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

02-05-2016 , 04:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
You seem to think it would be impossible to rape, cut someone on the neck, and strangle them without leaving dna evidence, especially when the sheets that were used were burned.



The garage has already been explained, they used bleach on the small spot that contained all the blood. There is a small 3x3 spot that has a reaction expected to see when bleach is used.



Why did they spot clean this one spot in that dirty garage? Why does it fit the evidence. Why is there a bullet from a gun only avery has access to that has TH dna on it in the same spot?

Blood doesn't soak through sheets apparently. Did they rape her on a bed of maxi pads?

Leg irons and handcuffs don't absorb the DNA of a women struggling apparently (oh, and might as well just leave those behind in the room while we're at it).

Hair is pretty easy to clean up too, that doesn't go everywhere.

Oh, 12 bullet casings, might as well just leave those all over the floor of the garage here.

A little blood in the car, no big deal, I'll just lean a branch against it.
02-05-2016 , 04:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
So it's possible that BD and his cousin lied on the stand. But definitely not possible that the police do because they "swore and oath".

Do you hear how inconsistent you are, or do you just not care?
Holy **** more strawmans. Unbelievable.
02-05-2016 , 04:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
The license plate was not affixed. It was detached and hidden somewhere else. And yes, I fully believe someone like SA would be criminally inept enough to think hiding it on that lot with all those cars covered in branches wouldn't be found. And I think his intention was to crush it later.. This is also what BD testified to. After the 31st he was busy for the next couple of days.
but, but, but ... he doesn't know how to use the crusher, right?
02-05-2016 , 04:22 PM
Also, BD was involved in this brutal, bloody rape/throat cutting, but his jeans stayed perfectly clean. Is he a surgeon?
02-05-2016 , 04:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
Blood doesn't soak through sheets apparently. Did they rape her on a bed of maxi pads?

Leg irons and handcuffs don't absorb the DNA of a women struggling apparently (oh, and might as well just leave those behind in the room while we're at it).

Hair is pretty easy to clean up too, that doesn't go everywhere.

Oh, 12 bullet casings, might as well just leave those all over the floor of the garage here.

A little blood in the car, no big deal, I'll just lean a branch against it.
Who said there was enough blood to hit the sheets? You can't cut someones neck without a lot of blood? Especially if there is a comforter etc.. beneath her. This is not the smoking gun you think it is. This is just an unexplained fact from the case.. Completely expected and common in murder trials.
02-05-2016 , 04:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Holy **** more strawmans. Unbelievable.

Hahahahaha.

Guys, I seriously don't give a **** if you think he's guilty as all hell. Be consistent and reasonable when discussing things.

You can't selectively apply reasoning where it fits, and then throw it out the window when it doesn't.
02-05-2016 , 04:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
but, but, but ... he doesn't know how to use the crusher, right?
Not very well no, it would have taken him a long time to use it.
02-05-2016 , 04:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
Also, BD was involved in this brutal, bloody rape/throat cutting, but his jeans stayed perfectly clean. Is he a surgeon?
No one implied the throat cutting was brutal. Listen to his confession. He wasn't describing a bloody murder scene until he started talking about the garage.
02-05-2016 , 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
Hahahahaha.

Guys, I seriously don't give a **** if you think he's guilty as all hell. Be consistent and reasonable when discussing things.

You can't selectively apply reasoning where it fits, and then throw it out the window when it doesn't.
No one ever said we should just believe police because they are police. He said it was unlikely kayla would lie to her counselor. Read someones argument if you want to attack it.
02-05-2016 , 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Not very well no, it would have taken him a long time to use it.

It's. Big hydraulic press, there's a up button and a down button. He's been around the yard his whole life.

It's not an airplane.
02-05-2016 , 04:28 PM
If SA drove the Rav4 into his garage, wouldn't he have to move his other car out first? Did anyone coming and going near the property (Tadych and Bobby D) say they saw SA's other car?

SA really planned this well: He makes an appointment with TH in order for him to have the opportunity to kill her. The appointment (which wasn't even confirmed until about 1:30 that day) was made to be at a time BD was coming home from school, when Tadych would leave on his usual hunting trip, when Bobby was around, when just about anyone who was going to be on the property would see him (as, some testified they did).

So, the master plan was for SA to kill TH at a time when there would be a lot of activity on the property; he would have to attack her in plain site, put her in her car, move his car out of the garage, and then move her car in the garage.

Then after shooting her (while already dead), he burns her body in plain site of the other house.

ok.

