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

09-08-2016 , 11:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by cardzone Making a Murderer
The guy is guilty as sin,,,gimme a break already
09-09-2016 , 04:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melkerson Making a Murderer
I'm grunching here, because there's no way I'm going to read this beast of a thread, but can someone give me cliffs of the involvement of the innocence project right now.

If I remember correctly in the doc, the innocence project took him off their site and refused to help him with the Halbach case. Are they now willing to defend him for this too?
Tricia Bushnell of the Midwest Innocence Project has been working on the case. She withdrew from her position as local counsel last week, but she now plans to rejoin the team as associate counsel.
09-09-2016 , 07:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostinthesaus Making a Murderer

Factor in the 1 in 10 million moonshot Manitowoc county hit by this going down days before the key depositions in the lawsuit,
Can you elaborate on this point? The prosecution theory is that Avery committed a murder shortly before the key depositions in his lawsuit. Your theory is that someone last seen with him was murdered by someone else shortly before the key depositions in his lawsuit.

Why would the first scenario be significantly more improbable than the second?

Are you saying that if you were a police officer investigating a murder case and you found out that one of your suspects had an outstanding lawsuit with key depositions scheduled for the following week, that learning that fact would make you less likely to pursue that person as a suspect? Can you elaborate on why you hold this position? Do you have any data that people are less likely to commit crimes prior to key depositions in lawsuits where they are the plaintiff? Can you provide citations?
09-09-2016 , 09:20 AM
A lawsuit that would be covered by insurance and have zero impact on any of the officers involved in the TH case.

Also since the timing is such a "moonshot" coincidence, I suppose that must mean the cops murdered TH themselves. Why not, right? Got that civil suit coming up, may as well kill a young woman. Or they could have hired Tadych, forgot about that well thought out theory lol.

The only reason the timing matched up with the lawsuit is because that is when Jodi was in jail and that is when SA the misogynistic sociopath was sexually frustrated and in the mood to hurt a woman.
09-09-2016 , 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkasigh Making a Murderer
Can you elaborate on this point?
Do you expect to receive rational answers to your questions from someone implying that the defendants in a civil trial:
  1. killed an innocent young woman
  2. elaborately framed the plaintiff for her murder, and
  3. have covered it up for ten years now
all because they were scared they wouldn't be able to keep some unknown bombshell a secret under the pressure of their depositions?
09-09-2016 , 09:44 AM
To The 3 rape apologists above me, it was not just all about the money & btw why do you guys want the cops who covered this up to walk free?

Foghaze-Reddit........
Avery's civil suit was going to expose how Kocourek and Vogel both knew Allen was the real perpetrator in the PB case and they knowingly let him go free in 1985. It would have proven they let a violent rapist go free which subsequently led to a dozen other women being violently raped in the years to come. V&K deliberately withheld this evidence just to frame Avery and didn't give a rats ass about PB or all the other women he would go on to rape and possibly murder! They would not be able to buy their way out of this revelation. No PR company in the world would touch this!
Once exposed there is no question at least a dozen more lawsuits would follow from this clear malicious act. I cannot even begin to imagine the ****storm that was getting ready to unfold there in Manitowoc!
If you are failing to see just how serious this is consider this. Imagine your daughter was one of Allen's later victims and it was revealed in 2005 that it all could have been prevented in 1985! Can you imagine finding out the sheriff's department had such a hard on for Steven Avery they didn't care that your very own daughter was his next victim? My god these men along with possible others (Peterson, Kushe and DVorak) were royally screwed! If this information got out it wouldn't surprise me if one of the fathers of these victims actually tried to kill those responsible because they knowingly let this man roam free for 10+ years!
The civil suit was clearly not just about the millions at all. It was much more than that. The civil suit was going to expose morally unacceptable behavior on every level. The community would have found out that the very men that took an oath to protect them was directly responsible for harming them with no regard for human life whatsoever! If the community found out about any of this it would be game over for all those involved!
Regardless of what some have been told about the suit it actually was a very big deal and it was more about revealing just how criminal all these men were and what they were capable of. It would have revealed some of the most sick and twisted acts you have ever heard of coming from any human much less coming from those who are supposed to be protecting you! The civil suit would not only prove how corrupt the sheriff's department was it would have proven these two men (possibly others) were morally corrupt MONSTERS!
09-09-2016 , 10:07 AM
The rape apologists itt Revots, Poorskillz &Ikasign may be in it for different reasons, 1 troll 1 bookseller(cash only pls) & 1 dumbass ( manti cop level) but make no mistake these 3 are sick ppl who require many years of treatment, imo.

