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

07-01-2017 , 06:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
It doesn't really matter if the police timeline is correct. She was already there, we know she was there by the time this conversation took place. We know when she called him and said she was on her way and when bobby saw her. So either fabian misheard, is lying, or is mistaken his time or SA changed his story.
Yes, there are any number of possible explanations, therefore it's hardly very strong evidence Steven 'changed his story'.

Quote:
Why should there be? Bobby D is the only other person who says they saw her there besides SA and BD, out of the 3 only 1 person did not participate in the murder so Bobby D is the one who ruined avery's plans to lie about her coming over.
None of the three people committed any crime against Teresa, AFAICT.

I have no evidence Steven ever planned to claim she never showed up.

Quote:
Not that I am aware. Her name is racheal, I can get her police report where she was questioned. It may take a min though. Sounds like your standard of evidence changes for avery though when you're all ready to pitchfork RH with 0 evidence he was involved.
Refresh my memory - what did I claim about RH? Quotes only. please.

Quote:
TH went missing on 10/30, when this interview took place she had been missing for 5 days. This is the first full day after she was REPORTED missing, by then SA already knew Bobby D saw her at his trailer.
Funny - Steven reports seeing TH on Monday, 10/31 at the salvage yard. Several people report seeing her after her visit to ASY.

Yes, Teresa was reported missing the evening of November 3rd. Steven on November 4 truthfully says Teresa showed up and left when her job was done.

When is Bobby D supposed to have 'ruined' Steven's alleged plot to deny Teresa ever showed up?

Quote:
I gave you two good reasons to believe this. Coupled with the enormous amount of evidence that he killed her any reasonable person would be even more convinced he changed his story.
No. As I have explained, there is no reason anyone should accept this theory of yours that Steven 'planned' to claim Teresa never showed up on 10/31.

Quote:
Which is why SA placed a call to her phone at 430 unblocked. BTW whats your explanation for this call? My explanation is it was to make it appear as if she didn't show up and he was calling to check on her location.
Steven had matters of business to discuss with Teresa, with whom he had a business relationship.

Quote:
As for the witnesses, his trailer is pretty remote. BD was going to be there with him so he probably figured it was unlikely anyone would see her at his trailer. Even if someone saw her heading that way that doesnt mean she actually showed up.
???

Even if people saw Teresa driving down Steven's driveway he could still claim she didn't show up?

This makes zero sense.
07-01-2017 , 08:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Yes, there are any number of possible explanations, therefore it's hardly very strong evidence Steven 'changed his story'.
Two people claimed he said she never showed up to his trailer. Both of these people made this claim before SA was a suspect or before they knew anything had happened to her. That is GOOD evidence he actually said she never showed up. Is it strong enough to get a conviction? No of course not. But it is strong enough to say "it is most probable steven avery originally told people she didn't show up"


Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Refresh my memory - what did I claim about RH? Quotes only. please.
You support KZ narrative dont you?


Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Funny - Steven reports seeing TH on Monday, 10/31 at the salvage yard. Several people report seeing her after her visit to ASY.
What? Who? Show me who said this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Yes, Teresa was reported missing the evening of November 3rd. Steven on November 4 truthfully says Teresa showed up and left when her job was done.
This was again, 5 days after she actually went missing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
When is Bobby D supposed to have 'ruined' Steven's alleged plot to deny Teresa ever showed up?
Time t= the time SA thought no one knew TH went to his house

Time Tx= the time SA knew someone knew TH went to his house.

Time t is sometime before nov 4th and after 10/31, time x is sometime after nov. 3rd

What don't you understand? At some point SA found out Bobbey Dassey saw her. This would be inevitable.



Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
No. As I have explained, there is no reason anyone should accept this theory of yours that Steven 'planned' to claim Teresa never showed up on 10/31.
I gave you reasons. My contention is this "it is most probable SA originally told people she never showed up. " And I have more than supported that contention.



Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Steven had matters of business to discuss with Teresa, with whom he had a business relationship.
Why would he call her blocked and not give his name before she showed up then call her unblocked after she showed up? What changed?



Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
???

Even if people saw Teresa driving down Steven's driveway he could still claim she didn't show up?

