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

11-18-2016 , 07:16 AM
When you get a jury pool of 130 where 129 believes SA/BD is guilty before trial, that is ridiculous. Especially when that biased was created by the prosecutor with unsubstantiated proof. Whether they are guilty or not, the investigation and trial were a farce. Beginning to end. The lack of even considering RH a suspect is amateur. They focused on one individual and ensured all the pieces fit. Even parts that were preposterous. Held two separate trials with completely different facts and perpetrators. Led by same prosecutor.

And even after convictions, they called SA a rapist. Ever though he wasn't even tried of that crime. Zero credibility.
11-18-2016 , 07:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
In contrast with the layperson's definition of words, in the legal context (which is the important context in a court of law) a word such as 'coercion' may have a slightly different significance. In this case, as Duffin has pointed out, it doesn't necessarily involve physical harm.

But since you don't seem too keen on what an experienced judge writes, or care about the many precedents he cites in his opinion, here is yet another source which you can use to try and educate yourself about 'coercion' in a legal context:

"Once interrogation commences, the primary cause of police-induced false confession is psychologically coercive police methods.20 Psychological coercion can be defined in two ways: police use of interrogation techniques that are regarded as inherently coercive in psychology and law, or police use of interrogation techniques that, cumulatively, cause a suspect to perceive that he has no choice but to comply with the interrogators’ demands. Usually these amount to the same thing.

Psychologically coercive interrogation techniques include some examples of the old third degree, such as deprivations (of food, sleep, water, or access to bathroom facilities, for example), incommunicado interrogation, and induction of extreme exhaustion and fatigue. In the modern era, however, these techniques are rare in domestic police interrogations. Instead, when today's police interrogators employ psychologically coercive techniques, they usually consist of (implicit or express) promises of leniency and threats of harsher treatment. As Ofshe and Leo have written, “the modern equivalent to the rubber hose is the indirect threat communicated through pragmatic implication” (Ref. 21, p 1115). Threats and promises can take a variety of forms, and they are usually repeated, developed, and elaborated over the course of the interrogation. Most documented false confessions in recent decades have been directly caused by or have involved promises or threats.5,8"


http://jaapl.org/content/37/3/332


As you recall, Duffin explains this quite clearly here:

"More than merely assuring Dassey that he would not be punished if he admitted participating in the offenses, the investigators suggested to Dassey that he would be punished if he did not tell “the truth.” (See, e.g., ECF No. 19-25 at 17, 23, 54, 102.) However, because the investigators’ assertions that they already knew what happened were often false, “the truth” to the investigators was often merely whichever of Dassey’s version of events they eventually accepted. Thus, as long as Dassey told a version the investigators accepted as “the truth,” he was led to believe he had no fear of negative consequences. But if the investigators did not accept as true the story Dassey told them, he was told there would be repercussions. "

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lega...nd%20Order.pdf

Sometimes the law does seem 'weird ass' to amateurs. Just look at the bizarre misunderstandings about the Italian Courts in the murder of Meredith Kercher!
Had this convo with you before and am not rehashing it with you again as it was already thoroughly covered the first time around. Separate thread on Meredith's case feel free to comment some more on it there. You don't know what coercion means as I told you before and again am not rehashing, except to reiterate that I don't agree with you on your earlier belief on another forum that contamination combined with police corruption combined with multiple occurrences of coercion combined with jury misconduct combined with prosecution misconduct combined with three sets of defence incompetence all occurred parallel and in perfect symmetry with each other and that this has a higher probative value than evidence indicating guilt, due to guilt.
I have found you dishonest in the past and have no desire to engage with you further due to this. Feel free to have the last word. Duffin's cited cases aren't apt imo and he may be breaking new legal ground by saying that the cops treated Dassey too nicely, giving him a false sense of security. I have hopes he'll be overturned.

