Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Making a Murderer Making a Murderer

01-26-2016 , 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddymitchel Making a Murderer
That s the most ******ed argument ever , if steven avery was harassing her there s no way she would go anywhere avery's place and noone will believe that she didn't know where she was going when she went there a few times before.
She thought it was his sister.. And the property is huge, several people live there. It would be akin to you not going to an apartment building that had a man you didn't like in there.
01-26-2016 , 12:10 PM
Furthermore, when there is a gruesome death like this, what else would the motive be but the killer just being a deranged psychopath?
01-26-2016 , 12:12 PM
You are talking about harassment not disliking.
But at least you are consistant Lenk had to be the evidence technician and no one else ever could have done it, and theresa had to be the photographer who went to some family property with awefull reputation where a guy who was harassing her was staying.
01-26-2016 , 12:14 PM
its very annoying when people misrepresent what you said. Saying Lenk was one of the few evidence techs in the area is not saying Lenk is the only evidence tech in the area. I also never said she was scared or disliked anyone. I am just saying the harassment by him establishes motive.
01-26-2016 , 12:18 PM
I go to the same barber, at the same barbershop every time I get my haircut. I guess I'm harassing that poor guy. I should really start using a different hairdresser every time I get my hair cut just in case he gets murdered some day.
01-26-2016 , 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
its very annoying when people misrepresent what you said. Saying Lenk was one of the few evidence techs in the area is not saying Lenk is the only evidence tech in the area. I also never said she was scared or disliked anyone. I am just saying the harassment by him establishes motive.

Except, you haven't actually established any harassment.
01-26-2016 , 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
I think the doc pointed out that it was shady that a report was filed, literally the day after SA was released/exonerated based on DNA evidence. A report about an apparently innocuous call from ~8 years prior. A call that Colborn claimed did not know was even referring to SA. So yeah, the report is pretty shady (to use your words).
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
I know, insane that myself and PoorSkillz are having trouble grasping this.
FYP
01-26-2016 , 12:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
I go to the same barber, at the same barbershop every time I get my haircut. I guess I'm harassing that poor guy. I should really start using a different hairdresser every time I get my hair cut just in case he gets murdered some day.
Ya, hopefully he doesnt get murdered while he is cutting your hair on your property and then buried in your yard after being burned beyond your house.. Thatll suck for you!
01-26-2016 , 12:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
yes they did establish a motive. They did this with the phone records and how it appeared he was harassing her. Their argument was basically that he had an obsession with her, which does fit the evidence. This is like arguing Gacy didn't have a motive so Gacy should be set free.
And yet Theresa felt safe to go on his property, it s like the prosecution narrative make no sense at all, damn biased documentary.
01-26-2016 , 12:26 PM
It wasn't just his property, and what makes you think she had any reason to fear he would actually do anything to her?
01-26-2016 , 12:33 PM
Here's an interesting theory -

A Cold Case Expert Thinks 'Making A Murderer' May Be Tied To One Of The Most Prolific Serial Killers Ever

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/cold-case-e...020034799.html
01-26-2016 , 12:35 PM
Because she is a woman alone on the property of a family who has horrible reputation in the area and got some history of harassment from avery who has maybe an even worse reputation than his family.
I ll point that my interpretation come from what you are spamming the thread with for the past month to justify avery's motive to murder her
01-26-2016 , 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
It wasn't just his property, and what makes you think she had any reason to fear he would actually do anything to her?
Ok, I know you contradict yourself a lot. But this takes the cake. That you for agreeing with me.
01-26-2016 , 12:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jinx702 Making a Murderer
Here's an interesting theory -

A Cold Case Expert Thinks 'Making A Murderer' May Be Tied To One Of The Most Prolific Serial Killers Ever

https://www.yahoo.com/tv/cold-case-e...020034799.html
posted before but missed because of 2 *** spamming the thread with desinformation and arguments about meaningless stuff.
01-26-2016 , 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Well, there's no strong motive nor evidence that anything was planted (and there's even the EDTA test which basically shows to a "reasonable degree of scientific certainty" that the blood wasn't from the vial)... so why exactly should the jury believe the evidence was planted again??
I'll provide my actual opinion once I read all o the DNA testimony.

But my current opinion based on the things I've read, is that all the EDTA test 'proved' is that there was no EDTA found (or that it didn't meet the minimum threshold for the test being conducted) in the blood samples tested.

Not as you just put it, that "the blood wasn't from the vial"

NOTE;

This is my current opinion, based on the things I have read to date, which is mostly other people's opinions.
01-26-2016 , 12:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
I'll provide my actual opinion once I read all o the DNA testimony.

But my current opinion based on the things I've read, is that all the EDTA test 'proved' is that there was no EDTA found (or that it didn't meet the minimum threshold for the test being conducted) in the blood samples tested.

Not as you just put it, that "the blood wasn't from the vial"

NOTE;

This is my current opinion, based on the things I have read to date, which is mostly other people's opinions.
I clearly said 'shows to a "reasonable degree of scientific certainty"'.
01-26-2016 , 12:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
I clearly said 'shows to a "reasonable degree of scientific certainty"'.
You said the following.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Well, there's no strong motive nor evidence that anything was planted (and there's even the EDTA test which basically shows to a "reasonable degree of scientific certainty" that the blood wasn't from the vial)... so why exactly should the jury believe the evidence was planted again??
And I simply said, that my current opinion, is that you are drawing conclusions that shouldn't be drawn.
01-26-2016 , 12:50 PM
Is it possible to bet on something like Steven not getting exonerated at any point in the next 10 years? I'd be willing to bet up to $10,000 on it. Where does someone go to make a bet like this?
01-26-2016 , 12:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Is it possible to bet on something like Steven not getting exonerated at any point in the next 10 years? I'd be willing to bet up to $10,000 on it. Where does someone go to make a bet like this?
"we aren't saying hes innocent"

coming very soon itt.
01-26-2016 , 12:58 PM
What. That bet has nothing to do with him being innocent. It has to do with him being exonerated. It's possible to be innocent and not exonerated(obviously the reverse is near impossible unless mistrial or something happens, I don't know I'm not a lawyer)

If anything his bet is a cop out. He should bet that that damning evidence of his guilt surfaces in the next 10 years or damning evidence of his innocence (as judged by an impartial panel). Where the most likely middle ground is a push. Right now he is basically stealing the majority (nothing new comes of this case) outcome for himself.
01-26-2016 , 12:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
"we aren't saying hes innocent"

coming very soon itt.
Haha true. There's a lot of people who believe he's going to go free even if he did do it though.

There's also people who 100% believe he's innocent, but I guess those also aren't the people to be making bets with lol.
01-26-2016 , 01:06 PM
when you ll understand that making a murderer was about a flawed justice system and not who killed theresa maybe you ll start making decent points itt
01-26-2016 , 01:09 PM
when you ll understand that making a murderer was a deceptive and manipulative advocacy piece maybe you ll start making decent points itt
01-26-2016 , 01:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Is it possible to bet on something like Steven not getting exonerated at any point in the next 10 years? I'd be willing to bet up to $10,000 on it. Where does someone go to make a bet like this?
Wherever it is, I hope you stay there.
01-26-2016 , 01:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
when you ll understand that making a murderer was a deceptive and manipulative advocacy piece maybe you ll start making decent points itt
Yep you're definitely right, he *67'd her. If that isn't a smoking gun I don't know what is.

      
m