CV will feel certainly find an echo chamber more to his liking.

We've cited everything you've asked for multiple times over the last year. It's all ITT. No one is going to do the work for you.

Have fun.

is it?

WI detective Phil Charley can't remember who told him to destroy all the DNA evidence in a rape case in which the defendant had already been chosen.

Neighboring county cops frame another man for murder.

Prosecutors retrying a 1980 murder charge against Ralph Armstrong in Madison, WI cannot use the results of a DNA test on a key piece of evidence because the results were obtained in violation of a court order, a judge has ruled. Dane County Circuit Judge Daniel Moeser said the state acted in "bad faith" when it went ahead with the testing without notifying the defense and, in the process, used up the material - in violation of the judge's order.

Manitowoc County circa 1991: Here's a case involving altered transcripts so the DAs could get a conviction.

Wisconsin DA's caught attempting to win convictions against people who have done nothing wrong. Man's own children coerced into testifying against him.

Veteran WI prosecutor found breaking numerous laws and codes of conduct, falsely imprisoning multiple innocent people, abusing power and lying in affidavits to cover his own mistakes

^^ all in Wis BTW.

Now you're getting it.

Yeah he's very unlucky. SA more so (this happened to him TWICE). I like how easy it was to dismiss the astronomical odds of SA committing a murder the day a law in his name is supposed to pass to PREVENT people for being wrongfully imprisoned and then ultimately re-imprisoned by the very same people who did him dirty the first time and stood to lose everything because of their original frame-job. Extremely easy to see exactly how and why LE would do such a thing. Unfortunately for you, it's extremely difficult to understand how and why Steven Avery would rape, murder and mutilate someone on a whim 1 week before the 2 top players (Vogel and Patterson) were to be deposed.

And I'm the nutjob?

Well you know that's not what happened and even if it was, the point I'm making still stands. We should expect police to focus their attention on the Avery's in this situation. That's where she was last known to be and her vehicle was found there.. With blood in the car. If they kept looking at that property and didn't find human remains I'm sure attention would be dedicated elsewhere.

I don't KNOW that's not what happened. In fact it very clearly is exactly what happened and is one of the foundations of KZs efforts to free or get a retrial for SA.

smacc laid out a trove of ways LE tunnel visioned Avery way before the location of the RAV-4 was miraculously inserted by God into Pam's head.

In some circumstances it can be safely assumed that if a certain event had occurred, evidence of it could be discovered by qualified investigators. In such circumstances it is perfectly reasonable to take the absence of proof of its occurrence as positive proof of its non-occurrence.

— Copi, Introduction to Logic (1953), p. 95

We should be expecting police not to be framing innocent people they just happen to have a grudges against - as it is pretty clear the Manitowoc police did to Steven Avery in the 1985 case that let the actual perpetrator go on to attack several more women.

This same organization had every reason in the world to frame him again when his multi-million dollar lawsuit threatened to expose them to financial an criminal liability.

Based on what I know about the case it would appear that Teresa was not murdered at the Avery Salvage Yard and that during the time frame in question Steven Avery was at the salvage yard - and since he can't be at two places at once it seems most likely he had nothing to do with any crimes against Teresa Halbach.

Yes, this seems like common sense. Not even sure why this needs to be repeated, except that some folks are very willing to stand by the old saw 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence' - the kind of magical thinking that one can use to argue for the existence of pixies in the garden and dragons in the garage.

You seem to be using speculation to connect 2 pieces of evidence without any real basis. Dassey saying Avery was sweaty seems fairly meaningless - he could be a sweaty guy in general, he could have just come in from work, he could have been browsing his collection of porn... To connect that to the DNA on the key chain seems like you are trying too hard to have Dassey say something relevant.

Can you remind me of the significance of the handcuffs, I honestly can't remember. Is there any evidence they were used in the crime other than Dassey saying so?

It was a junk yard. The vast majority of fires there probably had tires and auto parts in them. If Dassey was innocent and guessing, it would basically be the answer you would expect.

For me, this is one of the most damning parts of the interrogation. The way they got this statement was ridiculous. If you don't think so, we just won't agree but I think you are in a tiny minority if you think it was reasonable and the official police interrogation guidelines seem to agree with me. There is simply no doubt that the Police disclosed this information to him before he ever said it - it is there in black and white. Its been quoted many times in this thread.