This makes zero sense.
No, who would see her driving up his driveway? You do realize people don't normally pay attention to cars going up driveways right? It is a normal occurence.
07-01-2017 , 08:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Two people claimed he said she never showed up to his trailer.
Which two people? Fabian's story could easily be before Teresa showed up, as has been patiently explained to you already.

Who is this other person?

Quote:
Both of these people made this claim before SA was a suspect or before they knew anything had happened to her.
You know Fabian's story was taken down on November 10th, right? That is after Steven was arrested November 9th.

Quote:
That is GOOD evidence he actually said she never showed up. Is it strong enough to get a conviction? No of course not. But it is strong enough to say "it is most probable steven avery originally told people she didn't show up"
Fabian's testimony isn't very convincing that Steven ever claimed or planned to claim Teresa didn't show up at the appointed time and place. Most likely there was discussion before she arrived, so she hadn't been there yet.

Quote:
You support KZ narrative dont you?
I only support scenarios that conform to the facts.

Quote:
What? Who? Show me who said this.
You don't seem to be aware is that Monday October 31st is the day Teresa is supposed to have gone missing. Steven said he saw her, she took photo of the vehicle for sale, and left. A propane delivery driver saw Teresa's vehicle leaving the vicinity at exactly the time she would be leaving.

Quote:
This was again, 5 days after she actually went missing.
The day after Teresa was reported missing, the earliest moment anyone would be asking about her, Steven said she showed up, took her photo, and left. No indication Steven ever said or ever intended to say anything but the truth.

Quote:
Time t= the time SA thought no one knew TH went to his house

Time Tx= the time SA knew someone knew TH went to his house.

Time t is sometime before nov 4th and after 10/31, time x is sometime after nov. 3rd

What don't you understand? At some point SA found out Bobbey Dassey saw her. This would be inevitable.
Your attempt to turn this into an equation doesn't help you.

There's no evidence Teresa ever went to Steven's house. Therefore no reason for Steven to care whether anyone knew that or not, or cared what they thought. It is completely unimportant.

The first time anyone asks him about whether Teresa came to take photos (on November 4th), Steven says she did show up.

All the evidence we have points toward Steven only ever saying she showed up, and none that he ever said otherwise and no evidence he intended to say anything else.

Quote:
I gave you reasons. My contention is this "it is most probable SA originally told people she never showed up. " And I have more than supported that contention.
Except the Fabian document doesn't say what you wish it did.

And that appears to be all you have.

Quote:
No, who would see her driving up his driveway? You do realize people don't normally pay attention to cars going up driveways right? It is a normal occurence.
Teresa would have to drive through the customer parking area at Avery Salvage Yard to come down Steven's driveway. Who would see her? Just about everyone who was there - family, co-workers, customers.

No one can take seriously the notion that Teresa could drive through the busiest part of the business without being noticed.
07-01-2017 , 10:54 PM
Two people say SA said TH was never there.

Fabian
The employee from autotrader.

That is two people with 0 motive to lie.

TH was at SA house BEFORE according to fabian and the employee at auto trader SA said she wasn't.


WHo is this person who said they saw TH leave? Where can I read his testimoney?
07-01-2017 , 11:08 PM
Actually, the fabian thing happend at 430. We both know she was there by then.
07-02-2017 , 05:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Two people say SA said TH was never there.

Fabian
As has been explained, if someone asked before Teresa was there yet before she was there, the truthful answer is that she wasn't there yet. That sounds like what Fabian might have heard.

Quote:
The employee from autotrader.
There doesn't seem to be any evidence of this alleged phone call from Steven to Autotrader.

Quote:
That is two people with 0 motive to lie.
Steven has 0 motive to lie, either.

Fabian isn't saying what you claim.

There is no evidence Steven called Autotrader at that time to say Teresa didn't show up.

Quote:
TH was at SA house BEFORE according to fabian
Fabian did not say that. Fabian never claims that he saw Teresa there.

Quote:
and the employee at auto trader SA said she wasn't.
There is 0 evidence such a call ever took place.

