LE misunderstood what Bryan said, zero evidence to suggest the report is mistaken because of a typo or whatever pretzel-logic reason you're going to throw up as an objection next.

Actually, there is good reason to suppose that Bryan told the truth in 2005 (not ten years after) and is telling the truth now. Being Bobby's brother, Bryan is very likely to have had a conversation with him. The most likely reason Bryan might know what his brother witnessed is by a conversation with him. Bryan's statement goes against the narrative being suggested to him which would indicate he would be crystal clear about how he came to know the information (as validated by the affidavit). Given the consistency of the information Bryan provides it is most likely what he understood. Bryan has no conceivable motive to lie as he is not implicated in any way whatsoever.

You don't know logic even when it's kicking you in the ass.

Thanks for the link.

I suppose next we'll hear from the guilters this isn't Bryan Dassey, but a crisis actor posing as him in a vast 'Innocence Fraud' conspiracy funded by the Italian Mafia.

Bayes Theorem in practice:

https://maxandrews.files.wordpress.c...urrection9.pdf

You trolling or just dumb?

...and the bones being in Sherry Culhane's lab is good evidence she killed Teresa? LOL!

Oddly, it only turned up at ASY after Steven left. Amazing how something on wheels can be moved from place to place, isn't it?

A few drops sprinkled in random locations, none of which could be logically connected to coming directly from a bleeding finger by someone actually in the car? LOL!

LOL!

Anyone depending on the crazy-quilt of conflicting statements coerced from Brendan to put anyone in prison is not a serious human being.

Perhaps watching season 2 would be helpful in understanding where you're getting this claim from. I think a much easier approach would be for you to elaborate.

I can tell you that we don't know who did the searches and of the few dozen that are timestamped nearly all of them aside from the fisting ones happened on a sunday. Is bobby the only one home on sundays?

This isn't the same thing. Bobby is telling police or inferring to police that she didn't leave. It would be undisputable that she went there.

Someone can go to the averys and not die lolol.. but if someone dies after not leaving a place that means they died at that place.


Theres nothing but evidence to support this. Get a ****ing clue would ya.


Maybe barb told bryan she heard this from bobby, maybe bryan heard it from someone else etc... None of this really matters because I said I do not think bryan lying is most likely. I gave 5 possibilities, I said 2 and 3 are most likely. Either bryan is remembering incorrectly or he is misunderstanding what someone said.

However I think its also more likely that bobby is lying to bryan than it is bobby is lying to police. Its quite a weird lie for the killer to tell police, it however is not that weird of a lie to tell bryan if bryan is adamant that avery is innocent. Perhaps bobby just didn't want to be ostracized by his family.

Bobby is lying is the only conclusion here I see that's goofy. I haven't concluded anything, ive merely pointed out 5 possibilities, you however have for no reason at all assumed 1 is true and the other 4 are false.




Again, we don't even know what bryan told police exactly.


I do not think bryan is lying. I am just saying its a possibility. Just like it is a possibility that bobby is lying.

Yes, now you're getting it. there is also 0 evidence to suggest bobby is lying.

We/You don't know what bryan told police is 2005.

Sure, brothers have conversations all the time. Conversations are also sometimes misunderstood, this happens often as well.

This depends. Maybe bobby told bryan that she didn't leave and barb told bryan that bobby said she did. Maybe bryan got confused and transposed the two events. There is a plethora of explanations. Even if you assume bobby told bryan this, this doesn't mean bobby isn't simply lying to bryan.

I don't see how you've concluded this. Just because it goes against the narrative doesn't mean it somehow becomes more likely to be accurate.



What consistency? We don't know what he told police in 2005, we don't know where this conversation with bobby supposedly took place, we don't know if the details matched etc.. There is no examples in which to conclude how consistent it is.

no movite? Is bryan related to the accused?

Furthermore, for the 7th time. I do not think bryan is lying. I am simply pointing out to you there are at least 5 explanations to this affidavit.

Bryan Misunderstood
Bryan is remembering wrong
Bryan is lying
Bobby is lying to bryan
Bobby is lying to police


Bobby lying to police is not more likely than the totality of the 4 other possibilities.

Like with most nuanced and complicated methodology, it is often misued and misapplied.

Antiquity is about the last place you want to use bayes.

Another thing that will perhaps clear up some confusion. When using deductive logic (which is what you’re doing) you can’t say x (Bryan says Bobby told him Teresa left) to conclude y(teressa left) when there are other equally likely scenarios. The totality of other scenarios makes your scenario less likely. Think of it like poker. Even if there are 2 aces left in the deck that doesn’t mean it’s more likely you have an ace over 3 other random cards in which there is only 1 of each in the deck.

You keep leaving out the most obvious and most likely explanation that Occam's Razor would suggest:

Bryan's testimony is true.

You are treating your unlikely speculations as being somehow equal to the most straightforward explanation.

This is not a game of cards where the number of cards is known and it is random which one comes up.

Again, logic is kicking your ass and you remain clueless.

Please tell me how it is more likely

Bobby is lying to police

over

bobby is lying to bryan?

It is actually least likely Teresa left the property. If she did we in almost 0 scenarios would see her bones, property and car at the ASY.

NO it is straightforward. You have 1 possibility, I have 4 alternatives. As far as I can tell yours is not even more likely than any of the 4 I offered but it is certainly not more likely than 1 of the 4 others being right. Even if it is twice as likely as all other four scenarios that would just mean

40% you're right 60% I am.

and even worse, even if all of what you're saying is right it doesn't exactly prove avery is innocent. There is still the mountain of physical and circumstantial evidence that needs explained.

You have jumped like 38 steps here to conclude what you've concluded.

This tiresome game of asking me to repeat what I just posted is lame.

Read my post above #12842.

Bobby lying to police and the jury has an obvious motive.

There is no credible motive for Bobby to lie to Bryan - nothing to fear from him.

As Teresa intended to leave, we have witnesses who say she left, her phone tracks away from ASY, her vehicle was spotted off the property, and scent dogs tracked her off the property, there are zero scenarios that would suggest she didn't leave.

Again, the facts militate against your confirmation bias.

Since it's fairly obvious she did leave, it doesn't matter how many or few scenarios would lead to that result. It is the only logical answer: Teresa left and her vehicle and cremains were returned in an effort to put Steven in the frame.