No, he never said what Avery did under the hood, he said he didn't know. Just as with the comical "ill just come out and say it" process they went through to get the confession re Avery shooting her in the head, they essentially have a guessing witness and their technique is to keep going and just stop when they get the "right" answer and if they don't get the right answer with open ended questions, they suggest specific information which Dassey then agrees with. It is completely arbitrary and yet again they are the first to provide the information which Dassey then "agrees" with. Starting page 16 of Duffin's report:

When they ask general answers, "what did he do" they get a stream of guesses until he says he doesn't know. As soon as they suggest something specific, Dassey grabs it and agrees. The rules of the game had been laid out clearly right from the start by repetition and training and Dassey was playing by what he thought were the rules. This same process was used again and again to get every piece of significant information.

Again, Im being honest when I say that if you have read the transcripts (and I believe you have) and you don't see how the detectives are providing information for Brendan to agree with after his guesses fail to get there, we simply won't agree.

The judge used the correct definition of coerced and found the confession to be coerced. If you disagree the onus is on you to say specifically what you disagree with regarding his reasoning.

Yes, and the judge used it. You need to explain what he did wrong if you wish to make the statement above.

The reason I made the joke before re 404 is that you seem uncharacteristically angry recently whilst I have always found you to be quite calm, even when you strongly disagree with someone. I was actually so surprised that I decided to read the whole 91 page judgement today.

I just flung this out there to see who would bite.....

If I'm responding to you Corpus Vile i'll say so, and to think that I was getting along with yourself then the sudden change of heart is disheartening. My bad I thought you wanted to be reasonable.

So, what should they have done that they didn't? Stop the friends and family from looking for her? They spent time with all her friends, family and the zipplers before her vehicle was found. So yes, others were investigated.

Also, as has already been pointed out to you. Christians always attribute good things in their life to god, if you don't believe in god that's irrelevant to why someone else who does may think god is responsible for good fortune. So Pam saying "I think it was god" is a pretty common response from theists.

Yes, like if there were no rav 4 human remains, bullet and key.. Lol.

So how is it the cops can get a 'true' confession from Dassey when they lie and tell him the bus driver and all the students on it saw Teresa?

It's pretty clear when these sleaze ball cops realize they can get Dassey to say anything they want, no matter how false and impossible, they struck gold.

Really, the folks who are so pro-Law-n-Order they're OK with a District Attorney like Ken Kratz who uses his position to rape victims of domestic violence also seem to be OK with dishonest cops who use fraudulent means to coerce a false and impossible confession from a developmentally challenged teen.

Don't you think that if you were investigating a missing person, the fact that someone had deleted some of said missing person's voice mails would be something you'd want to look into?

I dunno, seems like something I'd want to look into.

Did Avery delete her emails iyo?

It is like he took a 100 question test and guessed 25% correctly and the police revise it to a 25 question test with 100% accuracy.

That wasn't a false confession or a true confession. Utter nonsense and complete garbage.

I really don't know why the police didn't just have him admit to being involved in other unsolved crimes while they had the chance. They could have closed a slew of other cases. Give him hundreds of forms to say he is sorry or not sorry.

Involving an ex-boyfriend?

Nothing to see folks. We have our suspect in custody.

Okay f*** this I told you I didn't wish to take part in this thread yet here you are insisting on trying to drag me back so let's do this why not

No you jhaven't, stop lying, you've cited what you personally regard as coercion and then it magically becomes so and that's not how it works, there's a standard definition of coercion which I linked so provide examples of the standard definition of coercion wrt how it applied to Dassey. Wow me.





Yes it is hence the reason I'm not interested in your spammed irrelevant links, but only interested in you can provide evidence of Dassey being coerced, a plausible explanation for his confessing to his mother, a plausible explanation for why he suddenly brought up the topic of rape outa nowhere on Nov 6 and a plausible explanation for how his confession is corroborated after being used to partially support a warrant against Avery. Yes the truth is easy to defend so defend it and knock my socks off here by providing what I've asked for several times over now only to be told to look on the thread.
Can you defend the truth or not? Provide this evidence, otherwise not interested in your waffle.








So poor Stevie was framed is that is? Provide evidence of this, otherwise I'm dismissing your speculation for being speculation.

Avery wasn't framed the first time around he was wrongfully convicted but not due to a frame up and some of those 18 years were serving concurrently for a separate crime. This is his FOURTH stint behind bars at prsent. Provide evidence he was framed for the rpe and indeed Ms Halbach's murder, otherwise not interested in your conspiracy theory.
I get that you feel that the boatload of evidence which convicted Avery and multiple trial and appellate courts can be rejected for both, while innuendo is sufficent for the cops, Tadych, the victim's brother and everyone else but good ole Stevie and Bren and these exact same tropes bored me in two other murder cases and I find them no less boring here. So I'm dismissing this unless you provide evidence to back it up and I gotta tell ya Lost, you're doing an absolutely piss poor job so far but I have hopes you'll break a trend.

