She was in jail cutey pie

Meh

He sounded to me like someone who was preoccupied with a household task such as cleaning blood.

It's not like a murderous rage doesn't have an endpoint as soon as the murder is over. There's nothing left for him to be angry about.

For 24 hours? And I'm a dumbass? GFY.

Household task of cleaning a murder scene? That is just stupid.

Your colors have really shown through here ITT. You believe he was just born a piece of ****, right? You've gone so far as to point out grammar and spelling mistakes and now resorted to name calling which obviously doesn't bode well for your character. There's no doubt in my mind you agree to some extent with O'Kelly, that the Avery's to one degree or another are evil and SA probably deserves to be in jail because of this and his social status.

It's scary to really have to admit that people like this are working in law enforcement. It really is. And that is one point to take extremely seriously from this documentary. Because as we have all seen, the results are catastrophic.

Obviously joking regarding the cleaning comment. How is that not incredibly obvious

Lol

Damn dude

Who works in law enforcement? Dafuq

I didn't think he was born a POS. But I'm using all of the info at hand to determine he's not a swell guy. Cat, cousin off road, multiple alleged physical and sexual abuse. List goes on.

Oh but he sounds normal and nice on a taped phone call

MAN OF THE YEAR

Ok?

Go **** yourself is somehow not as bad as dumbass.

Lol

1. I lol'ed at one misused word you used, that's all. It was funny for someone that thinks a lot of his intelligence to mistake "queue" and "cue". It's not like I derailed the thread or did it multiple times.

2. I definitely do not agree with Kelly about that. Try again.

I never ever said I believe SA was born a POS. You read too much into one comment a while back when I said some people are just born a POS when you asked me a question. Kinda forget the context now but iirc you were trying to ask what makes me think someone is evil. My reply was just don't think too deeply about it. Some people are just born rotten. Certainly has nothing to do with his social status. Lol, that's ridiculous. You somehow extrapolating that just goes to show how much you want this dude to be innocent. Someone can say their opinion on SA's or someone else's character without it meaning that's what they think about all people from that social class.

I am very curious how the misperception of me having anything to do with LE came from. I certainly never stated or implied anything like that.

Did Steven ever give a reason as to why he called Theresa around that 4:30pm time spot? didn't leave a voice mail? didn't use *67 for that call?

I'm not saying it's overly suspicious or anything but she would have been done with her business and there are very few reasons I can think of as to why Steven would have needed to call her at that point. I assume he would have already asked all the relevant questions pertaining to as when the vehicle, etc would appear in the magazine, etc while she was still at his property.

I still think it would also be interesting to see if in Steven's prior phone records he had a history of using the *67 function. He may have thought with his IQ that the function blocked his phone number from all records. If it was only about his privacy as he states then I'd expect he would have used it alot more during that time period.

Something was off about Jodi in the show. She was the one character in the documentary that I felt almost as if she was acting for the camera. In part she was probably just uncomfortable in front of it. There was still clear distress in Steven's demeanor in the clips shown in the documentary as well as with his immediate family but with Jodi it almost felt to me as if it her demeanor were staged. If you're in love with someone and believe they are innocent and going to be locked up for a crime that they didn't commit I think most people are going to be a lot more passionate than she displayed with her emotions in the documentary.

I just don't understand why everyone watches the netflix show and takes it as biblical truth. Like documentaries don't ever have an agenda. The guy doused a cat in motor oil and threw it in a fire. Prime example of a psychopath with the ability to commit this kind of crime. I think he did it or was involved and the cops planted evidence to ensure a conviction because they knew what a scum bag he was. Why do people care so much?! Time and time again in history people have been wrongly convicted and wrongly acquitted.

I don't think that the majority of people really genuinely care all that much about the fate of Steven Avery or even that possible injustice happened to put him there. Most of our lives are not directly effected by this case on a personal level. Injustice and/or incompetence is prevalent throughout society and as you say we only need to look so far to find many more cases of such.

The ten part documentary was a captivating film and lured in the viewers with all the twists and turns of the case. It's a real life drama leaving the viewer with questions at the end of it. Did Steven Avery possibly get framed for the crime? etc, etc. It leaves a lot of room for discussion and personal interpretation on what happened to Theresa Halbach on the night of Oct 31st and that's what I think has drawn in all the discussion into threads such as this one for many of us.

