Ap, for you and the rest of the manitowoc 3, if Zellner does find evidence that this was done by somebody else and SA gets exonerated, do you believe Dassey should be as well?

Revots, fraley, etc, have any of you guys seen A Murder in the Park?

Good 90 minute documentary with very striking similarities to Zellner, Dassey, and the reaction to MaM as a whole.

It's basically a frightening worst-case scenario for what happens with Zellner and Avery.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/a_murder_in_the_park/

Lol Oski gonna Oski.

I am not convinced of anything other than the process was unfair to the defendants.

Beyond that, in reference to you in particular, you seem unwilling to really "involve" yourself in the genuine questions about the confessions raised by 5ive. If you consider yourself "involved" in the discussion at all, these are not questions you can simply hand wave away. They do right to the heart of the matter and even if you believe on the whole, the confession is legitimate (and you have stated your reasons) these are questions you need to entertain and explore - that you do not really wish to shows you are simply and blindly restating conclusion you agree with.

Um. If you knew how to read, he is explaining why my (proper) statement that he does not really offer any insight or opinions of his own is correct.

Is there going to be a point in this thread ("selective participation" by you or otherwise) that you stop ****ting all over yourself?

My guess is, "no."

Why would anyone trust the opinion of a wrongfull conviction expert on an ultra shady case like this one...

And it can't be stressed enough that he (The Driz) was blown away. This dude has been in the trenches and seen it all.

p.s. Oops, I thought you said you said "confession" but the above still stands. It applies to Zellner also. (replace pronouns lol)

I understand the confusion and it basically all stems from not including quotation marks around "evidence".

Anyone? Buhler?

Well it's not likely to happen so probably academic. But yes if there was somehow legit proof that SA didn't do it, that would clearly cast a huge amount of doubt on Dassey's confession. His entire conviction is based on participating in the crime with his uncle.

Slow Day huh!!!

Not when it involves WI Cops...
http://www.fox9.com/web/kmsp/news/82059933-story

Letters to the New Yorker.......
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...bruary-22-2016

BD Lawyer Laura Nirider talks to St Thomas Uni....
http://www.fox9.com/news/95087578-story

What? Do you just assume we think it was coerced because there's nothing better for us to do and we had something against Wisconsin LEOs?

It's coerced because, well, just watch/read it. It's the most outrageously coerced police interview I've ever seen. Your post should read:

Of course you can't win when the framing has already taken place and is obvious. The coercion that took place is not even being questioned by SA Guilty camps. Fraleyight is the only one who thinks the confession is legit, although I am still not sure which confession of the 5 or 6 he thinks is the "truth".

I'll let the FBI explain it better.......
http://gmancasefile.com/moore-to-the...-4-part-1-of-3

According to Fraley though, he had information that could only be had by someone who participated in the crime. Wouldn't those two statements be contradictory?

Nope, I haven't seen it. So a guilty man gets exonerated?

Avery is guilty, you are referring to a hypothetical scenario that doesn't exist. If somehow avery is not guilty it really shouldn't effect BD case, it just means he committed the crime with someone else.

Holy ****ing ****, seriously? So if SA's lawyer finds proof the act was committed by somebody else, you would still stand by the fact that BD should be in prison simply because of a confession that now no longer ties to a person who is guilty of murder?

Wow

There's something really wrong with you.

Fraley that is amazing trolling. Bravo!

I think it is safe to assume at this point fraley has a personal connection that creates an enormous blind spot.

This.


It's complicated.

You are speaking about hypotheticals. It depends on who the actual murderer was. If it was bobby dassey for example, I don't think it changes much. If it was someone close to TH then yes.. Obviously he should be exonerated.

The problem is... None of those things are going to happen. You are asking me to change the reality of the situation and then ask how that would effect everything. Its hard to say because its an abstract example.

Of course it was a hypothetical. And hypothetically, why exactly would anything change if it was someone close to TH? Your entire thought process behind Brendan so far has been that his confession proves he knew things he couldn't have. Why does that change if the murderer is not someone he is familiar with?

Thanks SkippTopp.....

The last batch of documents is now online - 27 new documents totaling over 4,300 pages!
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/hearingtranscripts/

This batch includes all of the transcripts from the pre-trial and post-trial hearings, including: arraignment, motion hearings, jury voir dire, sentencing, and post-conviction.

Highlights include:
Initial Appearance and Arraignment Hearings: Initial, Arraignment - part 1, Arraignment - part 2
Jury Voir Dire: Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, Day 4 - part 1, Day 4 - part 2, Peremptory Strikes
Sentencing Hearing: click here http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007Jun01.pdf

Post-Conviction Motion Hearings: May 2007, September 2009....
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007May22.pdf

Thanks again to everyone who donated and/or helped to spread the word. Because of your generosity, we have been able to get the entire trial record, including:
247 exhibit photos
360 documents totaling over 13,300 pages

The only things we're leaving on the table are items that are simply not worth paying for, such as copies of empty envelopes, fax cover sheets, administrative paperwork, duplicate/redundant records, etc.

Jury Voir Dire Links
Initial appearance & arraignment hearings..
Arraignment Part 1. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2006Jan17.pdf
Arraignment Part 2. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2006May03.pdf

Day 1.. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007Feb05.pdf
Day 2.. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007Feb06.pdf
Day 3.. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007Feb07.pdf
Day 4. Part 1.. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007Feb08.pdf
Day 4. Part 2.. http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007Feb08.pdf
peremptory strikes..http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...-2007Feb09.pdf