Wasn't as much as a conspiricy as it was the DA knowing their limits

Still with this Colburn calling in to double-check the license plate nonsense?

Taken in and of itself, without Strang suggesting otherwise, there is absolutely zero noteworthy in that testimony. He had been given a plate number of a missing person. He called in to double-check it. How exactly does this prove he was "looking at the plate" when he called? There is no reason to think this, none - except that Strang planted the seed.

And so now they poured through what are likely thousands of pages of documentation, found one report with the wrong date entered, and somehow now this proves that Colburn actually was looking at the car?

If nothing else this proves that the arguments that "Avery may have been guilty but not beyond a reasonable doubt", and "it's all about procedure not being properly followed" are disingenuous. It is as I've known all along - people want to believe in a massive police conspiracy to frame SA. Not only want to believe it... they do believe it. If you didn't, you would not be so excited by one typed report that shows the car seized on 11/3. It is plain that you see this as proof that the police had the car, and planted it on Avery's property. Along with all the other evidence. Which is ridiculous. You realize people sometimes make typos, right? Or just enter the wrong date?

Too boring an explanation, compared to the massive police conspiracy I suppose.

Lol.

You are really on a (t)roll.

BTW: how's that coerced confession working out for you?

The Court of Appeals ruled very clearly that it wasn't coerced.

Now you've got a different judge who has a different opinion. He's wrong. Judges are just human beings, they make mistakes. Hopefully it gets reversed.

Lol.

Gold.

Federal judges make mistakes, sure. But rural law enforcement never does!

BTW: just so I'm clear on this: you claim the date on the car intake is a typo? Where do you get this information? Who made the typo and when did he or she testify about it?

Of course they do. I never said they don't. Has nothing to do with whether they conspired to frame SA or not.

Just so I'm clear... you claim the date on the car intake proves the police had the car BEFORE it was found on Avery's property, correct?

How things have changed.

This story is incredible as-is, but now consider: What if Steven Avery actually DID do it? It would be the greatest true-crime story ever told.


- Jodi did a bizarre interview that was supposed to be the GG moment for the defense which turned out to be some oddly edited footage that never actually aired on TV and in fact added the little nugget of info about the alcoholism class being mysteriously cancelled?

- We all actually started to believe that perhaps Andy really was just calling in to dispatch to confirm his hand scribbled notes were correct?

- Guilters were able berate KZ for talking a big game but not actually doing anything?


revots33, its okay bro, come on over. PoorSkillz got books to peddle or I'd invite him too.

Of course, how else would they prep it for the frame job and get it to the Avery lot?

Well, I guess you don't want to answer the question.

However, I will answer yours: if the document is genuine and contains no errors, "Yes" I believe it strongly indicates the police had the car prior to its "discovery" by the "search party."

So basically Zellner is on the doorstep of Manitowoc County courthouse giving a press conference openly stating that the tests they HAVE ALREADY DONE prove Avery's innocence and that further testing will strengthen his case AND reveal the ACTUAL perpetrator. Same thing she's been stating for months via Twitter. Freeing wrongly imprisoned, innocent people from the clutches of a broken system and greedy, corrupt law enforcement. Same thing she's been doing for years.

[x] gobbling

LOL conspiracy theories ftw. Would have been a perfect plan, if not for that guy who typed the REAL date on the intake report!

Let me guess, Colburn killed TH. Or Lenk. Or maybe the ex-bf killed her, gave her bones to the police, and told them he could help them with their little civil suit problem. Anything's possible in conspiracy-land.

I don't think you get it. YOU are the the conspiracy theorist now.

I don't think It would be extremely tough to determine who the actual killer was...

...but I'll give it shot:

January 7th Post

So you are saying if they really took possession of the car on Nov 3rd, then they really had possession of the car on Nov 3rd. I'm not disputing that.

Not sure if I read the post 100% correctly... but you are saying Tadych killed her, and the murder was either arranged or encouraged by the police?

I don't know. Maybe I am just not understanding the definition of conspiracy theory.

Would have been a perfect plan if not for:

-Those pesky documentary makers bringing this to light.

-That pesky Zellner lady and her team discovering the means, methods and motive of the real perps.

-That idiot Andy calling in the plates early.

-The honest workers of MCLE actually documenting things correctly.

-The "lead investigators" who never actually investigated anything (instead assigning the investigation to Colbourne and Lenk). The only leading they did was leading BD to a dark and twisted false confession.

-The documented phone calls showing investigators clearly ordering the Crime Lab to find specific results.

-The death certificate with date and method discrepancies.

-The alcoholic Crime Lab boss who didn't follow any procedures correctly and ruined the DNA testing.

Shall I continue?

Um, yeah. That was a proper answer to your question.

However, you never answered mine.

The conspiracy theory was Ken Kratz press conference that wove a fantastic tale.

Just imagine if the date of when the Rav4 was seized was also on Like transcripts that were,Hmm I don't know crowdsoursed, then picked apart by 1000's & debated for days/weeks.

Yup we said "defo typos, no question" ffs even I did. Reason:1. "To many typos" Reason:2 "No way L.E. That dumb"

Either a mistake/typo or they simply used the reported missing date and changed the code once it was found.

I think it's pretty funny that you dismiss these 2 completely standard and boring possibilities in lieu of the police conspiracy/frame/plant evidence and hide car on SA's property storyline.

Would you agree that for your story to make any sense, the police would have had to kill a random innocent young woman, or at the very least have arranged to have her killed, or had advance knowledge of her murder?

And I assume you think that is easier to believe, than either of my 2 possibilities regarding the date on the property form?

Couldn't they have just found a dead woman and took the opportunity to pin it on SA?

The problem with your logic is that you are choosing two independent events and declaring that the higher probability of occurring theory as fact. You are also inserting your own conjecture into a competing event to invalidate the possibility.

Nobody said the police killed a random innocent young woman (nice manipulation by the way instead of saying random person). Dates backed up with documents AND a phone call that doesn't match. There could be a thousand reasons why. Including error. But this is indisputably the most important item of evidence. It set off the Wisconsin calvary descending and immediately declaring the area a crime scene. it went from an endangered person missing to a homicide investigation.

Steve Avery never wavered that he had no idea how the car got on his property. Is he really that big of a fool that he would leave the victim's car, with his blood, covered by twigs to go on vacation for a few days? Perhaps, but seems highly unlikely. He supposedly burned a body with only one tooth left intact but just needs to gather sufficient time to dispose of an auto. In an auto salvage yard.

Couldn't SA just say he didn't do it and that the evidence was planted?

Nice strawman. I am simply asking whether it is your position that the document had a typo.

I also asked what support you have for that ... you provided none.

By the way, I already explained in an earlier post why your typo scenario where the reported missing date was used makes no sense.

Also, if the missing date was used, we would expect a number of similar typos for the other items collected that same day.