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

01-05-2016 , 09:46 PM
Not sure about this site but here's what they claim to be an email response from Kratz.

http://www.thewrap.com/making-a-murd...easons-guilty/
01-05-2016 , 09:47 PM
Quote:
Isn't the whole damned thing moot without TH's blood anywhere?
Her blood in significant amounts was found in the car. If you meant aside from that, then yeah I get your point. Her blood is no where on the property. Her DNA is nowhere on the property aside from the bones and car, both of which have extremely unusual circumstances surrounding them.

This is exactly my point too, though. There isn't one single bit of evidence that is irrefutable. Every single piece of evidence, even the circumstantial evidence, has a completely reasonable and logical explanation that invalidates it in some way.

Bones in yard? They were moved.
Key found? 7th search by extremely questionable character.
Key had SA's DNA on it? But not TH's.
Bullet found? 8th or 9th search and again, questionable character on scene.
Car found on property? "god sent", 20 minutes, only camera, ex-bf directions.
Blood in car? evidence seal on vial broken, no SA fingerprints (but many other prints)
BD's confession? Clearly coerced.
Bullet had DNA? so little only one test could be performed.
Bullet had DNA? technician also intro'd own DNA rendering test null per protocol.
Bullet had DNA? phone records indicate she was ordered to find SA's dna on it.
Bullet had DNA? same technician that tied avery to rape he did not commit.
Bedroom Crime Scene: Nope.
BDs new confession: clearly coerced AGAIN, this time to show garage as crime scene
Garage crime scene: No blood, no spatter, not a single thing...accept SA's DNA obv.
BDs 3rd confession: Coerced to put SA's DNA on hood latch. 6 months after being on impound lot, lol.

How is it likely that he's > 60% guilty?

How its likely that he's > .00060% guilty?
01-05-2016 , 10:02 PM
he's greater than 0.00060% guilty just by virtue of the fact that a woman he met with on the afternoon she went missing turned up dead metres from his trailer.

some of your points are good (not all), but your conclusion is totally ridiculous.
01-05-2016 , 10:03 PM
Check the link I posted for Kratz's refutation of the bones being moved argument.
01-05-2016 , 10:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostinthesaus Making a Murderer
This is exactly my point too, though. There isn't one single bit of evidence that is irrefutable. Every single piece of evidence, even the circumstantial evidence, has a completely reasonable and logical explanation that invalidates it in some way.
Right. The only possible way SA is guilty is if he kills her somewhere in the woods or something and transports the body with the Rav 4 back to the burn site. But even then, is enough of her blood in the car for this to make sense?

The bullet is complete BS to me. It's in the garage, but it's essentially impossible for the murder to have taken place in the garage, right? So SA shoots her in the woods, picks up the bullet, and drops it in his garage? OK.
01-05-2016 , 10:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalerobk2 Making a Murderer
Not sure about this site but here's what they claim to be an email response from Kratz.
kratz has been emailing that to anyone and everyone who contacts him for the better part of ten days. it's likely been discussed earlier in this thread.

it should be pretty obvious most of those points are laughable.
01-05-2016 , 10:31 PM
From the 1st trial that steven was found to be NOT GUILTY on all charges.
The State police told the sheriffs office that they had the WRONG GUY.
Several woman from the DA'S office told the Sheriffs Dept THAT THEY HAD THE WRONG GUY.
The Victim phoned the Sheriffs Dept asking questions & was told NOT TO PHONE AGAIN because she was just confusing the investigation.WHAT THE FCUK.
The Same judge who convicted Steven heard new evidence (DNA) & dismissed it. Again WHAT THE FCUK IS going on here.
The state police was watching this G.allen guy & told the Sheriffs Dept that the ONLY DAY THEY WERE NOT WATCHING HIM A RAPE HAPPENS. AGAIN WTF.(the rape happens with the exact same M.O.Almost within exactly a year that allen committed a sex offence.)
The victim was asked to SIGN yes SIGN statements when she told officers that she still coulden't see correctly due to her injuries. yes Thats correct SIGN statements that SHE COULD NOT READ.
Also the victim gave a description that DID NOT MATCH Steven Avery, colour of eyes WRONG-COLOUR of hair WRONG-SIZE & BUILD WRONG.
We have 20 people who all at different times provided statements to the sheriffs dept that when all put together accounted for the whole time frame that steven was nowhere near the crime scene, also a receipt was provided with a time stamp just after 5pm tying into the statements.
So after steven gets let out guess what the county investigated itself, they got in 2 DOJ investigators who SURPRISE SURPRISE found no wrong doing & were caught in taped interviews trying to construe previous statements made on paper.
so lets see.
No Motive.
No evidence.
No description of steven.
No DNA evidence(i know its 1985) No hair, No blood type match, No skin scratches, No ZILT NOTHING ZERO.
But over 20 witnesses, with paper reciept, with State police saying I think you guys have the wrong guy along with the victim also questioning the sherrif's dept. Hmmmm.
But the DOJ FINDS NO WRONG DOING by the sheriffs Dept
But to me all that feels like small potatoes when ANOTHER VIOLENT RAPE THAT WE KNOW OF(if stats are correct that not all victims of rape DO NOT come forward then its prob more) is committed & this allen guy gets convicted of it, then he goes on to tell that a guy is serving time for a crime that HE DID INFACT COMMIT. ( also his DNA WAS FOUND ON THE VICTIM)
So after saying this I would like to see the VICTIMS of gregory allen after steven was convicted asking more than questions, they should be going after the SHERIFFS DEPT & the DA,JUDGE & anyone elso who got the wrong man put in jail. They are lucky that the fathers of these victims or husbands have not took some measures that would be criminal violent or otherwise.
Steven refused to admit to this crime when he had a OUT to get out, when he was surrounded by REAL criminals & murderers WHO WOULD HAVE DONE ANYTHING to get out including framing an innocent man.