Last edited by corpus vile; 11-18-2016 at 08:04 AM.
11-18-2016 , 08:27 AM
This thread is such aids now
11-18-2016 , 08:31 AM
Don't worry effie I'm done with your rapist friendly echo chamber thread. Your rapist is going nowhere at present and Teresa Halbach won't be seeing any Wrestlemanias, thanks partially to Brendan Dassey who Teresa pleaded with to do the right thing. He slit her throat in return. Remember that when you're cheerleading for him. I'll be going through this thread solely to catch 5ive's posts from February and if I find them compelling I'll probably comment but don't worry, I'm done here, it's all okay now.
I'll leave you with some questions though.
Why did Dassey think as early as Nov 06 that the cops felt that Avery had raped Teresa? Why bring up rape outa nowhere unless he knew something?


Why does Dassey repeat some of the same lines as Avery re Teresa leaving?
Dassey couldn't have been home until 3:45- 4:00 as that's when his bus dropped him off, yet according to Avery Teresa left at 2:35 or so. And for no apparent reason also mentions that either the cops or the victim's family set up good ole Steve. So am I wrong to suspect that Avery coached Dassey on what to say?
You guys will believe what you wish to believe. I'll believe what I believe based on analysing and interpreting the evidence and data.

Last edited by corpus vile; 11-18-2016 at 08:56 AM.
11-18-2016 , 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EfromPegTown Making a Murderer
This thread is such aids now
Now??!!! It's been full blown AIDS for a looooooooooooong time.

Carry on....
11-18-2016 , 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeotaJMU Making a Murderer
Holy **** man. I've been posting on 2+2 for 13 years and corpus vile has shown in less than 20 posts to be hands down the worst poster I have ever encountered Jesus christ
You should see his work in the Amanda Knox thread.
11-18-2016 , 12:32 PM
In the state's responses to Brendan's numerous appeals, they always contend that it was Barb's decision to not be present when they interrogated Brenden. Below is one repeated example of this from their latest emergency motion to the seventh circuit filed this week.
The interviewing investigators asked both Dassey and his mother for permission to speak to him at the police station. SA 14. They had offered to let Dassey’s mother participate in a prior interview, but she declined.
...
The court of appeals also discussed Dassey’s mother, noting that she “declined the offer to accompany Dassey” to a prior interview and that she gave “permission” for the March 1 interview. SA 2.
These claims are derived from the statements of Fassbender and Wiegert. What gets continuously glossed over is Barb's own recount of the events and precisely why she "declined" to join Brendan.
First, on February 27, she was at work and completely unaware that Brendan had given any statements to police until after the session at the school had concluded, which was the first time Wiegert called her. Here is Barb's description of that first interaction, from her 2010 court of appeals court testimony.
NIRIDER: ...the day that Officers Wiegert and Fassbender first questioned Brendan. On that day, what time did the investigators first contact you?
BARB: What day?
NIRIDER: On February 27.
BARB: Um, it was around -- I'd have to say about two o'clock.
NIRIDER: How did they get in touch with you?
BARB: They called me on my cell phone.
NIRIDER: Do you remember which person it was? Which investigator placed the call?
BARB: If I think back, I'm sure it was Mark Wiegert.
NIRIDER: And what did Mark tell you?
BARB: Um, that I should come to school to pick up my son.
NIRIDER: Did he tell you that Brendan had already given them some statement having to do with Teresa Halbach?
BARB: Yes.
NIRIDER: Okay. Before you got that call, Barb, did you know that the officers had been questioning your son already?
BARB: No, I -- no, I didn't.
NIRIDER: How old was Brendan at the time?
BARB: Sixteen.
NIRIDER: What time did you get to Brendan's school that day?
BARB: It was a little after three. I had to work until three o'clock before I could leave.
