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

02-02-2016 , 11:30 AM
Does he admit to burning garbage though? My grandparents burned garbage a few days a week on their farm and they would have denied that ever being a bonfire.
02-02-2016 , 11:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddymitchel Making a Murderer
I didn't deny she was in the car. It s the presence of dassey that nothing confirm while avery's one is more inconsistant.
IM referring to avery's blood. There were multiple stains of his blood in the car and some of them were caused by his blood dripping.

Also the stain in his own car was consistent with the stain in her car by the ignition.
02-02-2016 , 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by prana Making a Murderer
Does he admit to burning garbage though? My grandparents burned garbage a few days a week on their farm and they would have denied that ever being a bonfire.
He said something about burning garbage but its been a few weeks..

I posted his first interviews itt. But you know, I don't contribute to this thread and just troll. (not saying you said that)
02-02-2016 , 11:38 AM
Rich,

Dude, how many times do I have to tell you reasonable doubt is not 0 doubt. If new evidence came up it would not effect me and I would still feel justified drawing the conclusion I did today. Just like I would have felt justified saying the universe is static a century ago.
02-02-2016 , 11:51 AM
This whole thing could've been avoided if SA's sister just went to Carmaxx to sell her car.
02-02-2016 , 12:03 PM
Wonder why SA's sister was trying to sell her car at the time she did.
02-02-2016 , 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
IM referring to avery's blood. There were multiple stains of his blood in the car and some of them were caused by his blood dripping.

Also the stain in his own car was consistent with the stain in her car by the ignition.
He doesn't have to remove his own blood from his own car. Removing prints and dna from halbach but leaving the stain near ignition makes no sense. Brendan beeing in halbach car leaving no trace makes no sense either since i wouldnt trust him lacing his shoes
02-02-2016 , 12:13 PM
Fraley,

In your opinion where did the murder take place? Just wondering if you think it happened in trailer/garage and Avery did expert job of cleaning, or if you think it took place somewhere else.
02-02-2016 , 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddymitchel Making a Murderer
He doesn't have to remove his own blood from his own car. Removing prints and dna from halbach but leaving the stain near ignition makes no sense. Brendan beeing in halbach car leaving no trace makes no sense either since i wouldnt trust him lacing his shoes
They probably covered themselves in trash bags and wore gloves but the blood seeped through the glove.
02-02-2016 , 12:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by housenuts Making a Murderer
Fraley,

In your opinion where did the murder take place? Just wondering if you think it happened in trailer/garage and Avery did expert job of cleaning, or if you think it took place somewhere else.
The murder took place obviously in the bedroom finished in the garage then they took her for a spin in her car and brought her back near his trailer to burn her.

Why would anyone have a problem with that theory... that s what brendan said and why he went to jail
02-02-2016 , 12:28 PM
Hey Jinx - we get it man. Can you stop trolling?
02-02-2016 , 12:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngerPush Making a Murderer
Hey Jinx - we get it man. Can you stop trolling?
Was wondering when someone would say something Guess my fun is done.
02-02-2016 , 12:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Just like I would have felt justified saying the universe is static a century ago.
NOW what the hell are you talking about?

Can't you find something else to do for a couple of weeks besides posting in this thread?
02-02-2016 , 12:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
*** Also, I have not seen you comment regarding the "Lenk was the only qualified tech" issue - where two other techs from Calumet testified they were excluded from the trailer, yet Lenk was allowed in. That is in direct conflict with your claim that Lenk was needed because there were no qualified tech available.

.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
this is what I am talking about oski. I never said any of this. You and others have created a strawman of what i said.. This is not the only time this has been done to me itt.

Master said I said something wasn't in the doc because I didn't see it (so did you) and all I said was I didn't recall it and it turns out that wasn't even in the doc.

I want an apology for you either misunderstanding me or lying about what I said. I gave you two examples. Now either admit you made a mistake or apologize for lying.
This is what I am also talking about. You simply cannot read.

"Also I have not seen you comment." That states, I have not seen you comment on that issue, which means I am not asserting that you put forward a position one way or another.

"That is in direct conflict with your claim that Lenk was needed because there were no qualified tech available."