Quote:
WHo is this person who said they saw TH leave? Where can I read his testimoney?
John Leurquin saw the RAV4 drive away at exactly the time Steven saw Teresa leave. Two people with no motive to lie.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...8.pdf#page=122
07-02-2017 , 05:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Actually, the fabian thing happend at 430. We both know she was there by then.
If this is true, then Fabian is a good alibi witness for Steven: Fabian, Chuck, Earl and Steven were hanging out shooting the breeze when Teresa was somewhere else getting murdered.
07-02-2017 , 01:43 PM
Ok, this is what you initially said.

Quote:
Funny - Steven reports seeing TH on Monday, 10/31 at the salvage yard. Several people report seeing her after her visit to ASY.
When asked who? you said this.

Quote:
You don't seem to be aware is that Monday October 31st is the day Teresa is supposed to have gone missing. Steven said he saw her, she took photo of the vehicle for sale, and left. A propane delivery driver saw Teresa's vehicle leaving the vicinity at exactly the time she would be leaving.
I will explain basic logic to you in a moment but assuming steven is innocent in this conversation and counting him as a witness to TH leaving is beggin the question and fallacious. Anyways, as for the truck driver. Here is what you said.

Quote:
John Leurquin saw the RAV4 drive away at exactly the time Steven saw Teresa leave. Two people with no motive to lie.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...8.pdf#page=122
First of all, SA does have a motive. We are discussing whether or not hes guilty, so we must examine the claim through that fact. This is how it works, if you say "he couldn't be lying because hes innocent and has no motive to lie" that is begging the question. You are asking WHY hes guilty (even if indirectly) so you must examine the evidence provided to you with the idea hes guilty in your mind.

As for Johns testimony. All he says is he MAY have saw TH vehicle, hes sure (according to him) it was a green suv, and hes sure (according to him) that it was on monday oct 31st. However, he can't identify any other vehicle, or anything to indicate he knew what day it was, the whether, what else he saw going on etc..

This in contrast to fabian who can remember specific things about that day, and Racheal who didn't often take calls from a customer looking for a missing girl. So johns testimony is kind of weak here. And it most certainly is not what you claimed initially that multiple people saw her after oct 31st
07-02-2017 , 01:48 PM
Couple of other things just to clarify.

I am not saying fabian claims to have seen TH there I understand how it could have been interpreted that way but what I am saying is according to the timeline everyone accepts (what time she was there etc) Fabian is saying this comment from SA happened after she arrived.

In other words

WE (me and you) know she was there by 430
Fabian is saying this happened after 430

Conclusion this happened after she was there.


Secondly, This is not a good alibi for SA. He clearly did other stuff after she was dead. Fabian recalls a fire going around this time, and SA may have been waiting for BD. He also wasn't around them too long and according to fabian seemed really distant and out of place.And on top of that, you are forgetting how guilty it makes SA look that he is telling chuck she never showed up when she did shortly before she goes missing.
07-02-2017 , 04:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
I will explain basic logic to you in a moment but assuming steven is innocent in this conversation and counting him as a witness to TH leaving is beggin the question and fallacious. Anyways, as for the truck driver. Here is what you said.
You see, I have this idea that until proven otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt, Steven is innocent. Therefore he has no reason to lie.

The presumption of innocence is both logical and a legal thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

Quote:
First of all, SA does have a motive. We are discussing whether or not hes guilty, so we must examine the claim through that fact. This is how it works, if you say "he couldn't be lying because hes innocent and has no motive to lie" that is begging the question. You are asking WHY hes guilty (even if indirectly) so you must examine the evidence provided to you with the idea hes guilty in your mind.
If this is your idea of 'logic', then that's not what is being taught in accreditied universities. No responsible person would suggest that you must regard someone as guilty simply because they are accused.

Quote:
As for Johns testimony. All he says is he MAY have saw TH vehicle, hes sure (according to him) it was a green suv, and hes sure (according to him) that it was on monday oct 31st. However, he can't identify any other vehicle, or anything to indicate he knew what day it was, the whether, what else he saw going on etc..
Of course the witness's testimony is 'according to him' - just like Fabian's testimony is according to Fabian, and 'Rachael' story is according to 'Rachael'. Not sure why you seem to think this is a point that doesn't cut both ways.