From there, Barb and Brendan were actually driven to Two Rivers Police Department by Wiegert and Fassbender. Here is Barb's description of what happened during this second interview of that day:
NIRIDER: What happened after you arrived at the police station?
BARB: We went in and they took Brendan into a room down at the police station.
NIRIDER: Did you try to join them?
BARB: I tried, but they more or less told me that it was in my best interest to go wait in the waiting room because they -- that Brendan was going to give them a gruesome story.
NIRIDER: Barb, did the officers tell you that you shouldn't be in the room with Brendan?
BARB: Yes.
NIRIDER: How did you feel about not being able to be in that room?
BARB: Upset.
NIRIDER: So where were you, exactly, while Brendan was being questioned by the police at the Two Rivers station?
BARB: In a waiting room.
NIRIDER: How long were the investigators alone with Brendan?
BARB: I'd say about an hour.
NIRIDER: Could you hear or see what was happening to him?
BARB: No.
Later in the afternoon of February 27, Barb, Brendan and a sibling were taken to Fox Hills Resort under police watch. The investigators alleged that this was for their own protection after Brendan gave the initial statements about Teresa's death (none of which incriminated himself, beyond the eventual claim of seeing body parts in the fire after much police prompting and insistence that he saw something). The truth is that they were sequestered there to allow Fassbender and Tyson additional time to question Brendan in an unrecorded session that began around 10 p.m. (the third such session that day). They wanted to ensure the "integrity" of the investigation by barring them off at this hotel that evening.
Finally, we arrive at the March 1 interview session. Here is Barb's timeline whereby she had a court date relating to her divorce at the same time they sought to question Brendan.
NIRIDER: Okay. Moving on to March 1, 2006, which is the day that Brendan told the police that he had been involved in Teresa's death. Um, when did you first talk to Officers Wiegert and Fassbender on that day, March l?
BARB: It was after I got out of court. Um, court for me was at one. It must have been about 1:30, 2.
NIRIDER: Was there something that morning?
BARB: Oh, yes. Um, they had called me and asked me if they could take Brendan down to the Manitowoc Police -- or the jail and question him some more.
NIRIDER: Okay. And when they asked you that, what did you say?
BARB: I told them, yeah, as long as they bring him back to the high school.
NIRIDER: Okay. Did they invite you to join them and Brendan at the sheriff's office?
BARB: No.
NIRIDER: Barb, did you -- at that time, did you have any idea that the police were going to accuse your son of murder?
BARB: No.
NIRIDER: Would you have responded differently to their request to question Brendan if you had known that they were going to accuse him of murder?
BARB: Yes. I would have told them that I wanted to be there.
...
NIRIDER: Just to do a little cleanup. From March 1, Barb, was there a reason why you couldn't have been there for March l?
BARB: Because I had a court date for my divorce.
NIRIDER: All right.
As an addendum, Barb just summarized much of the same on Facebook, following the seventh circuit's stay of Brendan's release and continued claims by certain parties that Barb had declined to be present when Brendan was interviewed.
To all supporters of Brendan Dassey, I have something to say about the state and their lying. They say that I gave them permission to interview Brendan, well that was a lie. The day they did this at school I was at work for 10 hours, they called me after the fact. They interviewed him for 3 to 4 hours then first contacted me to come get him. I never gave them permission to do what they did. They did it behind my back. And when they took us to the police station in T.R. they told me I couldn't go in with him (Brendan) because he was going to give them a gruesome story that I wouldn't be able to handle it. And told me to go have a seat on the chair. That is the truth, and they are lying through their teeth. I will not put any name but I'm sure you know who they are. Thank you.
Nexious, reddit-TTM.