What was their agenda, aside from documenting what was happening in Wisconsin circa 2005-2015?

Well thankfully we're not all judged by the poor decisions we made in our adolescent years when drinking and/or hanging around the wrong group of people. Pretty safe to say that most of us would be considered potential homicidal maniacs if it were up to truefish.

If anything, this is further proof he's innocent as he readily admitted to this crime, paid his fines and served his time, as with the other incident.

Bravo. Bravo. Guy spends 18 years in prison for something he clearly didn't do, could have gotten out a number of times but the communication and evidence was buried by the same cops that you now admit probably planted the evidence, and Steven Avery is the scumbag. You're really putting a lot of intelligent substance to your posts.

And just like that, the Sheriff Herman's, DA Vogels, Lt. Lenks and Sgt Colborns continue their reign.

In the trial, Strang describes the call with the words "quarrel" and "squabbling", not "lovey-dovey", but it's funny what selective editing can make someone believe.

Unfortunately, it seems the judge was so unfair to Steven that he approved the defense's motion to suppress all prison calls as evidence, otherwise the defense would have shown all those "lovey-dovey" calls that Steven made.


Strang gives the excuse that the 4:35pm call was to have her take a picture for another car he wanted to sell even though sunset was at 4:40. Steven didn't leave her a voicemail, nor did he ever call her or Auto Trader back in the ensuing days. Make of that what you will.

Every other call on his records that day (including those to Auto Trader and non-family members) was made without *67. The defense never provided evidence that Steven ever used *67 besides those 2 phone calls.


My guess is the sheriff's badge as your avatar and your title of "Sheriff of MSNL", along with the fact that you don't automatically assume every cop is corrupt.

Man this thread really is the hottest of aids now

A reasonable doubt is not a doubt which is based on mere guesswork or speculation. #reasonsbledoubt


What an interesting and original post. Thank you for your contribution to the thread.

Don't misconstrue the dynamic here. You're not a skilled villain that people respect but are rooting against. You're a goddamned idiot and horrible poster. Almost everyone wants you to go away forever.

Says the purveyor of all things hot aids

This explains a lot about why Wisconsin's Legal System is such a cluster.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diploma_privilege

"In the United States, the diploma privilege is a method for lawyers to be admitted to the bar without taking a bar examination. Once used by as many as 32 U.S. states and the District of Columbia, Wisconsin is currently the only state that offers a broad diploma privilege for admission to its state bar. "

What interesting and original posts. Thank you for your contributions to the thread.

Poorskillz you still don't understand reasonable doubt. I don't know what whackadoo corner of the Internet fed you the word "speculation" as some kind of shield against your ignorance of reasonable doubt.

Questioning the discovery, collection and custody of evidence is actually a pretty strong basis for reasonable doubt. It is why law enforcement have strict policies and procedures for doing such things and why when they don't follow them questions arise.

Since you have never served as a juror in a criminal trial and you don't understand reasonable doubt and apparently don't even understand what speculation means, you continue to thrash around this thread like a catfish on a dock suffocating.

If I see that the police and other agents of law enforcement failed to follow procedures and protocols over and over and over again, I am speculating that the consistency of those actions create doubt. Seriously why do you keep expanding the number of words you don't understand?

Again the burden is on the prosecution and if a jury can speculate a reasonable alternative based on what they have heard they can and should acquit.

#poorskillzwillneverunderstandreasonabledoubt

Reasonable doubt means a doubt based upon reason and common sense. It's a doubt for which a reason can be given, based on fair and rational consideration of evidence or lack of evidence. It means doubt that would cause a reasonable person to pause or hesitate when deciding if someone is guilty.

However, a reasonable doubt is not a doubt which is based on mere guesswork or speculation. If it's based merely on sympathy or fear to return a guilty verdict then it's not reasonable doubt. Yeah, it's the jury's duty to give the defendant the benefit of every reasonable doubt, but the jury should not search for doubt, the jury should search for the truth.

The cute parts are when you can tell that PoorSkillz is just pasting something from somewhere to sound smart, vs when you can tell it's him just mashing on his keyboard.

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...no_verdict_of/

"The term reasonable doubt means a doubt based upon reason and common sense. It is a doubt for which a reason can be given, arising from a fair and rational consideration of the evidence or lack of evidence."