Please try to tell us you have not made the claim that Lenk was there because he had to be there due to a shortage of qualified techs. In this case, there are two tech stating that Lenk was allowed in the trailer and they were told to walk the grounds. So, Lenk was not "needed" to search the trailer as there were already two qualified techs present and they were assigned non-tech work while Lenk was allowed in the trailer.

So, go get your shine box and stop crying like a little baby.
02-02-2016 , 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Also, I didn't demand an apology before he said he wanted to stop conversing with me. but I don't care. I see what kind of person he is. SO whatever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
OK oski? Which post came first? Holy ****ing hell...
This is why you are an idiot. The other poster chided you for demanding an apology after I posted to you.

You posted the above as if he stated the sequence incorrectly, when he actually did. Now, to make things worse for you, you substitute an unrelated post. You have some mental issues because now you are just arguing over nothing and demanding apologies for people "misunderstanding" or "misrepresenting" your idiocy.

The problem is you. If you want an apology, I suggest you look in the mirror and apologize.
02-02-2016 , 12:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman Making a Murderer
Yeah I consider moving items on top of found evidence before photographing it faking the evidence scene. What else would one call it? Would any competent crime scene investigator claim this is standard operating procedure?

"Oh look this key fell out of the book case. Wait place these items on top of it before photographing it."
Yes, true. At the very best, this testimony demonstrates the investigators were not following proper protocol. If shaking the furniture dislodged items from it (including from on top of it) that had to be documented.

In this case, it shows they selectively placed items and then took a photo.
02-02-2016 , 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Now, I can't prove eddymitchel cheats at poker, but there was a clear conflict of interest with him sitting at the same table as his friend, and he even staked him once. And if you judge by their (edited) reactions with each other, it's obvious there was something going on. And how could he make that one fold?! Whether he was cheating or not, clearly there was some kind of unethical activity by eddymitchel!
This is a terrible analogy because you leave out the fact that to put this on all fours, you would have to have the prior fact that eddymichel had previously been caught colluding with that friend.
02-02-2016 , 01:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddymitchel Making a Murderer
you are so dumb it s boring, if ESPN catch me colluding on camera i m a cheater , if i play at a table with a friend i am not a cheater.
And i am pretty sure people would be glad to be able to avoid playing with friends and risking to eliminate each other or have to avoid doing suspicious plays.

The situation you are comparing your crap exemple to is

- they ve done some suspicious stuff
- it was announced that they wouldnt be in a situation like that to avoid it
When was the announcement made and what was the full announcement?
- They volunteered to get in that situation instead of recusing themself.
They did not volunteer, they were asked to assist in helping find a missing woman

it s like if i could volunteer to play at my friend table and the organiser lied about us not knowing each other, and we colluded in front of camera
None of this happened in the investigation.

As i said before you are dumb as ****
Quote:
Originally Posted by cneuy3 Making a Murderer
Does Steven later admit to having a bonfire on that day? or is it only Brendan that later admitted that there was a fire on that day? I agree that's very suspicious if indeed it was later proven or Steven admitted to having a fire on that day. No reason for him to deny having a fire on that day if he was indeed innocent of the crime.
From the show:

Barb: Why would he say this about you then? You tell me. He was over by you that night.

Steven: That night he came over, we had the bonfire and he was home by 9:00, 'cause Jodi called me at 9:00, and I was in the house already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by housenuts Making a Murderer
Just to be clear, you think finding the key in plain view on the 7th search of a tiny trailer was perfectly normal and not possible evidence of something suspicious happening?
Do you realize how misleading the "7th search" thing is? It's covered in the trial. Here's a summary:

"This key was found after Avery's trailer had been entered multiple times. The first entry was a 10-minute sweep of the entire trailer, performed on November 5th after Teresa's car was found. This was just a cursory search to find any signs of Teresa alive. At 7:30pm on November 5th, officers again entered the trailer and searched for 2.5 hours, seizing around 50 pieces of evidence. They ended the search around 10:30pm, due to the late hour and bad weather. On November 6th, officers again entered the trailer for about 20 minutes, with a list of specific items to collect. The list included weapons, a vacuum cleaner, and bedding from the spare bedroom, noted the night before. This entry did not constitute a search, merely a collection of items previously noted. Also on November 6th, members of the State Crime Lab used special lighting to search the trailer for DNA evidence, and collected swabs from a few spots of blood found. (These were later matched to Steven Avery.) On the morning of November 8th, officers again entered the trailer for seven minutes. Their purpose was only to collect the serial number from Avery's computer, and they did not enter the bedroom. Also on November 8th, officers entered and spent three hours and 43 minutes doing a thorough search of the trailer. This was the search during which the key was located, and was a continuation of the search ended at 10:30pm on November 5.