Its kinds hard to discuss the case with people who believe the cops don't lie for their own means. But Whatever, i'm not giving up because I've seen bad **** in me life & don't want rapists (G.A.) on the loose or murderers.

#Justice for Teresa

Will you Corpus Vile hunt down the people responsible for letting a known rapist go free in G.A.?
11-18-2016 , 01:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
In the state's responses to Brendan's numerous appeals, they always contend that it was Barb's decision to not be present when they interrogated Brenden. Below is one repeated example of this from their latest emergency motion to the seventh circuit filed this week.
The interviewing investigators asked both Dassey and his mother for permission to speak to him at the police station. SA 14. They had offered to let Dassey’s mother participate in a prior interview, but she declined.
...
The court of appeals also discussed Dassey’s mother, noting that she “declined the offer to accompany Dassey” to a prior interview and that she gave “permission” for the March 1 interview. SA 2.
These claims are derived from the statements of Fassbender and Wiegert. What gets continuously glossed over is Barb's own recount of the events and precisely why she "declined" to join Brendan.
First, on February 27, she was at work and completely unaware that Brendan had given any statements to police until after the session at the school had concluded, which was the first time Wiegert called her. Here is Barb's description of that first interaction, from her 2010 court of appeals court testimony.
NIRIDER: ...the day that Officers Wiegert and Fassbender first questioned Brendan. On that day, what time did the investigators first contact you?
BARB: What day?
NIRIDER: On February 27.
BARB: Um, it was around -- I'd have to say about two o'clock.
NIRIDER: How did they get in touch with you?
BARB: They called me on my cell phone.
NIRIDER: Do you remember which person it was? Which investigator placed the call?
BARB: If I think back, I'm sure it was Mark Wiegert.
NIRIDER: And what did Mark tell you?
BARB: Um, that I should come to school to pick up my son.
NIRIDER: Did he tell you that Brendan had already given them some statement having to do with Teresa Halbach?
BARB: Yes.
NIRIDER: Okay. Before you got that call, Barb, did you know that the officers had been questioning your son already?
BARB: No, I -- no, I didn't.
NIRIDER: How old was Brendan at the time?
BARB: Sixteen.
NIRIDER: What time did you get to Brendan's school that day?
BARB: It was a little after three. I had to work until three o'clock before I could leave.
From there, Barb and Brendan were actually driven to Two Rivers Police Department by Wiegert and Fassbender. Here is Barb's description of what happened during this second interview of that day:
NIRIDER: What happened after you arrived at the police station?
BARB: We went in and they took Brendan into a room down at the police station.
NIRIDER: Did you try to join them?
BARB: I tried, but they more or less told me that it was in my best interest to go wait in the waiting room because they -- that Brendan was going to give them a gruesome story.
NIRIDER: Barb, did the officers tell you that you shouldn't be in the room with Brendan?
BARB: Yes.
NIRIDER: How did you feel about not being able to be in that room?
BARB: Upset.
NIRIDER: So where were you, exactly, while Brendan was being questioned by the police at the Two Rivers station?
BARB: In a waiting room.
NIRIDER: How long were the investigators alone with Brendan?
BARB: I'd say about an hour.
NIRIDER: Could you hear or see what was happening to him?
BARB: No.
Later in the afternoon of February 27, Barb, Brendan and a sibling were taken to Fox Hills Resort under police watch. The investigators alleged that this was for their own protection after Brendan gave the initial statements about Teresa's death (none of which incriminated himself, beyond the eventual claim of seeing body parts in the fire after much police prompting and insistence that he saw something). The truth is that they were sequestered there to allow Fassbender and Tyson additional time to question Brendan in an unrecorded session that began around 10 p.m. (the third such session that day). They wanted to ensure the "integrity" of the investigation by barring them off at this hotel that evening.
Finally, we arrive at the March 1 interview session. Here is Barb's timeline whereby she had a court date relating to her divorce at the same time they sought to question Brendan.
NIRIDER: Okay. Moving on to March 1, 2006, which is the day that Brendan told the police that he had been involved in Teresa's death. Um, when did you first talk to Officers Wiegert and Fassbender on that day, March l?
BARB: It was after I got out of court. Um, court for me was at one. It must have been about 1:30, 2.
NIRIDER: Was there something that morning?
BARB: Oh, yes. Um, they had called me and asked me if they could take Brendan down to the Manitowoc Police -- or the jail and question him some more.
NIRIDER: Okay. And when they asked you that, what did you say?
BARB: I told them, yeah, as long as they bring him back to the high school.
NIRIDER: Okay. Did they invite you to join them and Brendan at the sheriff's office?
BARB: No.
NIRIDER: Barb, did you -- at that time, did you have any idea that the police were going to accuse your son of murder?
BARB: No.
NIRIDER: Would you have responded differently to their request to question Brendan if you had known that they were going to accuse him of murder?
BARB: Yes. I would have told them that I wanted to be there.
...
NIRIDER: Just to do a little cleanup. From March 1, Barb, was there a reason why you couldn't have been there for March l?
BARB: Because I had a court date for my divorce.
NIRIDER: All right.
As an addendum, Barb just summarized much of the same on Facebook, following the seventh circuit's stay of Brendan's release and continued claims by certain parties that Barb had declined to be present when Brendan was interviewed.
To all supporters of Brendan Dassey, I have something to say about the state and their lying. They say that I gave them permission to interview Brendan, well that was a lie. The day they did this at school I was at work for 10 hours, they called me after the fact. They interviewed him for 3 to 4 hours then first contacted me to come get him. I never gave them permission to do what they did. They did it behind my back. And when they took us to the police station in T.R. they told me I couldn't go in with him (Brendan) because he was going to give them a gruesome story that I wouldn't be able to handle it. And told me to go have a seat on the chair. That is the truth, and they are lying through their teeth. I will not put any name but I'm sure you know who they are. Thank you.
Nexious, reddit-TTM.

