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

06-26-2017 , 04:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
False, and what stalking are you talking about? Me being involved in a group that had family members and friends of hers in the group? That isn't stalking. I didn't go looking for them, it just so happens that all her family and friends agree with the side of the fence I landed on, IE: Avery is guilty.

And the only connection I have to Griesbach (or anyone else involved with the case) is our similar opinion on Steven's guilt and Brendan's involvement.

It should come as no surprise that the same people who cling to fantastical theories of Steven's innocence and a corrupt investigation/trial have also conjured up fantastical theories to explain why others disagree with them.
06-26-2017 , 08:25 AM
Sure, posting whenever he releases a book or release a terrible article is totally a coincidence .

That guy is a nobody, he isnt even involved in the case and has absolutely no relevance.
06-26-2017 , 09:08 AM
Well, the state has until the end of the day to decide if they are going to appeal the 7th Circuit Court's decision upholding the defense of Brendan Dassey.

http://fox6now.com/2017/06/23/brenda...ay-to-respond/
06-26-2017 , 12:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
And the only connection I have to Griesbach (or anyone else involved with the case) is our similar opinion on Steven's guilt and Brendan's involvement.

It should come as no surprise that the same people who cling to fantastical theories of Steven's innocence and a corrupt investigation/trial have also conjured up fantastical theories to explain why others disagree with them.
I think your the one clinging to fantastical theories.
Of course it was corrupt, anyone with any bit of brain can see that.
They find her keys after how many searches of that tiny room?
Brendan says they slit her neck and tied her to the bed, yet not one drop of blood on the filthy mattress or room which hasn't been cleaned in how long?
The only evidence are ones that can be easily planted.
Not a thing in the house or DNA on the bullet or garage and yes is should be dismissed(as it would be in any other case) as it was contaminated but hey yer all buddy buddy with the family so ye want heads rather than fair trials.
Hopefully they both get released due to the BS investigation and they look into maybe her BF/family as well.
06-26-2017 , 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thesh0rtstack Making a Murderer
but hey yer all buddy buddy with the family so ye want heads rather than fair trials.
It should come as no surprise that the same people who cling to fantastical theories of Steven's innocence and a corrupt investigation/trial have also conjured up fantastical theories to explain why others disagree with them.

They found her key on the second search of Steven's room. They found her DNA on a bullet fired from Steven's rifle. Brendan said a lot of things; you don't have to listen to Brendan to find Steven guilty - the jury didn't.
06-26-2017 , 02:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
1) I think youre using mentally challenged loosely

2) I don't think he was coerced, Ive posted a lot on this but there are several details he knew about the crime that he shouldn't have. The most telling is knowing where she was shot. He was also given false positives to which he passed. It was suggested to him that TH has a tattoo on her stomach (she doesn't) and he said he doesn't remember one, he was even pressed further "you sure, you sure you don't remember the tatto" etc. And he still said that he didn't remember her having a tatto.

3) This is a false equivalency. BD told police he helped rape and torture a woman. What KK did was tell the press that manitwoc is only going to be involved in the investigation as support, which was mostly true. Most of the efforts in the case were conducted by the neighboring county. Lenk and Colborn were there because they were evidence techs which was lacking in both counties.
You are too attached to SA being guilty then take the view of the overall justice system and impartiality. The symbol of our judicial system is that justice is blind.

There is nothing I can do for you if you think it is ok for an agency to be actively involved that said they would not be. I don't care for what crime and where. It compromises the entire investigation and outcome.

The 'confession' was an utter joke. Just go to the part about 'what happened to her head'. The most important thing that the investigators said because only they knew that information. After 10 random guesses, they gave up and told him the answer.
06-26-2017 , 02:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
It should come as no surprise that the same people who cling to fantastical theories of Steven's innocence and a corrupt investigation/trial have also conjured up fantastical theories to explain why others disagree with them.
This is common with conspiracy theorists. Anyone who doesn't agree with them is somehow a sheep because they have a bias or is in on the conspiracy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
They found her key on the second search of Steven's room. They found her DNA on a bullet fired from Steven's rifle. Brendan said a lot of things; you don't have to listen to Brendan to find Steven guilty - the jury didn't.
Also, correct me if I am wrong but wasn't it the one prolonged search of his trailer that had to be split up into two days because of the weather when they searched his room "twice" ?
06-26-2017 , 02:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
You are too attached to SA being guilty then take the view of the overall justice system and impartiality. The symbol of our judicial system is that justice is blind.

There is nothing I can do for you if you think it is ok for an agency to be actively involved that said they would not be. I don't care for what crime and where. It compromises the entire investigation and outcome.

The 'confession' was an utter joke. Just go to the part about 'what happened to her head'. The most important thing that the investigators said because only they knew that information. After 10 random guesses, they gave up and told him the answer.
1)Nope, I thought he was innocent after the first watch of the series. I was just as floored as you probably are now but I reserved judgement until I did a bit more research.

