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

01-08-2016 , 12:15 AM
Colborn and Lenk weren't named in the lawsuit though. Only Kocourek and Vogel were.

And yes, I agree if it was $36 million, it might be more of a dispute with insurance. But it was really really doubtful it would be a $36 million payout. I believe Manitowoc had a $1 million offer on the table to Avery before the murder, and the guy who specializes in these cases guessed it would be around $6 million.
01-08-2016 , 12:20 AM
No, it doesn't add up to a clear picture, IMO.

You can't test 3 swabs then say it proves anything about the untested portion of the sample, that's ******ed regardless of whether or not the EDTA test was valid in and of itself.

And don't make me laugh at no motive to plant evidence when the county was being sued for millions of dollars. They absolutely had motive to plant evidence and plenty of opportunity when the Avery compound was sealed for days. Motive and opportunity doesn't mean 100% it was done but if you are going to try to argue with a straight face that LE had no motive to **** with Avery then I don't consider you worth talking to further, that's patently false.

And no I don't find anything de facto strange about rural rednecks having a several hour long bonfire on Halloween night, this actually seems perfectly normal to me. Maybe because I grew up in rural redneck NY. Fires are pretty.
01-08-2016 , 12:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
And no plausible scenario/motive for it to have been planted
Wow.
01-08-2016 , 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gadgetguru Making a Murderer
Me, specifically my car key. One of my employee's noticed this and started doing it himself.
Yeah I used to do that until I lost the key in a movie theater and could never find it.

So even though it's crazy it took eight searches to find maybe single car keys are just really hard to find if dropped somewhere... So you and your employee should probably stop doing this. Any benefit is outweighed by the downside (hassle of waiting on someone bringing you replacement key turn buying new key etc) all the way to providing evidence or questions if you ever get murdered.

Although with technology advancements people potentially carry around less keys.
01-08-2016 , 12:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Colborn and Lenk weren't named in the lawsuit though. Only Kocourek and Vogel were.

And yes, I agree if it was $36 million, it might be more of a dispute with insurance. But it was really really doubtful it would be a $36 million payout. I believe Manitowoc had a $1 million offer on the table to Avery before the murder, and the guy who specializes in these cases guessed it would be around $6 million.
Manitowoc ' s offer woukd have been from the insurance. In a case like this one, the offers would not increase significantly until it was clear: 1) the plaintiff could make it past summary judgment; and 2) it was clear the plaintiff had the will and means to take it to trial.

because of the murder, the numbers never had a chance to get very interesting. I could see the numbers well north of 10 million on the court house steps.

*** you can replace "officers" with "individual defendants" in my prior post.
01-08-2016 , 12:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT RJ Making a Murderer
No, it doesn't add up to a clear picture, IMO.

You can't test 3 swabs then say it proves anything about the untested portion of the sample, that's ******ed regardless of whether or not the EDTA test was valid in and of itself.
The 3 out of 6 thing is a strawman. The fact is he tested 3 samples and didn't find EDTA in them. He tested the vial and he found a significant amount of EDTA. Think - what if there were only three samples to begin with, how would that make anything different?

I'd also like to see his whole testimony. I think what he meant was that if 3 of them already didn't test positive, then it's highly unlikely one from the next 3 would.

(Edit: Also the EDTA test bolsters the prosecution's case, but it is by no means essential.)

Quote:
And don't make me laugh at no motive to plant evidence when the county was being sued for millions of dollars. They absolutely had motive to plant evidence and plenty of opportunity when the Avery compound was sealed for days. Motive and opportunity doesn't mean 100% it was done but if you are going to try to argue with a straight face that LE had no motive to **** with Avery then I don't consider you worth talking to further, that's patently false.
Before you get too heated, I said no motive to plant blood. Why? Because the blood would have had to been planted by Nov 6th. Why would you do that before you even know if the victim is alive or dead? Come on, you were a cop - does that make any damn sense at all???

