Fraley,

I gave a question for you. Does it bother you at all that they have zero idea where the murder actually took place. Ignore the fact that there is no evidence to support an actual,location of the murder but that there is not even a single viable theory as to where she was killed.

I would say in cases with so much physical evidence related to the deceased and where it was found related to the supposed timeline the fact that there is absolutely not any real supported locations for the actual scene of the murder is extraordinary.

I suspect in cases where remains and belongings were found as well as a the victim being placed at the scene there is likely almost always some place that is generally believed to be the location of the murder.

In this case we have Dassey's confession which is absolute make believe as it relates to any murder scene. Then we have the garage which scientifically is simply not a viable location for the murder.

You say it took place some place on the salvage yard, yet all the Calumet, I mean Mantiwoc horses and all the Calumet, I mean mantiwoc men could never actually determine a site where the murder took place.

Let us say it did take place somewhere on the salvage yard. The reason we most likely do not know where is bevause of the incompetence of both Sherriff offices and their refusal to actual let real crime scene investigators do their jobs.

So where do you think the murder took place? I personally think this lack of knowledge by the prosecution is a pretty gaping hole when you include all the other physical evidence they did discover. You can choose one of the earlier mentioned locations although I think you would need to point to some evidence that supported a murder took place in either location. Scrubbing the floor of the garage is not enough to remove all traces of a violent murder in what was a relatively cluttered garage full of many objects with quite a lot of surface area.

To me these goes back to the DA being able to just make up to two different fictional stories for two different juries as to what happened. I am bothered that there is no known murder scene. It is not like having the actual murder scene is impossibility uncommon in a murder case but it is if the narrative is the victim was lured to a piece of property, never left there and her remains, belongings and car were all found there then I suspect a murder scene is pretty common. In fact it would probably be the cornerstone of the case.

Its like taking the Casey Anthony trial and just taking the shower and bathroom off the table. I assume investigators scoured that property many times, yet there is still no murder scene that stands up to the most basic of inquiries.

Personally I want and believe law enforcement and prosecutors should try to determine as many facts as possible. In a show I was watching just the other day one of the homicide detectives talked about how they constantly must fight against tunnel vision because it can be too easy to just jump on what sticks out first.

Occam's Razor is not a good rule of thumb for homicide investigations. So back to my point I do not want my police and my prosecutors just doing what they need to do to trick or lead a jury to a verdict. I want them them to actually turn over every stone and when they think they know who did it turn over some more stones.

There were and are so many fundamental questions the police and DA can not answer to this day about this case yet if you were to talk to investigators in other jurisdictions of similar crimes would have the answer immediately and often supported with evidence. I don't think that is too much to ask for and I don not care if some guilty people do not end up in prison because of it. This case is riddled with holes in the form of major questions. Most cases can overcome one or even two such doubts and still prove their cases beyond their burden. However all we have here are mostly questions. It's like if the burn barrel was one property over there would be no case at all, that is how full of holes it all is.

I certainly do not know what happened in the death of Theresa Halbach but what is worse I don't even know what the police and DA think happened and they got two different people sent to prison.

Assuming you skipped all that, I will ask you again, where do you think Theresa was murdered. I don't feel a "Somewhere on the salvage yard property" is s good enough answer because it can not really be supported by any specific evidence. I would like your answer based on as precise a location as you can muster based on all you know.

No, I do not necessarily think this information is required to prove that someone was killed by the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. What they need to prove is who killed her, they don't necessarily need to prove how or where. Although, it helps in building a strong case, I think this case is pretty strong without that information.

If I may, consider the following analogy. You have a child who has cookies all over his face. The cookies are unique, say snickers and raisins. You find his face covered in this unique cookie. However, these unique cookies are out of his reach and no one else is in the house. There are competing theories on how exactly he obtained the cookies but the evidence clearly shows he did have the cookies in his possession. That is known beyond any and all reasonable doubt. Yet, there are still gaps of knowledge on the actual process in which it took place.

You will always have gaps of knowledge though, with literally everything you know. You are essentially just using an argument from ignorance.

Yes, but there is even evidence that at the very least she was burned there. There are tires intertwined with her bones and there are 5 witnesses who saw avery tending a fire all night. That fire is in the same location where the bones were recovered. So there is direct evidence she was burned there and very strong circumstantial evidence she was.

I don't know how you reached this conclusion. I am guessing a lack of blood? But it was demonstrated that a large 3x3 area was spot cleaned, the same area where the bullet was recovered. It is completely plausible she was shot in that area in the garage. It is a low pressure rifle so there would not have been much blow back.

No that is now why we don't know imo. The victim was likely moved to the fire after she was dead. That makes it more difficult to determine where an actual murder took place. Also, if this murder took place on the accused property he had time to clean up which also makes the location of the murder more difficult to find. Not to mention we are dealing with a 40 acre property and the police didn't know where to look at first.

I can say with relative certainty she was shot in the garage. I am not sure if she was shot before or after she died though. I don't really think it matters in this case though because there is too much evidence you have to explain away.

I think you are again making unwarranted assumptions. I see no reason why we should necessarily expect them to know the exact location someone is murdered when we are dealing with a 40 acre property.. Even if she wasn't murdered on the property you still need to explain why she was burned on the property and why Steven's blood is in 6 different locations inside her car.

That is kind of a weird comparison. there is way more evidence to suggest steven avery killed TH than there is to suggest CA killed her daughter. There is even I'd argue more evidence to suggest where the murder took place.