2) I didn't say it was "right" in the moral sense. Just in the legal sense there is no grounds to dismiss this evidence. They had not legal obligation to not participate in the search and furthermore he would have been convicted without the bullet or the keys. The car containing his blood would have been enough but they had much much more than that.

3) I don't agree it was a joke, He said SA shot her well before they asked questions about her head. he did however guess where she was shot on his own which later evidence confirmed.
06-26-2017 , 02:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Also, correct me if I am wrong but wasn't it the one prolonged search of his trailer that had to be split up into two days because of the weather when they searched his room "twice" ?
That's true, it can technically be considered one search. I'm considering it two searches, because I think it's how most would view it.
06-26-2017 , 03:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
1)Nope, I thought he was innocent after the first watch of the series. I was just as floored as you probably are now but I reserved judgement until I did a bit more research.

2) I didn't say it was "right" in the moral sense. Just in the legal sense there is no grounds to dismiss this evidence. They had not legal obligation to not participate in the search and furthermore he would have been convicted without the bullet or the keys. The car containing his blood would have been enough but they had much much more than that.

3) I don't agree it was a joke, He said SA shot her well before they asked questions about her head. he did however guess where she was shot on his own which later evidence confirmed.
You still keep writing about his guilt or innocence which is immaterial (except to him.) This is about conducting an impartial investigation so there is little doubt when/if a person is convicted or found not guilty. In this case, there is tremendous doubt. And that has nothing to do with the documentary.
06-26-2017 , 04:22 PM
just finished this show, is there a cliffs of what's happened since the end of the show? thx
06-26-2017 , 04:27 PM
Just watched this over the weekend. The fact that BD spent even 1 day in jail is a complete and utter travesty. There is absolutely no way his 'confession' should have been allowed and I'm glad to see that it looks like his sentence is finally going to be overturned. I hope he sues the state for $36 million.

As I was watching I was thinking that Fassbender & Wiegert should be sitting in a jail cell and Kratz should be disbarred along with Kachinsky. Glad to see Kratz turned out to be the slimeball I thought he was. What a F'd up case. Even though I think SA is probably guilty I would have let him walk. The state completely dropped the ball when it came to proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
06-26-2017 , 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
You still keep writing about his guilt or innocence which is immaterial (except to him.) This is about conducting an impartial investigation so there is little doubt when/if a person is convicted or found not guilty. In this case, there is tremendous doubt. And that has nothing to do with the documentary.
This is exactly right.

It is destabilizing when the public loses faith in law enforcement and the judicial system.

The establishment has a great incentive to deal with the bad apples: to avoid being generally known to be tolerant of incompetence and corruption.
06-26-2017 , 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Beal Making a Murderer
just finished this show, is there a cliffs of what's happened since the end of the show? thx
Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey have submitted appeals.

Dassey's defense has been winning a few decisions in the circuit court. State has until the end of today to say whether they will give Brendan a new trial, appeal the 7th Court's ruling, or let Brendan go without a retrial. The so-called 'confession' is as of now considered to have been coerced by police, and the court finds that without the 'confession' there is no case against Dassey.

Avery's defense has just submitted documents to show why Steven's trial for murder was unconstitutional and the verdict overturned. The argument is that Avery either deserves a new trial, or should be set free without charge.
06-26-2017 , 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
You still keep writing about his guilt or innocence which is immaterial (except to him.) This is about conducting an impartial investigation so there is little doubt when/if a person is convicted or found not guilty. In this case, there is tremendous doubt. And that has nothing to do with the documentary.
No sir, I was responding to this from you

Quote:
You are too attached to SA being guilty then take the view of the overall justice system and impartiality. The symbol of our judicial system is that justice is blind.
I am pointing out to you that I am not too attached to the idea that SA is guilty, I was convinced based on evidence that he was guilty and I am also willing to be convinced based on evidence that he isn't guilty, you presumably have not swayed on this opinion.. That was my point.

As for there being doubt, incorrect. There is no reason to doubt that he did this. There is no plausible theory in which the evidence we have would be available if he did not do it. IE: No reasonable reason to doubt he is guilty. If you think there is thats fine, 12 jurors disagree with you and that is all that matters.
06-26-2017 , 05:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
That's true, it can technically be considered one search. I'm considering it two searches, because I think it's how most would view it.
Just saying, its important to point out the distinction between

multiple searches just because and one search that needs to be stopped and finished later.