Also regarding that lawsuit motive, it's a bit embellished: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...torney_on_the/


Quote:
And no I don't find anything de facto strange about rural rednecks having a several hour long bonfire on Halloween night, this actually seems perfectly normal to me. Maybe because I grew up in rural redneck NY. Fires are pretty.
Yeah man, nothing wrong with bonfires.. but when you have a big bonfire the night the victim goes missing and then all the bones are there burnt together with your tires? Then there's something wrong with bonfires....

Last edited by PoorSkillz; 01-08-2016 at 12:41 AM.
01-08-2016 , 12:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
Manitowoc ' s offer woukd have been from the insurance. In a case like this one, the offers would not increase significantly until it was clear: 1) the plaintiff could make it past summary judgment; and 2) it was clear the plaintiff had the will and means to take it to trial.

because of the murder, the numbers never had a chance to get very interesting. I could see the numbers well north of 10 million on the court house steps.
What are your thoughts on this?

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...torney_on_the/
01-08-2016 , 12:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
*** you can replace "officers" with "individual defendants" in my prior post.
I'm just saying that it takes away a lot of the motive that people apply to Colborn and Lenk.
01-08-2016 , 12:42 AM
i love your repeated use of the term 'big bonfire', and the implication that it was incredibly rare for someone who lives in a salvage yard and has multiple fire pits to set something alight.

what's your thoughts on the expert who testified in court that the small fire in question could not reach the required temperature to burn a body like that?
01-08-2016 , 12:45 AM
Pretty sure I read it could be done with the steel belts from tires used as accelerants... which I think is what they found mixed with the bones...

Edit: Here you go: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd..._hours/cyhsdra
01-08-2016 , 12:52 AM
good link, thanks
01-08-2016 , 12:55 AM
You're welcome. Anyway, that's all for me tonight, let's do this again soon!
01-08-2016 , 01:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
depends on the policy.

When a claim is made, difficult cases are sent to coverage counsel who provide an opinion on the coverage. Most policies, even when coverage is in doubt still require a defense to be provided.

Here, it seems the defense was provided and the cases was proceeding under reservation of rights - with a strong indication most of the claim as pleaded would not be covered.

Where it appears a low ball settlement can be made, the plaintiff may cooperate with defense counsel to craft the settlement or amend the complaint to fall under coverage.

So, because insurance paid the 400K settlement does not provide any basis to believe it would have paid a 36 million judgment.

Given the nature of the allegations, I would believe the officers certainly had personal exposure.
I was trying to say this earlier but didn't do so quite as well.

Another reason the individually named defendants faced exposure - if a judgment came back against them was in excess of policy limits, they faced personal exposure even if the claims were otherwise covered (i.e., if the county had a $20mm policy limit, a $36mm judgment means officers are responsible for the $16mm).

Last edited by PayoffWiz; 01-08-2016 at 01:16 AM.
01-08-2016 , 01:05 AM
Two samples from the vial were tested for EDTA. Only one of them came up positive. That should invalidate the whole test imo
01-08-2016 , 01:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
I'm just saying that it takes away a lot of the motive that people apply to Colborn and Lenk.
1. I think the o.p. lawyer made some good general points, but it seems a number of other lawyers disagree with some of the finer points.

To the extent that he opines the civil case was unlikely to provide a motive for framing SA, I tend to agree.

2. With that said, I do think there was significant animus towards SA and the civil suit intensified it - as in it made it "personal" between SA and the county. So, I tend to see it as there being a target on SA'S back and that any number of things could have happened - without necessarily being planned. More like they were on high alert to get him if they had a chance. The ongoing civil case just seemed to add some urgency to the situation.

3. I doubt any party from the county even considered participating in a murder to get SA. I do think that once the events started unfolding, the county influenced the investigation to focus on SA and they likely had him under surveillance and also likely entered his property prior to the official Rav4 discovery.

I think they honestly believed SA had to be responsible to the exclusion of any other possibility.

At that point, I think their goal was simply to make sure the Rav4 was not tampered with or disposed of. They wanted to be careful so that they could get a proper arrest.

