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

02-12-2016 , 10:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
I do not know.

I do know that once you file a notice of appeal, the Court's are pretty liberal in granting extensions for briefs, etc.

I am not even sure what procedure she will using - her "interview" linked by Poorskillz mentioned she generally files a concurrent civil rights lawsuit and she explained that it give the jury the benefit of really understanding the evidence and the constitutional protections involved. I do not know how that type of suit fits with a technical appeal.

I am just as interested to find out as everyone else.
If some prop betting doesn't come out of this whole thing I will be very disappointed.
02-12-2016 , 10:22 PM
Oski,

Rough guess on odds avery gets exonerated? Gotta be like 3 to 1 even if you think he is innocent right?
02-12-2016 , 10:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Oski,

You are not a criminal lawyer so you may not know this but after filing an appeal how long will it take for a response? She is supposed to file in 30 days. How long before they accept/deny him another trial?
http://www.convolutedbrian.com/the-a...-step-one.html
A little more info.... Sheriff Pagel contacted the juror to inform him of the accident, when it is the court bailiff's job to do so.(& was not the 1st time he had done so). WTF.
Then judge Willis spoke to the juror without the defense attorneys present. And later contacted JB/DS by phone.

Last edited by smacc25; 02-12-2016 at 10:39 PM. Reason: wtf
02-12-2016 , 10:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
If some prop betting doesn't come out of this whole thing I will be very disappointed.
Nice ava btw.

What odds are you giving Fraley... 10-1 in next 3yrs, 3-5yrs 3-1. something like this?
Start a book m8.
02-12-2016 , 10:44 PM
I think 3-1 sounds about right. Only because of the public outcry claiming this man is innocent. I think his odds of getting exonerated are actually much higher in reality but due to public opinion I think you can get 3-1 odds easily.
02-12-2016 , 11:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
http://www.convolutedbrian.com/the-a...-step-one.html
A little more info.... Sheriff Pagel contacted the juror to inform him of the accident, when it is the court bailiff's job to do so.(& was not the 1st time he had done so). WTF.
Then judge Willis spoke to the juror without the defense attorneys present. And later contacted JB/DS by phone.
Follow-up to why Judge Willis denied the Appeal.
http://www.convolutedbrian.com/avery...al-denied.html



Fraley you got to get a time on it before you get angled... lol
02-12-2016 , 11:18 PM
Are any betting sites taking action on this
02-12-2016 , 11:19 PM
Not that I know of. I am pretty sure given the heated conversation itt some side bets are inevitable though.
02-12-2016 , 11:44 PM
The defense was allowed to introduce a third party but only an unnamed suspect & only by using evidence introduced by the state.

Convoluted Brian:
The appeals attorney(2009 appeal) argued that since denny required a motive of a named third party to introduce evidence of the third party involvement, that it was not applicable. They pointed out that no motive was developed to show avery was involved.

Yup WI Denny ruling is the GOAT law for prosecutors.

Last edited by smacc25; 02-12-2016 at 11:53 PM.
02-12-2016 , 11:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Oski,

Rough guess on odds avery gets exonerated? Gotta be like 3 to 1 even if you think he is innocent right?
I have no idea.

first of all, I am not clear on Zellman's proposed procedure (as I explained above) this thing about a concurrent civil rights case throws me for a loop.

I also want some insight of what grounds she will proceed upon. If it's "new evidence" I'd like to know what that is. If she has some other move, I'd like to know about that as well.

It's one thing to sit in your living room and say, "hey, that trial is bull****" and another to bring the issue properly in an available ground for appeal.
02-13-2016 , 12:02 AM
Jurors from the SA trial went to BD trial to find answers as some believed evidence was withheld...
http://www.convolutedbrian.com/avery...sey-trial.html

Hmm
02-13-2016 , 12:27 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
Well, that is certainly an interesting take - On one hand, you cannot comprehend that the local law enforcement had any motivation to put Avery away (by combination of politics, lawsuit, and personal animus), but on the other, you readily believe (actually posit) that a specialist in exonerations would take this case because she formed the opinion SA was not-guilty from watching the documentary.

For this you assume the professional specialist would be so compelled by a television show that she would ignore her professional duties and practices and just jump into the case, while you cannot believe a rural police force (which had prior motivation) would ignore their professional duties and practices in order to convict Avery.

ok.
nice
02-13-2016 , 03:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
I have no idea.

first of all, I am not clear on Zellman's proposed procedure (as I explained above) this thing about a concurrent civil rights case throws me for a loop.

I also want some insight of what grounds she will proceed upon. If it's "new evidence" I'd like to know what that is. If she has some other move, I'd like to know about that as well.

It's one thing to sit in your living room and say, "hey, that trial is bull****" and another to bring the issue properly in an available ground for appeal.
I was expecting the civil lawsuit but Im surprised she ll do both at the same time. I know some evidence technician that will wish he recused himself 10 years ago even if he was totally needed.
02-13-2016 , 03:38 AM
Full disclosure I haven't been able to finish episode 9 yet, it's too overwhelming. I just can't believe they were able to get away with that coerced confession. The part I keep stopping at is when they're grilling him about 'where did you get all the details from huh huh??!' I keep wanting him to jump up and start screaming 'you mother****ers told me all that ****!'

p.s. Should I blame the lawyers? They seem far from incompetent but how did this **** fly?