This is one thing about the doc that is so misleading. It counts police entering his home to grab his computer as "1 search" or the blood tests as "1 search" basically everytime someone went into his house it was a search according to them.
06-26-2017 , 06:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Well, the state has until the end of the day to decide if they are going to appeal the 7th Circuit Court's decision upholding the defense of Brendan Dassey.

http://fox6now.com/2017/06/23/brenda...ay-to-respond/
The State has issued its response:

https://localtvwiti.files.wordpress..../06/dassey.pdf

CHICAGO – The state of Wisconsin has asked the full Seventh Circuit of Appeals to keep Brendan Dassey in prison while it appeals a ruling overturning his conviction for the 2005 murder of Teresa Halbach.

Last week, federal judges in Chicago ruled 2-1 to uphold the decision vacating his conviction. After that, Dassey’s attorneys asked for his release pending any state appeal.


http://fox6now.com/2017/06/26/state-...-reviews-case/
06-26-2017 , 06:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
No sir, I was responding to this from you



I am pointing out to you that I am not too attached to the idea that SA is guilty, I was convinced based on evidence that he was guilty and I am also willing to be convinced based on evidence that he isn't guilty, you presumably have not swayed on this opinion.. That was my point.

As for there being doubt, incorrect. There is no reason to doubt that he did this. There is no plausible theory in which the evidence we have would be available if he did not do it. IE: No reasonable reason to doubt he is guilty. If you think there is thats fine, 12 jurors disagree with you and that is all that matters.
Just to address the bolded bit - there may not be any reasonable doubt in your mind, but there seems to be plenty of reasonable doubt discovered by many other people who have looked into the case.

It might be that you don't find some arguments critical of this investigation persuasive, but on the other hand some don't seem to find your arguments that it's all good to be persuasive.

Now that the case is ion the appeals process, it matters quite a bit what people besides those who sat in a jury box a decade ago decided.
06-26-2017 , 07:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Just to address the bolded bit - there may not be any reasonable doubt in your mind, but there seems to be plenty of reasonable doubt discovered by many other people who have looked into the case.

It might be that you don't find some arguments critical of this investigation persuasive, but on the other hand some don't seem to find your arguments that it's all good to be persuasive.

Now that the case is ion the appeals process, it matters quite a bit what people besides those who sat in a jury box a decade ago decided.
No one was doubting his guilt until this doc came out, it also happens to be the case that the doc was misleading. I think its pretty clear to anyone willing to remain unbiased whats going on here.

Last edited by fraleyight; 06-26-2017 at 08:01 PM.
06-26-2017 , 08:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
As for there being doubt, incorrect. There is no reason to doubt that he did this.
You saying so doesn't make it so.

And just because someone committed a crime, it doesn't mean a thorough investigation doesn't have to occur. There may be other suspects. As in this case! SA was not the only one.
06-26-2017 , 09:07 PM
Last person to talk to victim before she goes missing
Vehicle found on his families property with his and her blood inside the vehicle
Victims remains found in a burn pit that 5 people testified to him using the night before
victims burnt items found in a burn barrell just outside his door

^This is what you call no reasonable doubt.
06-27-2017 , 03:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Last person to talk to victim before she goes missing
Vehicle found on his families property with his and her blood inside the vehicle
Victims remains found in a burn pit that 5 people testified to him using the night before
victims burnt items found in a burn barrell just outside his door

^This is what you call no reasonable doubt.
A bullet fired from his rifle with the victim's DNA on it.
The victim's key found in his room with his DNA on it.
A constantly changing story of what happened that night, including denying having any fires that week before it was even known the bones were found there.
Bones found intermingled with the wire from tires burnt in his pit the night he went missing.

^This is what you call no reasonable doubt.
06-27-2017 , 04:53 AM
Please stop arguing with poorshillz and the other shill.
We have read for 1 year and a half the same exact arguments and no matter how many expert will testify and destroy the credibility of all key evidences they will still repeat the same nonsenses.
2 courts have ruled in favor of Dassey and they still call him a rapist while there are 0 evidences TH was even raped. 90% of lawyers qualify Dassey confession as textbook coreced and yet they still stick to their initial feeling like some autistic kids.

Either they are troll, ******s or shills so stop making this thread unreadable by engaging them.
06-27-2017 , 06:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
No one was doubting his guilt until this doc came out, it also happens to be the case that the doc was misleading. I think its pretty clear to anyone willing to remain unbiased whats going on here.
I disagree. Steven and Brendan were fighting this through the appeals process before the documentary came out.

Yes, the documentary made more people aware of this situation. So what?

I do find it very clear what is going on here. Because I am unbiased.
06-27-2017 , 09:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
No one was doubting his guilt until this doc came out, it also happens to be the case that the doc was misleading. I think its pretty clear to anyone willing to remain unbiased whats going on here.

There was a lot of doubt before that press conference where nobody under the age of 15 was supposed to watch. With zero evidence, the person who was to prosecute the case said he was guilty. The press conference was completely unnecessary because they had both the subjects in jail and there was no public safety risk. It poisoned the jury pool completely.

And this is "justice" to a few lost souls. Of course they were found guilty by 12 people.

      
m