Unfortunately for you, that doesn't trump the s***-ton of evidence that convicted him, which I'm not rehashing as it's already been covered by the court.

Oh God yeah.
Lermme break this down. Either:
A) LE framed Avery meaning they murdered Teresa
B) Some other killer murdered Terea and LE SIMULTANEOUSLY framed Avery.
C) Avery did it.

A & B are almost impossible.
A certain Mr Occam points at C.

Now I'm not in the slightest bit interested in Avery at present as right now he's where he so richly belongs and is gonna die in prison and then be buried in the prison cemetery. IF (and that is one bigass "if" btw) Zellner provides actual exonerating evidence- actual proof of factual innocence (instead of merely um, tweeting about this tsunami of exonerating evidence) I will happily place my hand on my heart, look you square in the eye and say "Dude, you were right and I was wrong. We didn't listen!" with zero problems at all as I do not wish for a miscarriage of justice here but right now I'm not interested in the serial offending little scumbag but on,y if you can provide evidence that Dassey was coerced. So provide it not the proof by assertion bollocks you're giving me, so... can you do so? Or not?

[QUOTE=golfnutt;51220381] Who, G-moo?Heh, no nor would it ever have been possible for him to do so, especially now, put out to pasture slob that he is. He couldn't even hold his campus security guard gig as they fired his ass, lol.
His wife otoh (who btw thinks that "Italian" women are jealous of "white" women, a fact I mention for your passing interest) was nearly arrested for physically assaulting a prosecutor in court on another murder case.

Oh I'm not, explain how asking for evidence to back up certain false claims is trolling thanks.

By that rationale, I take it you think Steve Moore's writing isn't atrocious and his reasoning isn't infantile?? Guess what answer I'm hoping you give in this regard.

If you think that lying murderer shill clown's burblings deserve so much as a nanosecond of merit then you're clearly a few rounds short of a tournament there golf and I really really cannot emphasise this enough.

FRAMED I tellz ya.Lmao.

Well then in that case you have my apologies smacc, I thought you were responding to me, but my bad and my apologies again.

With respect I don't think I'm being unreasonable. I don't think it's unreasonable or unfair to ask for evidence of coercion, I do find it a bit weird how rather than simply cite the transcript pages where threats intimidation, demands, duress, actual fuhreelz false promises of leniency such as Weigert/Fassbender promising that they'll use their influence to see that Dassey doesn't serve a day in prison, that's a real viable example of a false promise of leniency), I'm either given invalid examples, told that it's been covered itt and to go look for it and other things which should be simple to cite. Dassey is told right from the start that no promises can be made for him (Fassbender iirc but would need to re-check) he was offered a lawyer, he has explained to him what an admission against interest is, allowed breaks, given food and drink, allowed to use the bathroom. This in no way qualifies as coercion.
I've read Duffin's interpretation of what he considers a coerced involuntary confession and again find him irresponsible. Being told right off the bat that no promises can be made doesn't equate to a false promise of leniency, nor does being told that the cops will stand behind a suspect no matter what he did as he's telling the truth and being a good guy, certainly it doesn't equate to a false promise of no prison time and it's dishonest to say it does,sorry.

I want evidence of the standard definition of coercion not passages from the Gospel According to Duffin who appears to really dig Netflix docs, sorry.

I was tired last night and am gonna find the posts that were mentioned but again I find it strange that nobody can cite the pages where any threats intimidation etc occurred because again the truth is easy to defend and if I were presented with actual evidence of coercion, I'd hold my water.
But I haven't been. And with respect that doesn't say much for the coercion claims.

Anyway again you have my apologies for inferring wrongly and I assure you I'll be reasonable, just gimme the actual evidence of real coercion.

You need to also explain why Dassey confessed multiple times including after incarceration to his mother. I know he was encouraged to ring his mam by the cops but don't tell me with a straight face that this equates to another instance of coercion.
Explain why Dassey mentioned the rape on November 6 and explain how his confession contains details that the cops never provided, again these are not unreasonable requests to make mate.
If Dassey is so innocent then my questions should be easy to answer, in fairness and by that I mean answer plausibly, jot the nutty crap I just got from list, for example.
So can you? Provide the explanations and evidence?

I tried to warn you.

Yes, if "looking for her" means destroying and tampering with evidence that would lead to information about her whereabouts such as voicemails and phone records. No one should have to explain this to you.

Qué?

Cool story about Christians n' that. But back here in the land of logic, common sense and probabilities, it doesn't fly.

Does any of this point to rape? Does any of this point to Dassey?

LOL what?

Get it together man, you are all over the map.

I'm quite sure the reference is to the should-have-been suspect who admitted to hacking her cell phone account.