(and, he wanted to dump the body in the pond, but even though it is his own property, he did not already know the pond had dried up ... ).
02-05-2016 , 04:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
It's. Big hydraulic press, there's a up button and a down button. He's been around the yard his whole life.

It's not an airplane.
Well ask him about it. He is the one that said he is not very good at using it.
02-05-2016 , 04:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
No one ever said we should just believe police because they are police. He said it was unlikely kayla would lie to her counselor. Read someones argument if you want to attack it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
You realize he's sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, right?

I'm not saying he definitely is, but let's not just assume he's not because he has a "vested interested in the jury believing that there was nothing improper with his investigation".

It's testimony, and it's meant to be considered by the jury.

.
02-05-2016 , 04:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
.
I am glad you quoted that to show how bad your reading comprehension is.
02-05-2016 , 04:30 PM
Oski,

To a ****** like myself it would seem that post has nothing to do with the fairness of the avery trial and more so is actually you arguing the possibility and capability of avery being the guilty party.

But thats just me.

We do know yoy actually have no opinion on that subject.
02-05-2016 , 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCuster_911 Making a Murderer
Oski,

To a ****** like myself it would seem that post has nothing to do with the fairness of the avery trial and more so is actually you arguing the possibility and capability of avery being yhe guilty party.

But thats just me.

We do know yoy actually have no opinion on that subject.
02-05-2016 , 04:31 PM
Please explain to me how I failed to comprehend his clear sarcasm.
02-05-2016 , 04:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
So it's possible that BD and his cousin lied on the stand. But definitely not possible that the police do because they "swore and oath".

Do you hear how inconsistent you are, or do you just not care?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
You realize he's sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, right?

I'm not saying he definitely is, but let's not just assume he's not because he has a "vested interested in the jury believing that there was nothing improper with his investigation".

It's testimony, and it's meant to be considered by the jury.
This isn't the first time you've misrepresented what I've said.
02-05-2016 , 04:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
So it's possible that BD and his cousin lied on the stand. But definitely not possible that the police do because they "swore and oath".

Do you hear how inconsistent you are, or do you just not care?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
You realize he's sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, right?

I'm not saying he definitely is, but let's not just assume he's not because he has a "vested interested in the jury believing that there was nothing improper with his investigation".

It's testimony, and it's meant to be considered by the jury.
..
02-05-2016 , 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCuster_911 Making a Murderer
Oski,

To a ****** like myself it would seem that post has nothing to do with the fairness of the avery trial and more so is actually you arguing the possibility and capability of avery being the guilty party.

But thats just me.

We do know yoy actually have no opinion on that subject.
I am and have been posting about how certain scenarios may work from the beginning of the thread. That has nothing to do with proving whether SA killed or did not kill TH, because we do not have the benefit of a proper trial, these are merely hypotheticals.

Do I have your permission to continue?

I appreciate that you cannot fathom that I understand that this is merely an exercise in speculation and accept it as such.
02-05-2016 , 04:37 PM
oski,

point me to the post where you questioned the police framing him?
02-05-2016 , 04:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
This isn't the first time you've misrepresented what I've said.

Please explain to me what you were saying then.
02-05-2016 , 04:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
No, they usually ask if they want to testify. This is common. The judge has to hear from the defendant personally on record they do not wish to testify.
I had no idea. So, in all criminal cases, when the defendant declines to testify, the defendant has to tell the judge himself in court?
02-05-2016 , 04:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melkerson Making a Murderer
I had no idea. So, in all criminal cases, when the defendant declines to testify, the defendant has to tell the judge himself in court?
I am not totally sure on this but I do know I have seen it in every murder trial I have followed.
02-05-2016 , 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
oski,

point me to the post where you questioned the police framing him?
I have not questioned that there is a reasonable possibility that the police framed SA. That the possibility exists is right there in the documentary. As you shold know, I have not stated I am convinced he was framed, either way. Like most other people in this thread, I have stated it appears the trial was unfair and whether it is legally possible or not, we believe a new trial should be had.

Is that so hard for your simple mind to grasp?

FYE: I have stated my opinion that the police's motive to frame SA is overplayed by the doc. by making it seem the lawsuit loomed large over the individual officers - you can look that up right at the beginning of the thread.

I have also taken issue with the fact the doc. seemed to downplay SA's past which would make him appear much less sympathetic to the viewer. Did you forget about that as well?

So, as usual, you are pretty far off.

      
m