Quote:
This in contrast to fabian who can remember specific things about that day, and Racheal who didn't often take calls from a customer looking for a missing girl. So johns testimony is kind of weak here. And it most certainly is not what you claimed initially that multiple people saw her after oct 31st
More than one person gave evidence which indicates Teresa left ASY. Which is all I claimed.
07-02-2017 , 04:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Couple of other things just to clarify.

I am not saying fabian claims to have seen TH there I understand how it could have been interpreted that way but what I am saying is according to the timeline everyone accepts (what time she was there etc) Fabian is saying this comment from SA happened after she arrived.

In other words

WE (me and you) know she was there by 430
Fabian is saying this happened after 430

Conclusion this happened after she was there.


Secondly, This is not a good alibi for SA. He clearly did other stuff after she was dead. Fabian recalls a fire going around this time, and SA may have been waiting for BD. He also wasn't around them too long and according to fabian seemed really distant and out of place.And on top of that, you are forgetting how guilty it makes SA look that he is telling chuck she never showed up when she did shortly before she goes missing.
The more I look at it, the more full of holes this Fabian story seems to get.

For one thing, the date of these alleged observations is in dispute - right in the statement itself:

CINDY's sister, THERESA (ph) LNU... has informed either CINDY or ROBERT
that she has talked to CANDY AVERY, EARL AVERY's wife. THERESA LNU tells
ROBERT that she was told by CANDY AVERY that ROBERT and EARL were
rabbit hunting on the property on Wednesday, 11/02/05, instead of Monday,
10/31/05.

Perhaps being mistaken about the date is why Fabian never testified under oath to this alleged conversation in court?
07-02-2017 , 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
You see, I have this idea that until proven otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt, Steven is innocent. Therefore he has no reason to lie.

The presumption of innocence is both logical and a legal thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence
Well firstly, this is only pre conviction. After they are convicted this doesn't apply. Secondly, that isn't what I was saying. I am saying when examining a claim you can't ask for evidence, then say the evidence is false because the claim is false. Which is what you're doing here.

There are two possible worlds

pw1 avery is guilty
pw2 avery is innocent

You are examining my claims in pw2, which is bad logic. In pw1 it doesn't matter what avery says.



Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Of course the witness's testimony is 'according to him' - just like Fabian's testimony is according to Fabian, and 'Rachael' story is according to 'Rachael'. Not sure why you seem to think this is a point that doesn't cut both ways.
Because, my claim is that avery is guilty. Of course if my claim is correct he will deny having any involvement and say TH left his house. What is he going to say? She stayed?

Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
More than one person gave evidence which indicates Teresa left ASY. Which is all I claimed.
That wasn't what you claimed. You said multiple people said they saw her after october 31st. No one has said this. All we have is someone convicted of murder saying she left his house (which apparently wasn't his original story) and someone who saw a green suv leave the asy on the same day. That was not your claim.
07-02-2017 , 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
The more I look at it, the more full of holes this Fabian story seems to get.

For one thing, the date of these alleged observations is in dispute - right in the statement itself:

CINDY's sister, THERESA (ph) LNU... has informed either CINDY or ROBERT
that she has talked to CANDY AVERY, EARL AVERY's wife. THERESA LNU tells
ROBERT that she was told by CANDY AVERY that ROBERT and EARL were
rabbit hunting on the property on Wednesday, 11/02/05, instead of Monday,
10/31/05.

Perhaps being mistaken about the date is why Fabian never testified under oath to this alleged conversation in court?
That is unlikely because why would avery be talking about TH showing up on wed?
07-02-2017 , 07:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
That is unlikely because why would avery be talking about TH showing up on wed?
Because Steven called after Teresa left ASY to see if she'd come back to photograph the loader.
07-02-2017 , 07:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Because Steven called after Teresa left ASY to see if she'd come back to photograph the loader.
Avery is dexter. Made this call to appear he didn't rape and murder her. Then he cleaned up his bedroom and garage to an extent investigators couldn't find anything.
07-02-2017 , 07:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Well firstly, this is only pre conviction. After they are convicted this doesn't apply.
Obviously, if you're simply going to assume Steven is guilty then there is no discussion to be had.

If it is a question of whether Steven is involved or not, then I have no reason to assume the conclusion that he is guilty. It is an open question.