There wasn't tunnel vision here either. Initially the suspects were narrowed down to zippler, his wife, and avery, avery's family. once the car was recovered on the property and it was known avery saw her after zippler the suspects were narrowed down to the averys. It is not logical to think zippler could have kidnapped and killed her after she saw avery, especially when he just saw her a little earlier.

occam's razor is always a good rule of thumb for anything. You should never assume an explanation that requires more assumptions over one that doesn't. Doesn't matter though, direct evidence doesn't require any assumptions. Steven bled in her car.

These are more arguments from ignorance. Focus on what we do know, not what we don't.

We know: she was shot by his gun
we know: he bled in her car
we know: he was the last known person to see her
we know: she was burned on his property

How is this not enough stuff to "know" to convict someone? there are things we don't know, there are things that we think is most likely but the above is stuff we know.

they think steven avery killed her with the assistance of BD, and they proved this in court.

I asked you what you think I don't understand about reasonable doubt. Not what you think I am wrong about with the case or why you think there is reasonable doubt in this case specifically. What do you think I do not understand about the concept of all doubt which is reasonable?

there was a bullet with her dna in the garage. it's conclusive!!

thought experiment: Is Avery found not guilty if he had OJ's defence team?

i don't think oj was found not guilty because of his defense team. I think he was found not guilty because of the horrible job done by the prosecutors.

There is a video in the OJ thread that outlines this nicely.

What would it have taken for avery to be found not guilty?

Assuming we have all the evidence available..

1) No denny rule, or at least the judge ruling the denny rule isn't applicable here.
2) The edta test is ruled unreliable by the judge and cannot be used
3) The trial is held in a different county, a county that knows nothing about the case or avery


There are probably a few other things that would need to happen but I still think the odds are slim. Like 1 in 50 or worse.

I think Strang and Buting did as good a job as anyone could ask for given what they had to work with.

Didn't avery say in one of his appeals that his attornies were insufficient or something?

we know: there was a bullet from his gun with her DNA
we know: his blood was in her car
we know: we were informed he was last known person to see her
we know: her bones may have been found on his property

You don't know anything that really happened.

It doesn't mean that the prosecution has to show a body or a weapon for a conviction. It certainly helps.

That's where being reasonable with doubt comes into play golf.

There is reasonable doubt because virtually all the evidence that you mentioned was discovered by unauthorized personnel. If they stayed away as they were instructed and let other people find the evidence, then it would not be viewed with such a high suspicion rate.

That isn't true that all that evidence was discovered by "unauthorized personnel"

First, there was no requirement or order for anyone from manitwoc to not participate in this investigation.

Second, some of the information I listed relies on reports from the state crime lab and from the neighboring county.

most importantly, Lenk and Colborn were unique in that they were evidence techs. So if you are wondering why they found a lot of the big pieces of evidence that is why. They were the actual ones there to collect evidence. It is also important that the lawsuit from averys wrongful conviction was about kocurek and the DA in 1985. Both of which were retired.

Colborn was deposed to tell how he gave information to his superior (kocurek) about the phone call and apparently kocurek didn't look into. Despite what he told Colborn.

Lenk was only deposed to testify that he told colborn to fill out the report after both men discovered avery was innocent.

It is not reasonable to doubt this evidence is legit with that information. Which was discussed at avery's trial.

They are certainly unique individuals. I am sure they were the only ones capable of searching a mobile trailer. I agree that very few people can shake a bookcase violently to uncover a secret key, yet leave the rest of the contents undisturbed.

Considering that isn't what happened. That is a weird thing to say.

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/ne...tive/82261446/

It's pretty amazing that despite how much people have searched for it, no information of any unethical activity by Colborn or Lenk has ever surfaced, save for the Avery case allegations.

It's almost like they're not even corrupt.

What happened? I could be wrong.

https://js4.red/r/MakingaMurderer/co..._the_bookcase/

From everything I read, they shook the bookcase, and the key fell out. If you look at pictures, the bookcase is very well organized. Seems very improbable that a bookcase could be shaken hard, yet everything remains the same. I would think everything would go flying.

That didn't help, its amazing to me how people can't give up a single inch when arguing this case.

Again the Mantiowow 3 forget that A.Colborn never wrote a report about being the ONE to find the key until Well Erm later, but that's cool as he has offered to turn over his whole career paperwork.
Since he is now head detective in his department, deos he allow the rest of the detective write reports months or even years later just like his old bosses done for him.

The 1st link below Golfnutt about the timeline is a good read..... GZ

You have been itt for a long time Luckproof & you should have known that there's a lack of decent photo's of where the Rav4 was found, any complaints about this subject is not the #reasonabledoubt fault, just saying.

Meanwhile here's a couple of links that have better info that that real crime profile(with loads of mistakes) that you were posting about......

http://georgezipperer.blogspot.co.uk...e-records.html
http://gmancasefile.com/moore-to-the...es-part-1-of-2
http://www.viewfromthecouch.com/episode-1/
http://www.michaelspratt.com/poadcas...show-episode-9

You are partially correct, Colborn did shake the book case and even admitted he was violent with the book case, however he says in this testimony that he replaced everything before noticing the key. And he says he forces the binders back into the book case forcefully which is what I think pushed out the key.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...20.pdf#page=64

He starts talking about it on pg 126.

Bravo!!!

Replaces everything perfectly EXCEPT for the key. The tv remote, the coins, the books and magazines and just then notices the magical key. That fell out of the secret compartment in the $5 book stand.

Can't argue the need for an expert EVIDENCE TECH on the scene.

Who this guy? Whatever do you mean?

“I would be willing to sign any release to allow access to both my military service records and/or my personnel file at Manitowoc County as I have never been the target of suspicion and I feel my service to both my country and Manitowoc County has always been performed to the best of my ability,”. Colborn wrote in his email to LaBre.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBvm...ature=youtu.be
Calumet Co flyover video, just released.
Thanks to Skipptopp from reddit.