Its kinds hard to discuss the case with people who believe the cops don't lie for their own means. But Whatever, i'm not giving up because I've seen bad **** in me life & don't want rapists (G.A.) on the loose or murderers.

#Justice for Teresa

Will you Corpus Vile hunt down the people responsible for letting a known rapist go free in G.A.?
Nope. I'm Corpus Vile, not Frank Castle. I simply accept such things and move on.
Guardians aren't required under Wisconsin law for minors, some minors are physically and/or sexually abused by their parents or guardians for example.

I never said that cops don't lie but the reasoning appears to be that cops lie ergo lied here.

Dassey claimed that Avery was sweaty, when he answered the door and DNA was then found on Teresa's key which likely came from Avery's sweat.
He mentions the handcuffs, and Avery admitted purchasing them.
Dassey said Avery threw tires on the fire that they used to dispose of Halbach’s body. Charred parts of her bones, cell phone, PDA, and camera were found intertwined with steel belts from those tires.
he also said that Avery shot Teresa with a .22 and her DNA are found on the bullet in his garage
He said Avery hid Ms Halbach’s car and went under its hood to disable the battery. Avery’s DNA was found on the hood latch.
The cops tell him none of this or how many times Teresa was shot or what side of the head she was shot yet Dassey simply knew these details anyway.
Then he confesses again to his mother which can possibly be admissible as evidence against him
Quote:
Dassey: Yeah, but you might feel bad with... if I say it today.
Janda: Huh?
Dassey: About what all happened.
Janda: Huh?
Dassey: About what all happened.
Janda: What all happened? What are you talking about?
Dassey: About what me and Steven did that day.
Janda: So Steven did do it?
Dassey: Yeah.
Janda: Oh, he makes me so sick.
Dassey: I don't even know how I'm gonna do it in court, though.
Janda: What do you mean?
Dassey: I ain't gonna face him.
Janda: Face who?
Dassey: Steven.
Janda: You know what, Brendan?
Dassey: What?
Janda: He did it. You do what you gotta do. So in those statements, you did all that to her too?
Dassey: Some of it.

Janda: But what about when I got home at five, you were here.
Dassey: Yeah.
Janda: Yeah. When did you go over there?
Dassey: Well, I went over earlier and then came home before you did.
Janda: Why didn't you say something to me then?
Dassey: I don't know, I was too scared.
Wonder why Dassey was scared, since Steve is so lovable and of course railroaded.

Maybe it's because he claimed Avery molested him.
Quote:
Janda: Did he make you do this?
Dassey: Ya.
Janda: Then why didn't you tell him that.
Dassey: Tell him what
Janda: That Steven made you do it. You know he made you do a lot of things.
Dassey: Ya, I told them that. I even told them about Steven touching me and that.
Janda: What do you mean touching you?
Dassey: He would grab me somewhere where I was uncomfortable.
Janda: Brendan I am your mother.
Dassey: Ya.
Janda: Why didn't you come to me? Why didn't you tell me? Was this all before this happened?
Dassey: What do you mean?
Janda: All before this happened, did he touch you before all this stuff happened to you?
Dassey: Ya.
Janda: Why didn't you come to me, because then he would have been gone then and this wouldn't have happened.
Dassey: Ya.
Janda: Yes, and you would still be here with me.
Dassey: Yes, Well you know I did it.
Janda: Huh?
Dassey. You know he always touched us and that.
Janda: I didn't think there. He used to horse around with you guys.
Dassey: Ya, but you remember he would always do stuff to Brian and that.
Janda: What do you mean?
Dassey: Well he would like fake pumping him
Janda: Goofing around?
Brendan: Ya but, like that one time when he was going with what's her name…Jessica’s sister.
Janda: Teresa?
Brendan: Ya. That one day when she was over, Steven and Blaine and Brian and I was downstairs and Steven was touching her and that.
Was he coerced here too and on November 6 when he asks the cops re Teresa being raped?
Look Smacc you seem like a nice well intentioned person. I disagree that Dassey was coerced as there's a standard definition of the term and Brendan Dassey's interrogation in no way remotely qualify as such and I'm quite frankly flabbergasted that there's posters here entertaining this, seriously.
That said I'd rather see how things play out. I don't wish to partake in this thread but will happily debate other issues with you on other threds so I would appreciate it if we just kinda stopped here, no offence or disrespect intended to you personally. His multiple detailed confessions have too much independent corroboration for me to think anything other than he was involved in Ms Halbach's murder and I went into the transcripts leaning toward innocence or coercion but it just doesn't wash, sorry.
And I have seen no evidence, certainly not in the offered examples that constitutes actual coercion. Coercion is not what people decide it is, again there's a standard criteria and definition for and of coercion. Brendan Dassey was not coerced.
I do not find Duffin's ruling sound or his citations aptly comparable to Dassey's situation and have renewed hope he'll be overturned and if not then the Halbach's have my condolences. We'll leave it at that, cheers.