Officers testified they were collecting pornographic materials from the bookcase in the bedroom, and bumped and shook it quite a bit while searching it. After searching the bookcase, they noticed a key on the floor next to it that had not been there before. They assumed it had been on or in the bookcase, and had fallen to the floor when the bookcase was moved. The back panel of the bookcase was separated from the body, so the key could've fallen through the back as it was turned and searched. The key was noticed by Lt. James Lenk, who had been deposed in Avery's wrongful imprisonment suit against Manitowoc County. He was under the supervision of Deputy Kucharski from the Calumet County Sheriff's Department, whose job was to oversee the search and keep watch over the Manitowoc County officers. Kucharski testifies that while he kept watch over the officers and did not believe the key was planted, it would have been possible when he was distracted."

- See more at: http://stevenaverycase.com/was-evidence-planted/
02-02-2016 , 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddymitchel Making a Murderer
He doesn't have to remove his own blood from his own car. Removing prints and dna from halbach but leaving the stain near ignition makes no sense. Brendan beeing in halbach car leaving no trace makes no sense either since i wouldnt trust him lacing his shoes
Do you know if they took picture of the car's interior before it was moved? I would like to see the position of the passenger seat. I know this is just speculation, but in my experience, single people don't often chance the seat position, and for some reason, it tends to be all the way forward. If BD got in the car, I would expect to see the seat in a position where he could at least fit in (even at 16 he was pretty big and a RAV4 is basically a small car designed as an SUV).

Also, +1 to if BD was in the car that he would leave zero traces makes no sense. (However, to be fair, if the lab was interested in planting evidence - which I don't think it was, planting fibers of BD's clothes would have been simple).
02-02-2016 , 01:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddymitchel Making a Murderer
The murder took place obviously in the bedroom finished in the garage then they took her for a spin in her car and brought her back near his trailer to burn her.

Why would anyone have a problem with that theory... that s what brendan said and why he went to jail
By the way, if the murder happened as BD describes, and then TH was put in the back of the car, shouldn't we expect to find a lot more blood?
02-02-2016 , 01:19 PM
I've seen pictures where they show the lanyard that connects to the key in question. Have they mentioned where this came from?
02-02-2016 , 01:20 PM
Also please note that I'm not saying that the cops definitely didn't plant any evidence, and the key can definitely be viewed with suspicion. I'm just saying that with no clear sign that evidence was planted, maybe people shouldn't throw hissy fits about how corrupt the system is, especially if they haven't even read the trial transcripts and gotten an accurate description of events.
02-02-2016 , 01:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Do you realize how misleading the "7th search" thing is? It's covered in the trial. Here's a summary:

"This key was found after Avery's trailer had been entered multiple times. The first entry was a 10-minute sweep of the entire trailer, performed on November 5th after Teresa's car was found. This was just a cursory search to find any signs of Teresa alive. At 7:30pm on November 5th, officers again entered the trailer and searched for 2.5 hours, seizing around 50 pieces of evidence.[/url]
Let's just take the 2.5 hour search of a 20 feet x 20 feet trailer with 10 officers. That is enough time to find every single thing in every single nook and cranny of the trailer. They could have picked up every last piece of dirt from Avery's feet and every single poo klingon that fell off his butt down to the floor since he does not wear underpants. It is not possible to miss a key on a f*cking lanyard during that search.

If you think it is possible, then you are admitting the absolute gross incompetence of the search parties.
02-02-2016 , 01:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
especially if they haven't even read the trial transcripts and gotten an accurate description of events.
trial transcripts = accurate description because no one has ever lied in testimony?
02-02-2016 , 01:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by housenuts Making a Murderer
trial transcripts = accurate description because no one has ever lied in testimony?
Certainly more accurate than a 10 hour show on Netflix.

Regarding the searches, I was just clearing up your misleading description of "7th search". Believe what you want about how long it should take, but something tells me you know **** all about anything related to the investigation or what is involved in the search.

      
m