However, as time went by, I think LE was surprised at the lack of evidence to support their theory. At that point, it gets interesting: I am sure some were sure SA was the killer and may have cut corners in making the case; others may have had doubts but felt boxed in by the prosecutors grand proclamations and went along with it anyway.

I believe evidence was planted; I believe the kid was cooerced.

I don't think SA killed her.

I think the Bobby and Step dad scenario makes sense (but not that there was active collusion between them and the county - passive, morelike).

Also, I would have liked to have known who was stalking the victim with harassing phone calls. That fact could still be discovered through phone records.
01-08-2016 , 01:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Pretty sure I read it could be done with the steel belts from tires used as accelerants... which I think is what they found mixed with the bones...

Edit: Here you go: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd..._hours/cyhsdra
That may be so, but that ignores Yeti's point: There was no "big bonfire" so why do you keep referring to it as a big bonfire?

Why did the prosecutor do the same?

If it is true that a small fire with accelerates would do the job, why didn't the prosecutor press that point and avoid the issue of trying to have witnesses misclassify the size of fire as well as himself improperly calling it a "big bonfire?"
01-08-2016 , 01:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeti Making a Murderer
good link, thanks
That link is interesting - especially if you tend to believe the body was not cremated in SA's pit.

The author states it would have taken about 5 hours and that the bones appeared to be broken down as well. Breaking down the bones could not have been done with a shovel and the fire would have been too hot to get close enough with a hammer.

This seems to indicate the quarry pit is where the body was burned. I would assume tires would be used in that fire as well.
01-08-2016 , 01:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
"An error occurred during validation.

This video does not exist.

Sorry about that."
01-08-2016 , 03:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smacc25 Making a Murderer
Opps sorry
The url above is wrong & correct 1 won't play for some reason.

youtube shaun attwood.

Last edited by smacc25; 01-08-2016 at 03:49 AM.
01-08-2016 , 04:31 AM
Quote:
Pretty sure I read it could be done with the steel belts from tires used as accelerants... which I think is what they found mixed with the bones...
There's nothing mentioned about accelerants being used and steel belts would probably be close to dead last on the list of possible fire accelerants. The steel belts being brought up were only to show that the fire investigator believed the belts to be the remains of burned tires.

The author of the article you are citing as proof that the fire could have burned the body to this degree suggests that we read his other posts in which he states:

Quote:
So, what you would have needed is either a closed environment (incinerator), or in an open environment (SA's bonfire), a fairly large stack of tires and 3-4 hours of continuous, steady attention to achieve and maintain the required amount of heat. Then, you figure many hours of 'cool down' after that before you can really clean up or dispose of anything.
I don't believe there was anywhere near enough fuel (belts from just a few tires pictured), let alone the time necessary to get the job done.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...quarry/cyffdjf
01-08-2016 , 04:36 AM
more comments by strang, including some stuff we haven't seen before:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...DB&via=FB_Page
01-08-2016 , 04:36 AM
One mystery that I'm not sure we'll ever get an answer to is why nobody can seem to spell any name in this case correctly.

Krantz
Brandon
Colborn

Jesus ****
01-08-2016 , 04:39 AM
of course we all know that the father of someone who works in the sheriff department was on the jury. it's actually this woman's dad:



lol. it's pretty incredible that he was only the 7th most worrying juror in the pool.
01-08-2016 , 04:40 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman Making a Murderer
Yeah I used to do that until I lost the key in a movie theater and could never find it.

So even though it's crazy it took eight searches to find maybe single car keys are just really hard to find if dropped somewhere... So you and your employee should probably stop doing this. Any benefit is outweighed by the downside (hassle of waiting on someone bringing you replacement key turn buying new key etc) all the way to providing evidence or questions if you ever get murdered.

Although with technology advancements people potentially carry around less keys.
Noted, it is a de facto situation for me. I got tired of turning my car off to run into the post office with a po box key so I got a detachable keychain. Then I forgot to re-attach and found that things worked so much easier with it separated. Haven't looked back but it hasn't bit me in the ass yet.

That being said, now I'm worried I'll get murdered.

      
m