Last edited by corpus vile; 11-18-2016 at 01:08 PM.
11-18-2016 , 01:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
Cheers. I have a thick skin no worries.
When I heard all the hoo-haa regarding Dassey's confession, I'm being completely honest, I went into the interrogation transcripts kinda expecting to see coercion or at the very least a blatantly spoon fed questioning, where they say stuff like

But I saw nothing like that. There were certainly problems with the interview no argument there but to the point where it made the confession unsound? Hardly and certainly not coercion and I honestly can't believe that there's posters itt asserting this. The Birmingham Six were coerced. Ditto the Guildford Four they all had the crap kicked outa them with one of them being subjected to Russian Roulette.
If the actual reports are correct, then imo convicted serial killer William Heirens' confession was coerced as he was given the third degree and threatened with the death penalty if he didn't confess, at 17. he spent the next 63 years in prison and died there. He may have been guilty or may have been a burglar, I don't know. But his confession was coerced imo.
These cases are in no way remotely comparable to Dassey's and neither are the examples Duffin cites imo, three of which the court actually ruled in the state's favour, despite them being treated far more harshly than Dassey.

Dasey's sentence does not sit right with me. He was 16 at the time, seemed to show remorse and a life without parole for 41 year sentence makes a mockery out of the concept of rehabilitation, which I feel is possible with Dassey.
But I also think he's factually guilty after reading his absolutely non coerced confession- again regardless of the spin I've seen here- as it's corroborated too much and he often volunteers info that the cops don't mention.
So while I may feel some degree of sympathy towards him, up to a point, I don't allow my personal feelings to disregard evidence or dissipate the seriousness of crimes, especially crimes like rape and murder.
Teresa is the one people should be sticking up for, not her rapist and accomplice in murdering her.
Just saddens me that people run with the feelgood innocence narrative simply because they see a biased medium and can't be bothered studying the actual confession themselves and they haven't studied it as they wouldn't be falsely asserting coercion if they did.

We're living in very dodgy times when our perceptions can be shaped by biased mediums and now innocence or guilt is apparently decided via documentaries and social media to the point where they arguably play a part in influencing irresponsible judges who overturn convictions via inconsistent reports. Any one of us or our loved ones can be victims and any one of us could be going through the same nightmare as the Halbach family and others. Seeing our daughter and sister's killers being martyred in the court of public opinion, which I guarantee will happen if Dassey walks. Even if his conviction is vacated, it'll be akin to an actual exoneration in the court of public opinion. Feelgood comments on wrestlemania will abound on Twitter and social media and Dassey will be referred to as the "poor kid", despite being 26 now.
And our society will become less safe as a result due to overturned convictions of factually guilty offenders.
The truth is taking a beating when now coercion can mean whatever you wish it to mean. Cops acting hardass will be intimidating and when they take a softly softly approach like they did with Dassey, well that's coercion too, they lulled him into a false sense of security you see.
Just saddens me. Yet at the same time hardens my resolve all the more.
To those who wish me banned. Right now Dassey is going nowhere and I will never ever stop fighting Innocence Fraud, regardless of your insults or threats of banning. Because the truth will not be silenced and it speaks volumes that none of the posters who have responded to me can defend the truth or in this case the best truth they're able to think, when it comes to evidence of actual coercion, just stuff they personally really feel is coercion.