I'll repost a link to this thread why many ppl in manti were worried for their future...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TickTockMan...manitowoc_for/

Kelly: 'There is a distinction in the law between simple mistakes for which officers like that are immune, and purposeful conduct that violates constitutional rights, for which they are not immune.'

This Civil suit was in FEDERAL COURT.
09-09-2016 , 10:36 AM
Why does SA being in jail stop the civil suit? I know in this case he had to make a deal to afford lawyers but would the cops really know it would play out like that?

If the PD really wanted SA out of the way do you really think they would set up this elaborate frame job which possibly involves killing an innocent woman or conspiring with the real killer while letting him go free when they could of just killed SA?

Do you guys realize how rediculously easy it would be for them to just outright kill SA? It would also be 1000x more easy to justify morally instead of this conspiracy you claim took place.
09-09-2016 , 10:52 AM
^^ Critical Thinking at it's best here boy's....... "as long as Its not your wife, daughter, sister huh"

Why are you guys so protective over these badge wearing piece's of scum?
09-09-2016 , 11:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckproof Making a Murderer
Do you guys realize how rediculously easy it would be for them to just outright kill SA?
Of course the easiest thing of all would be to just not reveal much in the depositions (assuming they had a lot to hide), let the lawyers do their job, and settle for a few million dollars (which would be covered by insurance). But that's too boring.
09-09-2016 , 11:58 AM
Has to wade through the Knox thread to find a link, was none too surprised to see Ika in there defending Knox.
09-09-2016 , 11:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
^^ Critical Thinking at it's best here boy's....... "as long as Its not your wife, daughter, sister huh"

Why are you guys so protective over these badge wearing piece's of scum?
Who exactly are you quoting?? And while you're at it, wtf are you talking about?
09-09-2016 , 12:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckproof Making a Murderer

If the PD really wanted SA out of the way do you really think they would set up this elaborate frame job which possibly involves killing an innocent woman or conspiring with the real killer while letting him go free when they could of just killed SA?
The idea there needed to be some grand conspiracy is absurd. You don't need to conspire when everyone involved has the same goal. You could have had multiple parties working against Avery without any of them even knowing about the others.

I'm not saying it happened, but lets say someone dropped off the rav4. Someone else could plant the blood to strengthen their case without even knowing the rav4 was planted.

I think he probably did it, but also think if someone had framed Avery for a crime he'd have gone down easily with the way they investigated. The cops wouldn't be conspiring with the killer because they would believe they are just helping their legitimate case against Avery.
09-09-2016 , 12:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by happyhappy... Making a Murderer
Has to wade through the Knox thread to find a link, was none too surprised to see Ika in there defending Knox.
The funny thing is that he uses his "mathematical analysis" to the exact OPPOSITE effect in the Knox case.

Anyhow, my favorite post of Ikasigh's in the AK thread is his claim that something written in your diary cannot be a "lie."
09-09-2016 , 12:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckproof Making a Murderer
Why does SA being in jail stop the civil suit?

Do you guys realize how rediculously easy it would be for them to just outright kill SA? It would also be 1000x more easy to justify morally instead of this conspiracy you claim took place.
Why don't you explain the underlined & the bold to the best of your ability, as you seem to only want answers to Q's you post, an actual effort to participate ITT would be good.