Quote:
Secondly, that isn't what I was saying. I am saying when examining a claim you can't ask for evidence, then say the evidence is false because the claim is false. Which is what you're doing here.
No, that isn't what I am doing. I am just disputing your assumption Steven is guilty and therefore he is a liar when he denies involvement in crimes against Teresa.

Quote:
There are two possible worlds

pw1 avery is guilty
pw2 avery is innocent

You are examining my claims in pw2, which is bad logic. In pw1 it doesn't matter what avery says.
You haven't explained why it is 'bad logic' to consider one of the two possible options you list here.

According to you it doesn't matter what the evidence says, Steven is guilty no matter what the facts are.

Quote:
Because, my claim is that avery is guilty. Of course if my claim is correct he will deny having any involvement and say TH left his house. What is he going to say? She stayed?
There is no evidence Teresa was ever in his house.

But, since you are assuming he is guilty despite the evidence, you are claiming she must have been there.

Quote:
That wasn't what you claimed. You said multiple people said they saw her after october 31st. No one has said this.
I only said more than one person saw Teresa leave ASY, but made no claims about there being any sightings after October 31st.

You are wrong in trying to make out that I claimed anything else.

Quote:
All we have is someone convicted of murder saying she left his house (which apparently wasn't his original story)...
There is no real evidence Steven 'changed his story'. Fabian doesn't even know what day of the week he was at ASY.

Quote:
and someone who saw a green suv leave the asy on the same day.
Yes, we have Steven saying Teresa left, like she'd done on several previous occasions, and Leurquin saw a vehicle drive away from ASY, a vehicle like the one Steven saw her drive away in, at exactly the time Steven said she drove away. He confirms Steven's observation.

Quote:
That was not your claim.
I have a suspicion I know what I was claiming better than you seem to know it.
07-02-2017 , 07:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by housenuts Making a Murderer
Avery is dexter. Made this call to appear he didn't rape and murder her. Then he cleaned up his bedroom and garage to an extent investigators couldn't find anything.
Nothing about this scenario dreamed up by the prosecution makes any sense.
07-02-2017 , 09:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Because Steven called after Teresa left ASY to see if she'd come back to photograph the loader.
Nah, because if that were the case Earl would know she was coming a second time. Meaning he would know she came and left.
07-02-2017 , 09:04 PM
Quote:
Funny - Steven reports seeing TH on Monday, 10/31 at the salvage yard. Several people report seeing her after her visit to ASY.
No this is what you said. Who said they saw TH after her visit to the salvage yard? So far you have provided 0 examples.
07-02-2017 , 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
That is unlikely because why would avery be talking about TH showing up on wed?


Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Because Steven called after Teresa left ASY to see if she'd come back to photograph the loader.


Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Nah, because if that were the case Earl would know she was coming a second time. Meaning he would know she came and left.


I don't know too much about this part of the trial, so just going from above exchange.
But if indeed a second appointment was made for the Wednesday as suggested, and this conversation happened that afternoon, why would we assume anyone was talking about the visit two days earlier?
07-02-2017 , 11:35 PM
my apologies. I now know why I have never multi quoted on tapatalk.
i don't think I've ever seen anyone else's posts formatted like that so I could have infact broken the site. again all I can do is apologise


*edit. nvm, for a brief minute every post was showing as double, with pics attached
07-03-2017 , 12:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by marke. Making a Murderer
I don't know too much about this part of the trial, so just going from above exchange.
But if indeed a second appointment was made for the Wednesday as suggested, and this conversation happened that afternoon, why would we assume anyone was talking about the visit two days earlier?
I am not even sure where the idea that anyone thought she was supposed to come back to photograph came from.
07-03-2017 , 12:15 AM
Its also important to note that fabian says he remembers taking the kids trick or treating that same night and is sure it was on monday, this interview took place on friday. (5days later)
07-03-2017 , 07:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Nah, because if that were the case Earl would know she was coming a second time. Meaning he would know she came and left.
I don't see any reason why Earl would know about one visit and not the other.
07-03-2017 , 07:04 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
No this is what you said. Who said they saw TH after her visit to the salvage yard? So far you have provided 0 examples.
I have, and we have even discussed them.

Now you are trying to change what happened when everyone can read a few posts up where I named two people who witnessed Teresa leaving ASY and you talked about them.

      
m