And where exactly did you hear that?

They didn't frame him the first time. They were just wrong, even if you want to call it tunnel vision that isn't the same thing as planting evidence.

Also again, the people accused of wrong doing in his rape case did not work for the sheriffs department during the murder investigation. They were both retired.

Lol we have hard proof they fabricated the first case and you still deny. The portrait they made by tracing avery shot doesn't qualify in your mind?

You can believe they traced his mug shot all you want, there isn't really any evidence of this and I don't even think his mug shot looks that much like the portrait. The man in the portraits hair is more curly and he has a larger nose. They resemble each other enough that it could be the same guy but not enough that you can say its copied and "traced" is quite the stretch.

Again, none of this matters because the guys you are implicating as crooked or whatever didn't work for manitwoc during the TH case. They were retired.

No you don't.

He wasn't wrongfully convicted so it's all good

No, this gets down to some people thinking that Avery being sloppy enough to get got is somehow exculpatory evidence of innocence. It isn't just means he was sloppy enough to get caught.Prisons are full of such people.

eh, the one scumbag was still convinced it was avery even after the dna evidence proved he was not the rapist.

Yeah I get that you think that those who agree with multiple court of laws verdicts after the evidence scrutinized and defence arguments heard are idiots, while those who buy into baseless conspiracy theories with zero evidence to support them...aren't. It's why Avery's groupies, like the groupies of other murderers and sex offenders are considered akin to a weirdo cult who use weird lexicons for unbelievers such as "guilter".

No need was covered by multiple courts so doesn't need to be rehashed on the internetz again for your personal satisfaction and you need to accept that and deal with it. The onus is upon you to prove innocence or frame up not for me or anyone else to prove guilt again.


Sure I can- Avery and Dassey murdered Teresa Halbach, see how easy that was?

Served along with crimes he did commit regardless of your revisionist spin. I strongly believe that had not Avery had have been wrongfully convicted he'd have ended up in prison anyway, low life scumbag that he is.

Oh and just to clarify, nobody actually said Teresa was shot "through" the head so Zellner's objection is moot, like much of the rest of her brief.

Her motion is imo a face saving exercise.She knows the evidence is overwhelming against Avery and hasn't a hope of a retrial. This is her "escape hatch" so she can look good in the court of public opinion, as in the segments of the public who really dig Netflix. This is purely to pander to the conspiracy theories of people like you, basically, just in time for Making a Murderer 2. Expect future tweets bemoaning how the courts are now covering up The Horrible Truth by rejecting her frivolous crap.
She is reprehensible attacking Teresa Halbach's reputation and intimating she put herself at risk, when she can't even defend herself thanks to your two icons brutally and callously snuffing her young life out. She is reprehensible smearing a man for whom no evidence exists to even charge, but again sleazy innuendo & scurrilous accusation is perfectly okay for him while multiple courts can be rejected for your special little guys. Shame on her and shame on you too and anyone else who engages in such despicable double standards.

There is no evidence - zero zilch nada niente bupkas- that he was framed for the rape. He was simply wrongfully convicted for it. Big difference between the two. By that I mean "objectively". I say this because some of Avery's fans seem to conflate their personal beliefs & criteria for evidence with actual facts and the standard criteria for evidence. There's none for a frame up in either case.

Facts mean nothing to Avery's groupies they simply want him free. They only care about getting the outcome they desire, even if they can't support it.

There. Fixed it for you. (Go on- insist they're independent )

Does he have convictions for unethical misconduct during either Avery or Dassey's trial? That question's rhetorical btw as I already know the answer. Not interested in your personal attacks on Kratz but only if you can cite charges for misconduct he engaged in during SA/BD due process.
There's nothing strong overall in 1200 pages of face saving fairy tales, it's just KZ flinging a great big steaming pile of bs at the wall hoping some will stick. Her entire opening is some absence of evidence equating to evidence of absence bs, combined with the argument that Avery being dumb and sloppy enough to get caught is somehow evidence for innocence. It isn't. Just means KZ knows she'll be rejected hence her bs arguments and 1200 page length, which will make her rejection all the more "suspicious" as in "suspicious" to Avery's fanclub, but nobody else.

Still- brain fingerprinting though.

Correct and doesn't prove their innocence and doesn't prove Teresa's ex is the murderer. Just a bunch of unsubstantiated claims.