And don't forget S.A. was just exonerated from a 32 yr sentence & P.B.(1 of the most respected members of mantiowoc ) had written a statement that was due to be read out in FEDERAL court.
09-09-2016 , 12:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
The funny thing is that he uses his "mathematical analysis" to the exact OPPOSITE effect in the Knox case.

Anyhow, my favorite post of Ikasigh's in the AK thread is his claim that something written in your diary cannot be a "lie."
OMFG!!! Ofc teenagers & young adult's never ever lie so help me god.

Imo he's trolling this thread, just like luckproof.
09-09-2016 , 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Of course the easiest thing of all would be to just not reveal much in the depositions (assuming they had a lot to hide), let the lawyers do their job, and settle for a few million dollars (which would be covered by insurance). But that's too boring.
Yeah, you can keep going on about that even though you are not correct.

At the time all this went down, even a lawyer involved in the case could not expect the insurance to cover the entire claim which expanded to cover individual wrong-doing.

The actual settlement was done with SA extremely leveraged and unable to continue pursuing his case (for all intents and purposes) - so, the facts, or investigation of such, never rose to the level of the allegations. The allegations were very serious and the lawsuit promised major exposure.

A layperson, especially at that particular time in the matter, was not going to be privy to a complex (insurance) coverage analysis; nor would they be in a position to appreciate it. Given that, the case was a huge threat to the county, the named defendants, and those in LE.

As to LuckProofs comment about it being easier to just kill SA: No kidding. How do you know that wasn't thought about. If there was a nefarious plan underway, how do you know the plan was NOT to kill SA and then this opportunity came out of nowhere and they changed course?

You don't know. Is any of this illogical or unreasonable? It sure is, however, the final decision on what is "crazy" depends on context. In a "normal" situation, we would not be talking about planting evidence, conspiracies, etc. Those things usually do not happen. But when you look at all of the questionable things in this case, it is quite unreasonable to simply brush it off and rely on how improbable it all is - especially when that seems to be the only response to each issue raised.

At some point, if those defending the cops want us to rely on "how ridiculous" it all is, a clear narrative explaining everything will have to be offered.

I am able to look at these things with an open mind, and thus far, I have to say I simply cannot accept - "the odds of something like this happening are so low, that we can simply rule it out."
09-09-2016 , 12:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJacob Making a Murderer

I think he probably did it.
Imo the deeper you look at this case the more you discover.... https://stopwrongfulconvictions.word...investigation/


Last edited by smacc25; 09-09-2016 at 01:18 PM.
09-09-2016 , 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
OMFG!!! Ofc teenagers & young adult's never ever lie so help me god.

Imo he's trolling this thread, just like luckproof.
He's not trolling - he's just an idiot.

His first post in the AK thread was some jumble of a mathematical analysis of why AK could not be involved. He linked (more than once) to some blog about how you should use probability to approach these situations. My take was that he was trying to either emulate the blog, or that it was his blog. In any event, the approach is very unsatisfactory for these types of matters.

That he continues to try to fit his square pegs in round holes is constantly evident (and either reveals that he is, or appears to be, an idiot) as his approach has no nuance or room for changing facts.
09-09-2016 , 01:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJacob Making a Murderer
The idea there needed to be some grand conspiracy is absurd. You don't need to conspire when everyone involved has the same goal. You could have had multiple parties working against Avery without any of them even knowing about the others.

I'm not saying it happened, but lets say someone dropped off the rav4. Someone else could plant the blood to strengthen their case without even knowing the rav4 was planted.
What do you think the odds are that each of these unfortunate series of events would happen on their own?

Can you write out a theory of how each item was planted or why it should be explained away (the Rav4, the blood, the bullet, the bones, the key, the EDTA test, etc.) without a massive conspiracy taking place?
09-09-2016 , 01:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
He's not trolling - he's just an idiot.

His first post in the AK thread was some jumble of a mathematical analysis of why AK could not be involved. He linked (more than once) to some blog about how you should use probability to approach these situations. My take was that he was trying to either emulate the blog, or that it was his blog. In any event, the approach is very unsatisfactory for these types of matters.

