So what are the possible ways to get the remains the way they were?

Bro, I fought to have your ban lifted. But this is just getting out of hand.

1) Why is animal(s) plural?
2) Why is wom(e)n plural?
3) Why are you stating that he told others he wanted to build a torture chamber?
4) Why are you stating that he was masterbating in front of his cousin? (That is in fact G. Allen's m.o.)
5) Why are you saying he threatened to kill her after she told police?

Exaggerating and lying in order to make someone look bad or a scenario look worse than it is the kind of behavior you see from extremely dangerous people who are usually trying to hide their own transgressions. If spew like this goes unchecked in, for example, a company or law enforcement agency or small town or government branch, the results can be catastrophic. It's completely insidious and can make an entire town turn on a single or few human beings who haven't actually done anything wrong.

It's one of the key points of the documentary and is exposed in the extreme on O'Kelly's email to Len Cachinsky.

What you have repeatedly attempted to do in many of your posts is exactly what he is doing in his email. It is a sign of someone that is at best completely ignorant and at worst truly evil.

I am not saying you are these things. You are probably just rage posting and attempting to get your points across by inserting exaggerations and things that are not proven to be true.

But consider you sh*t checked.

Concerning the EDTA test. Good read.

http://www.techinsider.io/edta-blood...urderer-2016-1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e00xNDNTF54

If only they would have allowed an observer from the defense for the ETDA test.


#

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e00xNDNTF54

I gotta give PoorSkillz the nod on this one. I have read the credible source he cited that says it is "possible" to get the bones burned to the degree they were burned with what was used to build the fire. However, from my understanding of the report, it was only a possibility at best.

The second part of that scenario is that the second burn site which was also an outdoor setting and would have required a substantial amount of fuel for a fire hot enough to burn the body. So in my mind, it's tough to simply assume that the 2nd burn site was hot enough but that Avery's wasn't. If I had to choose which site of the two the body was more likely to have been burned, I would choose the second burn site simply by ST's statement to police that the fires flames were only 3 feet high. The fact that he lied about this later further convinces me that there are falsities regarding this fire scenario that we may never know about, but strengthens my belief that this was not where she was burned.

Another point I want to draw attention to here are that PoorSkillz also repeatedly points to the fact that the investigator testified that the bones we're intertwined with the steel belts that remained after the tires burned. This to me is evidence that the bones and belts were in fact scooped up and put in the burn barrel at some point mixing them together.

Audit report anyone.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e00xNDNTF54

Lostsauce is there anything that could ever make you believe Avery did it? Short of her last known whereabouts, blood evidence, DNA evidence, ballistic evidence, victim's auto found on his property, victim's bones found in his yard, victim's key found in his bedroom, etc.?

I mean come on. Believing the cops set him up is practically 9/11 truther level conspiracy. The amount of evidence is overwhelming. And that is leaving out anything about Avery's past violent/deviant behavior. Also leaves out the fact he repeatedly called the photographer (hiding his number), asked for her to come to the house specifically, and had creeped her out before. Also leaves out pending claim of sexual assault against his teenage cousin, claims of repeated abuse by his girlfriend, etc.

The guy is a dangerous sociopath and a pathological liar. I'm guessing almost everyone in that town/area is glad he's off the streets.

Is it legal to burn tires?

i posted a link to a scientific paper earlier itt that will tell you prob not far back. 10/20 plus pages.


#

Lost,

if you fought to get my ban lifted. There was no need. It was only a 24hr timeout because someone (I assume master) reported me for calling someone else I name. The same person who called me a name in the previous post none to less.

Do your own research, most of the questions I have already answered itt.

This is the post of the thread imo.

He wrote to the mother of his children threatening to kill her. He pointed a gun at his cousin. I don't really see any interpretation of that other than a threat to kill her. And Jodi claims he threatened to kill her.

Jodi gave lucid details about him threatening to kill her and that he knows he could get away with it.

Yes, except for the fact that they ALREADY SET HIM UP FOR A CRIME ONCE BEFORE.

Comparing it to 9/11 conspiracy theories is pretty ******ed. If you don't see the difference you are just as dumb as fraley and poorskillz.

False, he was wrongfully convicted not set up. This is according to the investigation by the innocence project. And yes, the leaps of logic required for this set up theory are right on par with 9-11 conspiracy theories.

Uh, with 9/11 we have videos of a plane flying into a building, so no, it's not the same at all.

Apparently you have never engaged with a truther because this doesn't appear to be a problem for them. Its ironic that you say that though because we have bones on SA's property.