So anyone in the thread that thinks SA is guilty of any rape/murder go ask the victims of G.Allen.

After reading this thread & some of the absurd comments by people who refuse to believe that the cops ARE & WERE corrupt it is no surprise that more & more victims of rape DO NOT TRUST the police, public or any other person close to them after a horrible crime like rape has been committed upon them. And also why in some states people have been getting away with horrific crimes for years because of personal vendetta's.

Before anyone replies to this post THINK OF THE VICTIMS OF g.allen before & AFTER SA was found guilty, before dismissing my claims of fact in this post.
01-05-2016 , 10:47 PM
Quote:
he's greater than 0.00060% guilty just by virtue of the fact that a woman he met with on the afternoon she went missing turned up dead metres from his trailer.
Yeah obviously this would be true if this was the only info we had. But we have a massive amount of information that can sway the odds in one direction or another. Each piece of evidence that has been introduced that is not legit, both physical and circumstantial, exponentially increases the probability of innocence. All it would take is one piece of legit evidence. Just one.

But there is literally no solid evidence AND the evidence we do have can all be traced back towards the police having planted it. AND these very same police have strong motive to do so.

Finally, the reason these same police have motive to do so is because they are up against a lawsuit from the very same man for doing the very same thing to him once already.

Until there's a single piece of solid evidence, there's no gray area here. There's no chance he's a murderer. Zero. None. The cops would need absolutely no help if he committed this crime.
01-05-2016 , 11:01 PM
Quote:
Check the link I posted for Kratz's refutation of the bones being moved argument.
I think Strang and Buting did a good job of pretty much destroying this claim in the documentary.

A near full skeleton was found in SA's burn pit. Two known missing pieces were fragments from the pelvic bone. A second burn site is located and the exact two missing pieces of female pelvic bone missing from the skeletal remains are found in this 2nd pit. But it was never proven that it was Teresa's?
01-05-2016 , 11:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJacob Making a Murderer
Its never mentioned in the documentary whether the plate is still on the car when they find it.

Which is important because if its been removed it kills the theory that they just found the car in the salvage yard and told that woman where to find it.
The car did not have plates on it when it was found, that was mentioned
01-05-2016 , 11:15 PM
Quote:
A near full skeleton was found in SA's burn pit. Two known missing pieces were fragments from the pelvic bone.
source please. i haven't found anything about the number of bones present at the burn pit and what was or wasn't there.
01-05-2016 , 11:18 PM
Biggest revelation for me was when Dassey was testifying, asked if his story wasn't true then where did he come up with the story and drawings and he replied he got it from a book.

All I could think was no way he has read a book.
01-05-2016 , 11:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banana man Making a Murderer
The car did not have plates on it when it was found, that was mentioned
I remember the woman having to read the VIN somewhere off the car, but thought maybe its because the plate was covered.