That he continues to try to fit his square pegs in round holes is constantly evident (and either reveals that he is, or appears to be, an idiot) as his approach has no nuance or room for changing facts.
I suppose Ikasign & poorskillz are 2 off the same people, when they both can't admit that mtDNA is laughable evidence of identification.

Last edited by smacc25; 09-09-2016 at 01:24 PM. Reason: I admit that I have never looked into the murder of Meredith Ketcher
09-09-2016 , 01:39 PM
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...hook-hoax.html

Good article on another infamous truther movement with numerous parallels to this one.
09-09-2016 , 02:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJacob Making a Murderer
The idea there needed to be some grand conspiracy is absurd. You don't need to conspire when everyone involved has the same goal. You could have had multiple parties working against Avery without any of them even knowing about the others.

I'm not saying it happened, but lets say someone dropped off the rav4. Someone else could plant the blood to strengthen their case without even knowing the rav4 was planted.

I think he probably did it, but also think if someone had framed Avery for a crime he'd have gone down easily with the way they investigated. The cops wouldn't be conspiring with the killer because they would believe they are just helping their legitimate case against Avery.
I'm not saying there needed to be one, other posters are. I'm just saying if there was a conspiracy to get rid of the civil suit there wold be much easier ways to go about it. I see your point though, there are several people living on that property so the police could have planted the evidence that narrows it down to SA.
09-09-2016 , 02:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
Why don't you explain the underlined & the bold to the best of your ability, as you seem to only want answers to Q's you post, an actual effort to participate ITT would be good.

And don't forget S.A. was just exonerated from a 32 yr sentence & P.B.(1 of the most respected members of mantiowoc ) had written a statement that was due to be read out in FEDERAL court.
If you can't read and understand that I can't help you at this point.
09-09-2016 , 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
Yeah, you can keep going on about that even though you are not correct.

At the time all this went down, even a lawyer involved in the case could not expect the insurance to cover the entire claim which expanded to cover individual wrong-doing.

The actual settlement was done with SA extremely leveraged and unable to continue pursuing his case (for all intents and purposes) - so, the facts, or investigation of such, never rose to the level of the allegations. The allegations were very serious and the lawsuit promised major exposure.

A layperson, especially at that particular time in the matter, was not going to be privy to a complex (insurance) coverage analysis; nor would they be in a position to appreciate it. Given that, the case was a huge threat to the county, the named defendants, and those in LE.

As to LuckProofs comment about it being easier to just kill SA: No kidding. How do you know that wasn't thought about. If there was a nefarious plan underway, how do you know the plan was NOT to kill SA and then this opportunity came out of nowhere and they changed course?


You don't know. Is any of this illogical or unreasonable? It sure is, however, the final decision on what is "crazy" depends on context. In a "normal" situation, we would not be talking about planting evidence, conspiracies, etc. Those things usually do not happen. But when you look at all of the questionable things in this case, it is quite unreasonable to simply brush it off and rely on how improbable it all is - especially when that seems to be the only response to each issue raised.

At some point, if those defending the cops want us to rely on "how ridiculous" it all is, a clear narrative explaining everything will have to be offered.

I am able to look at these things with an open mind, and thus far, I have to say I simply cannot accept - "the odds of something like this happening are so low, that we can simply rule it out."
Just for the record, I'm not defending the cops. I know they are shady. But that doesn't mean SA is innocent. Both things can be true. I'm also not trolling.

As for the bold, you agree it would be easier, but then you ask why wouldn't they take the oportunity to switch to a much more complicated plan that puts more people at risk? I mean, common sense. These cops probably aren't geniuses but I'm pretty sure they know what kinds of crimes are hard to solve and which arent. If they wanted to kill a guy and get away with it, especially when they are also investigating the murder, it's probably not that hard. Colburn could probably figure it out on his lunch break.

      
m