Do you have a video tape of SA burning the body that resulted in those bones being discovered there?

Do you have a video tape of the pentagon being hit by a plane?

Also, most truthers don't argue that planes didn't hit the WTC so its a non issue for most of them.

EXACTLY.

This guy is an idiot.

Someone this dumb is not capable of cleaning up a violent crime scene. But supposedly he did.

Oh, and his relative said that he "forgot" to tell investigators that SA shot Teresa. Yeah, I am sure we all forget to see a woman who was supposedly just raped and knifed that she was then shot multiple times in the head while she was still breathing.

This trial should have been held in a different state.

Obviously more likely to have committed. Wtf. Can you read

Sure. Believe me, I was just like many of the other posters in here at first. "There's a chance he did it, but he should not have been proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt."

Then I started looking into facts online. There are just too many coincidences, lucky guesses, "I don't know"s, "I don't remember"s, inconsistent reports, obviously coerced confessions, flat out lies under oath by law enforcement, tainted jurors, EXTREMELY tainted evidence, inexplicable decisions by judges, extremely unethical DA's....AND THAT'S JUST IN THE FIRST CASE.

Now lets add in conflict of interest, extremely clear motive by MC to frame Avery.

Now lets bring it home with probabilities. I simply refuse to believe that he choose to commence his rape, torture murder plot:

-3 weeks after depositions of key people not only went in Avery's favor but also potentially could have implicated MORE persons in the civil case
-Just a few days before the actual individuals in positions of power who were implicated in the civil case were to be deposed
-On the exact day the Avery Bill was put into effect
-By phone ordering his victim through a well known company
-On the same day he is scheduled to take Jodi to an Alcoholism class

-And the cherry: This is the 2nd time they are doing this to him.

TBH, I think it's the exact opposite. I think that most people interested in the case agree that some degree of framing was performed here. Not only that, it was actually proven in the first case, so it's not "9/11 truther level" as you have stated. What other info would YOU need to believe some of this evidence is planted? There is even DNA evidence of planting in multiple instances, both missing and present!

Its off topic, but I think the inability to accept the fact that people in power can and will exact these kinds of evil acts for their own benefit or self preservation is simply a means to avoid responsibility, so that lives can continue without having to actually do anything about it. I would go so far as to say that there are parts of the world where this story is not even sensational in the least and is simply part of everyday life. I'll use the 43 dead students in mexico as an example which has quite a few similarities, actually.

You have to take a further step back. The amount of evidence that show high probabilities of being planted is what is truly overwhelming here. There is literally not ONE piece of evidence that you can say "there's simply no way that could have been planted". And to answer your first question, this might be what it takes to get me to consider that there is a possibility that SA did it.

I cannot justify the cat incident that was a mistake that he readily admitted to and did his time and paid the price. I cannot justify what he did to his cousin. But I can say that if I were a new father that is relying on a business as a means of providing for my family, and someone trying to get out of a speeding ticket was spreading these absolutely vicious lies about me doing lascivious acts at my place of business, I would be enraged. That's all I will say.

Additionally, if you are going to bring up his past behavior as evidence that he did it, why not bring up the fact that he did in fact own up to everything he ever did without question? His past behavior also shows that he never once wavered on his story in either case. There are no "I don't remember"s, I don't know"s, conflicting stories, inaccuracies, nothing. It's simply improbable that a man of his means would stay rock solid and not have any parts of his stories crumble if it were not the truth (imo).

But he called the company and gave them his address? Who cares if he *67, he's famous (or infamous) now. Maybe it's a habit to protect his privacy.

And then kills her? Come on. Ridiculous. She had been there 10-15 times in the past year. She probably shows up on time, does a good job and leaves, exactly what he needed and wanted in order to take Jodi to her court ordered AA meeting, part of her requisites to get her daughter back.

Source?

When was this supposed to have occurred within the last 20 years, 18 of which he was IN PRISON. There was no pending claim, not sure what you are talking about. There was someone who claimed to have heard this story but there has been nothing substantiated or proven about it. It's just incredible the amount of slander that keeps getting tossed into this when the very documentary that this thread is about shows how this type of slander can destroy somebody's life.

This is just more of the same. Makes you sound like O'Kelly. I think you should do some research and quickly get out of any conversations that contain the name O'Kelly.

This is such false logic. A low IQ person can't clean up stains?

I don't think so. I know they probably don't instruct jurors on a
Percentage. I've heard 90% is good enough. That said, I "feel" he probably did it, but taking into consideration everything I've heard and read, there is still reasonable doubt, so I would vote not guilty.