So was I but I suspect my tears of laughter was for much different reasons than your tears. I guess I should actually thank KZ as she's pretty much ensured with her brief that Avery's gonna die in prison even if he lives to 120.
Oh and I wouldn't advise a drinking game based on the amount of times Zellner uses the word "idiot" btw...

She needs to back up her accusation with proof. She hasn't provided any evidence to cast doubt You merely believe she does which is one of the many, many (many) reasons nobody with an IQ exceeding double digits takes Avery's fan club remotely seriously.

You and the rest of Avery's groupies seem to think that because courts get it wrong and wrongful convictions occur, that's what therefore happened here, while refusing to cite any objectively valid flaws in their due process. You simply whinge about stuff you personally find wrong but which aren't required or are permitted by courts. You constantly raise police procedural, due process and burden of proof bars for your special little guys and then tell others with absolutely no sense of irony that they don't know how courts work.
So I'm not interested in your conpiralunacy or your shameful double standards and especially not your opinion on me as I'm only an a-hole to murderer groupies who think it's okay for lawyers to attack the reputation of completely innocent murder victims and who deem innuendo a-okay for those they consider alternative suspects while rejecting multiple court verdicts for low life rapists and murderers.
I'm actually quite a nice civil bloke to those interested in actual honest discourse, aka not you or your ilk.
Yes I get that you think that those who agree with the established facts of courts of law, after the defence have had their shot at refuting the evidence, while those who believe in baseless, logistically next to impossible complex conspiracies are the epitome of reason and logic. It's reason #8,965 why you supporters of various killers and sex offenders are considered akin to a somewhat sinister and decidedly creepy ass cult. Onus on Kz to prove (regardless of your assertions otherwise and props on the "she's not a prosecutor!" gem btw, that made my morning) and you supporters to prove in terms of debate, not on anyone else to prove guilt again in the court of public opinion.

So hopefully that clears things up for you.

She doesn't need to prove RH is the killer. She need to prove he is a suspect and that LE fail to investigate him.

No need to spam the thread absolutely no one want to read your posts.

Can I ask you something? Do you think the people who imply the parents of the sandy hook children were responsible for the sandy hook massacre are scumbags?

Zellner's "new evidence" is "brain fingerprinting"!!! BAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHA

But seriously, her motion is a mess, especially considering she couldn't back up her previous claims that she had proof of Steven's innocence and would prove who the real killer was. Steven will die in prison.

Also, it's a fact that the State was offering Brendan a 15-year plea bargain, and that Brendan's defense attorney Mark Fremgen was advising Brendan to take the deal.

Here's an email from Kratz to the judge on Jan 24, 2007 providing some context: http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...ed.pdf#page=28

By the same logic I see others use in the thread shouldn't we ask..

"If the state was committing this conspiracy theory to frame avery, why not offer BD immunity to testify against him? Why only offer him 15 years?"

So the same level of smearing and lack of evidence was acceptable for Avery's first wrongfully convicted charge but such 'scurrilous accusations' are not OK for others? Makes sense in Manitowoc I guess

1. I think almost everyone agrees that the 1985 case was handled poorly and unacceptable.

2. In the 1985 case, there was at least evidence that Steven committed that crime with the victim identifying him as the culprit. There is literally no evidence pointing to Ryan committing the crimes Zellner has accused him of. In fact, her theory ignores Ryan's alibi where he was with numerous other people at the time he was supposedly framing Steven Avery.

3. http://www.fallacyfiles.org/twowrong.html

As we know people can tell all kinds of lies about someone.

After all, Steven was falsely accused of rape and went to prison for it.

Steven showed integrity by not 'confessing' to a crime he did not commit so that he could leave prison early.

Just like Brendan could have falsely 'confessed' to the murder and gotten a deal from prosecutors.

Like I said - telling the truth even when you're freedom is at stake is integrity.

You clearly know nothing about this case to make such statements as you do.

About the bolded bit - I think Brendan told the truth in his very first statement to police: that he never even saw Teresa on the day she came to the salvage yard.

But the police were able to pressure Brendan to lie, and they used that to create the whole scenario.

But I do agree that the whole story concocted by police and taught to Brendan so he could repeat it for them is just garbage.

I'm glad Brendan came clean and told the truth about the so-called 'confession', that it was a sham orchestrated by police interrogators.

So you think he lied under oath? Got it.