Again I will [never stop highlighting the truth and exposing innocent fraud. My eyes were opened nine years ago and they will never be closed again, of that you can all rest assured and I will never stop speaking on behalf of victims either regardless of the consequences. This is a gambling forum so you all can bet on that.
The wall of text begins...
11-18-2016 , 01:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrChesspain Making a Murderer
You should see his work in the Amanda Knox thread.
You mean the thread where you made fun of the murder victim with your scummy little joke about how you were moved"like Meredith was moved",knowing as you did that someone returned later to move Meredith's body and pose her? You murderer groupies really can't help yourself with your victim denigration can you? You sick pos.
11-18-2016 , 01:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
Don't worry effie I'm done with your rapist friendly echo chamber thread. Your rapist is going nowhere at present and Teresa Halbach won't be seeing any Wrestlemanias, thanks partially to Brendan Dassey who Teresa pleaded with to do the right thing. He slit her throat in return. Remember that when you're cheerleading for him. I'll be going through this thread solely to catch 5ive's posts from February and if I find them compelling I'll probably comment but don't worry, I'm done here, it's all okay now.
I'll leave you with some questions though.
Why did Dassey think as early as Nov 06 that the cops felt that Avery had raped Teresa? Why bring up rape outa nowhere unless he knew something?


Why does Dassey repeat some of the same lines as Avery re Teresa leaving?
Dassey couldn't have been home until 3:45- 4:00 as that's when his bus dropped him off, yet according to Avery Teresa left at 2:35 or so. And for no apparent reason also mentions that either the cops or the victim's family set up good ole Steve. So am I wrong to suspect that Avery coached Dassey on what to say?
You guys will believe what you wish to believe. I'll believe what I believe based on analysing and interpreting the evidence and data.
LOL.

[ ] rapist
11-18-2016 , 01:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
DNA was then found on Teresa's key which likely came from Avery's sweat.
Oh man. Ultimate fail.

It's now EXTREMELY clear that you have never had any intention of learning facts about this case and then drawing a rational conclusion. You are a LE shill or have some other motive here.

Last edited by lostinthesaus; 11-18-2016 at 01:28 PM.
11-18-2016 , 01:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostinthesaus Making a Murderer
As I've stated many times, I think Tadych is main perp as this clearly required someone who knows and has access to about a 10 mile radius of the land in both day and night, but Patterson and Vogel (and possibly a few others no one knows of) are masterminds. It wasn't some random act ST (or some perp) pulled off.
Cool lost, I assumed you had put CV on ignore & would not respond to him, my apologies bud.
11-18-2016 , 01:32 PM
Quote:
He said Avery hid Ms Halbach’s car and went under its hood to disable the battery. Avery’s DNA was found on the hood latch.
The cops tell him none of this or how many times Teresa was shot or what side of the head she was shot yet Dassey simply knew these details anyway.
You sure about this?
11-18-2016 , 01:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lostinthesaus Making a Murderer
Oh man. Ultimate fail.

It's now EXTREMELY clear that you have never had any intention of learning facts about this case and then drawing a rational conclusion. You are a LE shill or have some other motive here.
Nope Avery's DNA was found on Teresa's key and I'm not interested in your conspiralunacy re shills and in response to your other post, Dassey is a rapist unless you want me to get all pedantic in which case he's a second degree sex criminal and mutilator of a corpse, and party to murder see his conviction for details.
Now stop responding to me you nutjob. I won't be responding to any more replies to me from anyone itt. I don't wish to partake in it as I've explained several times now.