That makes me a hell of a lot more suspicious of that call to the dispatcher then. So where did they find the plates?
01-05-2016 , 11:39 PM
Sandra Morris(steven's cousin) who reported an alleged sexual assault refutes her 1st statement to police when in a video taped interview in the PD, saying No I didn't say, err I would not have said it like that. Then goes on to say that steven was getting it ready when she was driving at 40mph past his property.(wow 1st time I.ve heard that claim to go out a speeding ticket).Sept 20-1984. She says he was getting it ready U know doing his thing.
Hmm makes me wonder, driving at 40mph & being able to see SA running out of his property to the road with SA knowing that it was Sandra driving the car. hmmm.
Also in the same statement the officer interviewing says that on the statement you gave it says that you said SA had SEX with his wife outside in public on his property so as anyone could see them, NOW in the video tape sandra says NO I DID NOT SAY THAT.
The officer asks sandra if there was a time that she was saying all of the above in a tavern about steven. Her answer is I might have(she chuckles weirdly) I might have been to several taverns.(this part is in 2nd episode).
So the officer then asks in 1985 were you personally friendly with SA. Answer NO Officer then says so you actively dislike SA. No answer but a hand gesture that says is it not obv I dislike him.
01-05-2016 , 11:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJacob Making a Murderer
I remember the woman having to read the VIN somewhere off the car, but thought maybe its because the plate was covered.

That makes me a hell of a lot more suspicious of that call to the dispatcher then. So where did they find the plates?
The plates were found on the Avery yard all messed-up.
01-05-2016 , 11:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostinthesaus Making a Murderer
I think Strang and Buting did a good job of pretty much destroying this claim in the documentary.

A near full skeleton was found in SA's burn pit. Two known missing pieces were fragments from the pelvic bone. A second burn site is located and the exact two missing pieces of female pelvic bone missing from the skeletal remains are found in this 2nd pit. But it was never proven that it was Teresa's?
From the link I posted:

Quote:
5. The victim’s bones in the firepit were “intertwined” with the steel belts, left over from the car tires Avery threw on the fire to burn, as described by Dassey. That WAS where her bones were burned! Suggesting that some human bones found elsewhere (never identified as Teresa’s) were from this murder was NEVER established.
I don't remember anyone refuting that. I don't think it was ever mentioned in the documentary. Assuming it's true, it seems more than hugely damning.
01-05-2016 , 11:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by martymc1 Making a Murderer
Biggest revelation for me was when Dassey was testifying, asked if his story wasn't true then where did he come up with the story and drawings and he replied he got it from a book.

All I could think was no way he has read a book.
Probably not, but he could have seen the movie.

It was kind of a burn though. Prosecutor was incredulous that such a book could exist and he comes up with Kiss The Girls.
01-05-2016 , 11:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalerobk2 Making a Murderer
From the link I posted:



I don't remember anyone refuting that. I don't think it was ever mentioned in the documentary. Assuming it's true, it seems more than hugely damning.
1 expert in the trial said that it is not conclusive that the bones were burned in the pit or in the burn barrel. Refuting the crime labs take on the bones. And also saying that in no way can we tell if these bones are actually TH's remains.
Only If i remember correctly is that a tooth found in the pit & the jaw bone was TH's.
Also it takes a lot more heat that some tires and/or fuel to burn bones to this degree to get all traces of DNA removed.
This is why the fire as Kratz says was 10ft high, but if you ask anyone who is familiar with burning corpses they will tell you that a pit fire or burn barrel of this size will just not do that job. Upwards of 1800'c is needed to do this.
01-06-2016 , 12:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet Making a Murderer
Probably not, but he could have seen the movie.

It was kind of a burn though. Prosecutor was incredulous that such a book could exist and he comes up with Kiss The Girls.
Yeah I was actually cheering at that part. One little bright spot amidst all the depressing stuff. If he was ever GOING to open a book, I could see him managing to struggle through the juicy parts of that one.

In general regarding the evidence etc., I don't see how any further discussion could be worthwhile. People are gonna believe whatever they want.

The takeaway for me is that it REALLY sucks to be poor and stupid in the USA.
01-06-2016 , 12:14 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet Making a Murderer
Probably not, but he could have seen the movie.

It was kind of a burn though. Prosecutor was incredulous that such a book could exist and he comes up with Kiss The Girls.
Yeah it was a burn and I laughed.
01-06-2016 , 12:21 AM
My main takeaway from this story is that Packer fans are the nut low.
01-06-2016 , 12:54 AM
Kratz and Strang were on Fox News. Please post the link if anyone finds it.
01-06-2016 , 01:18 AM
super obvious and straightforward but a decent read:

http://chadsteele.blogspot.com.au/20...ce-in.html?m=1
01-06-2016 , 01:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by campfirewest Making a Murderer
My main takeaway from this story is that Packer fans are the nut low.
Says a Nuggets fan... Birdman was a pedo.
01-06-2016 , 01:33 AM
James Patterson books like Kiss the Girls pretty much target the ****** market. I'm sure he did read it.

      
m