Shameful ****.

p.p.s. OMG THEY'RE EVEN TRYING TO DO IT STILL WHILE HES TESTIFYING... When they ask him how he feels and he says he feels sorry and the lawyer leaps on it like 'why... why... why?!?'

Honestly I didn't know these emotions would come back. This is a field I worked in, in what seems like a former life, and did research for a book a friend was writing, specifically about coerced confessions of juveniles being tried as adults (though the book and the research started to sprawl wildly)

AHHHHHHHHHHH

p.p.p.s (lol) Made it through redirect... Srsly wtf? Were Dassey's attorneys specifically instructed to not ask questions like "did you admit to details only after the officers mentioned them first?''

Last edited by 5ive; 02-13-2016 at 03:55 AM.
02-13-2016 , 04:05 AM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...518-story.html

They put these children in a room with no parent or lawyer and basically don't let them leave until they confess. This is oversimplification but I'm on too much life tilt right now to go into detail.
02-13-2016 , 04:08 AM
They shoot horses, don't they?
02-13-2016 , 04:47 AM
Real talk though, Wisconsin still ain't got nothing on my neck of the woods.

http://cookcountyrecord.com/stories/...-double-murder


Real talk take 2, you people who think these situations require some illuminatiesque grand conspiracy kinda half disgust me and half fill me with envy and wonderment at the innocent naivete, bright eyed and full of hope.
02-13-2016 , 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
For example, even with the evidence that some of the stuff in the OJ case was planted I still would have convicted him and he still should have been convicted. Unfortunately for you however, there is 0 evidence anything was planted here.
What in the actual f**k are you talking about? There is a giant heaping steaming pile of evidence that it was planted. Why do you keep insisting this? Are you going to try and say there's no dna evidence that it was planted? And at the same time insist BD is guilty and telling the truth in his confession, despite a legit lack of evidence, DNA or otherwise, that he had anything to do with anything.

You "dont know" if Zellner thinks Avery is innocent? How is this remotely possible? She tweeted she knows who the real killer is and can prove it. Her co-counsel is the head of the mid-west INNOCENCE project. What they hell is going on over there? I hate to bring this up again but your ability to assimilate information seems extremely flawed, or you are trolling.

Does anyone still think this fraleyight account is legit?
02-13-2016 , 09:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostinthesaus Making a Murderer
You "dont know" if Zellner thinks Avery is innocent? How is this remotely possible? She tweeted she knows who the real killer is and can prove it.
I googled her twitter and fail to see this tweet anywhere on it. Can you link this tweet or a screen shot please?

I read the letter on there from Steven Avery claiming that no one in his family committed the murder and that it was obvious who committed the murder. Very strange confidence now from him and the defense.

Anyone have any ideas who they are referring to in this claim?
02-13-2016 , 09:26 AM
There is dna evidence that corroborates brandens story. Idk how many times I have to tell you this. You can argue he was coerced to admit this all you want but his confession is corroborated with evidence.

There is however, no evidence that anything was planted aside from speculation. Basically you are just making a claim and using a bunch of logical fallacies to support it. IE: there was a lawsuit against the county, avery was shortly after convicted of a murder from that county so one must necessarily follow the other.. IE: lots of people agree with me so I must be right, they can't all be wrong.

As for what do I think Zellner believes. I don't ****ing know but her approach to this whole thing is suspect. I am not claiming she doesn't believer herself but idk if she does. We will discover how genuine she is in the coming months. Should be an interesting thread as things develop.

In the meantime Lost, let it go dude. I have almost 7500 posts on this account. You can track posts from me over 4 years ago that say my location is the same as in this thread. If anyone should be accused of being a troll it is you. Who the **** are you anyway? Do you talk to anyone from this forum outside of this forum?
02-13-2016 , 09:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
There is dna evidence that corroborates brandens story. Idk how many times I have to tell you this. You can argue he was coerced to admit this all you want but his confession is corroborated with evidence.

There is however, no evidence that anything was planted aside from speculation. Basically you are just making a claim and using a bunch of logical fallacies to support it. IE: there was a lawsuit against the county, avery was shortly after convicted of a murder from that county so one must necessarily follow the other.. IE: lots of people agree with me so I must be right, they can't all be wrong.

As for what do I think Zellner believes. I don't ****ing know but her approach to this whole thing is suspect. I am not claiming she doesn't believer herself but idk if she does. We will discover how genuine she is in the coming months. Should be an interesting thread as things develop.

In the meantime Lost, let it go dude. I have almost 7500 posts on this account. You can track posts from me over 4 years ago that say my location is the same as in this thread. If anyone should be accused of being a troll it is you. Who the **** are you anyway? Do you talk to anyone from this forum outside of this forum?
There is zero evidence that Brendan was present at any crime scene. How you can convict someone without a shred of evidence at them being present where the killing might have taken place and might not have is beyond me
02-13-2016 , 10:28 AM
Except there is evidence he was there.
02-13-2016 , 10:50 AM
There is physical evidence that Dassey was there? Please enlighten me then. I must have missed it.
02-13-2016 , 10:51 AM
His confession is corroborated by evidence. That is physical evidence that he was there.

      
m