@Smacc- from reading the transcripts the cops do not provide these specific details I mentioned to Dassey. I'd need to go backover them again butif I'm wrong please cite and while I won't be responding any more itt, I will apologise in advance and retract the "none of these things" part of my comment thanks, provided these specific details are cited and the cops asking who shot Teresa in the head won't count, sorry.
Cheers guys.
11-18-2016 , 01:48 PM
I guess some people don't want to hear the truth....
11-18-2016 , 01:52 PM
The funny thing is CC said things to a teacher and the cops lied about it and then used her sorry ass to get to Brendan, with more lies..
CC statement to her councillor is a good place to start.
11-18-2016 , 02:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
I guess some people don't want to hear the truth....
Yeah and I guess other people aren't able to cite what was asked of them which is odd considering that the truth is easy to defend...
Ah. So now the cousin lied AND the cops lied to go with the multiple counts of coercion huh?
Gee, Brendan sure is unlucky isn't he, I mean what are the odds eh? (and of course let's not forget the contamination against his fellow railroadee Steve or Stevie to his many friends, as well as the jury misconduct and frame up job which occurred in symmetry with poor Brendan's woes... If I were more cynical I'd say it almost looks like both are gaf.)
Now seriously- Please stop responding to me itt, again no offence mate. Thanks.
11-18-2016 , 02:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
It ls not abnormal. But what is normal that it is a much higher % that a family/friend is the muderer than a random stranger. That is what a professional
Investigative unit balances. They watch the search party with an apprehensive eye. Everyone of them is a suspect.
this was before it was a murder investigation though. She was just missing at this point. And I also don't think they normally watch the search part that close, especially when they find her vehicle on his property.
11-18-2016 , 02:13 PM
I really don't understand everyone's problem with police focusing their search on the place she was last seen, especially after finding her vehicle there with blood inside vs focusing on her friends.

You realize how many murderers would get found not guilty due to lack of evidence this way?
11-18-2016 , 04:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
Smacc thanks again and I will look for his posts.
As for the Steve Moore blog...when you say Steve Moore, do you by any chance mean a certain ex FBI agent? Wife name Michelle?
Because if it is the one I'm personally thinking of then I'm going to have to respectfully decline for reasons which... I really don't wish to specify Suffice to say, I simply don't regard former special agent Moore as a reliable source or a very nice person, again for reasons I'm not touching with a 10 foot pole.
I would suffer confirmation bias wrt to Moore seriously . However I do appreciate your intention and you strike me as a genuine guy, and again cheers
Did he arrest you? Stop trolling like you know anything. You writing is atrocious and your reasoning is infantile.
11-18-2016 , 05:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
Had this convo with you before and am not rehashing it with you again as it was already thoroughly covered the first time around. Separate thread on Meredith's case feel free to comment some more on it there. You don't know what coercion means as I told you before and again am not rehashing, except to reiterate that I don't agree with you on your earlier belief on another forum that contamination combined with police corruption combined with multiple occurrences of coercion combined with jury misconduct combined with prosecution misconduct combined with three sets of defence incompetence all occurred parallel and in perfect symmetry with each other and that this has a higher probative value than evidence indicating guilt, due to guilt.
I know what coercion means with regard to this legal context. Duffy knows.

If you want to claim lawyers and judges and law professors don't know what they are talking about, but you do, that is your prerogative. But that comes off sounding like a creationist or a flat earther who prefers a world of fantasy rather than one where facts matter.

Other than these coerced statements (I'm using the legal definition cited above, not your idiosyncratic one), there is no evidence of Brendan being the least bit involved in any crimes against Teresa.

Quote:
I have found you dishonest in the past and have no desire to engage with you further due to this. Feel free to have the last word. Duffin's cited cases aren't apt imo and he may be breaking new legal ground by saying that the cops treated Dassey too nicely, giving him a false sense of security. I have hopes he'll be overturned.
I'm used to trolls calling me 'dishonest', and to me such reckless accusations merely indicate you'd rather go for the ad hominem than discuss issues.
11-18-2016 , 05:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
I guess some people don't want to hear the truth....
Just wait - you'll be accused of being a liar next.
11-18-2016 , 05:35 PM
Quote:
I don't wish to partake in it as I've explained several times now
Quitting is easy. I do it everyday.
11-18-2016 , 05:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
I really don't understand everyone's problem with police ONLY focusing their search on the place she was last seen, especially after finding her vehicle there with blood inside vs focusing on her friends.

You realize how many murderers would get found not guilty due to lack of evidence this way?
See what I did there?

      
m