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

08-09-2017 , 06:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Also, avery's rape case wasn't "unfounded". you already know why they didn't prosecute. It was because of his ongoing murder case. This has already been linked to you and you responded to it. Kratz has said in other interviews that if by some miracle avery was found not guilty of murder he was going to be prosecuted for the rape of his young niece.
Also, avery's civil case demand of 34mm wasn't "unfounded". you already know why they didn't settle for a higher amount or go to trial. It was because of his ongoing murder case. This has already been linked to you and you responded to it. Buting has said in other interviews that if by some miracle the charges against avery were dropped he was going to settle for life changing money.

... Now about that "special pleading" argument.
08-09-2017 , 06:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
I don't consider myself ******ed. But I appreciate your understanding. thanks.
I don't think you are ******ed, either. However, I can't help but notice you continue to make a strong case for it.
08-09-2017 , 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
I don't consider myself ******ed. But I appreciate your understanding. thanks.



Because I don't consider texting someone vague sexual innuendos or making passes at someone a crime (neither does any state as far as I know), and I don't think calling someone who does this a "sexual predator" is a applicable description. Kratz was removed from office because of who he was and who he was texting. Mainly a DA making inappropriate comments toward someone whom he would have a conflict of interest with. It had nothing to do with him committing a sex crime and according to kratz, the feelings were mutual.
Sorry, but the testimony of one of Kratz's victims is an account of rape pure and simple:

"After various phone conversations, Kratz asked to visit JW at her apartment. JW asserts that Kratz arrived at her apartment and
after threatening JW, forced her to have sex
.

On September 28, 2010, JW provided the information about Kratz to her probation officer at the Department of Corrections (DOC). The DOC reported the issue to the DOJ.

The DOJ interviewed JW who provided a statement. The statement JW provided alleges that Kratz, while District Attorney of Calumet County,
had forcible sex with an emotionally vulnerable woman after previously prosecuting the woman
. "

https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/...f&seqNo=113968

Quote:
To be clear, I am not defending what kratz did. i think its wrong for someone in his position to display this kind of behavior and agree he should have been removed. I think calling him a sexual predator is an obvious attempt to defer blame from avery.
You are wrong - Kratz's victim says otherwise. This has nothing to do with Steven Avery and everything to do with Kratz's criminal and out of control behavior.

Quote:
Also, avery's rape case wasn't "unfounded". you already know why they didn't prosecute. It was because of his ongoing murder case. This has already been linked to you and you responded to it. Kratz has said in other interviews that if by some miracle avery was found not guilty of murder he was going to be prosecuted for the rape of his young niece.
We already know from the coerced 'confession' from Brendan Dassey how police in this neighborhood can manufacture testimony.
08-09-2017 , 06:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
Also, avery's civil case demand of 34mm wasn't "unfounded". you already know why they didn't settle for a higher amount or go to trial. It was because of his ongoing murder case. This has already been linked to you and you responded to it. Buting has said in other interviews that if by some miracle the charges against avery were dropped he was going to settle for life changing money.

... Now about that "special pleading" argument.
Wtf? I didn't say avery's case was unfounded. What in the world are you talking about? Read the conversation you are referencing again and I will be happy to clear up any confusion.

To summarize, I was agreeing with skillz that avery was not getting anywhere near 36 million. And that I am not sure why avery supporters constantly pretend like he would have.

Footz said that its brought up because that was the amount of the lawsuit

Then I said that would be like bringing up the 400k as the settlement amount and ignoring nuance, acting like he wouldn't have gotten more

See, this is what I am talking about. you either intentionally or unintentionally mis-represent what I am saying.
08-09-2017 , 07:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Sorry, but the testimony of one of Kratz's victims is an account of rape pure and simple:

"After various phone conversations, Kratz asked to visit JW at her apartment. JW asserts that Kratz arrived at her apartment and
after threatening JW, forced her to have sex
.

On September 28, 2010, JW provided the information about Kratz to her probation officer at the Department of Corrections (DOC). The DOC reported the issue to the DOJ.

The DOJ interviewed JW who provided a statement. The statement JW provided alleges that Kratz, while District Attorney of Calumet County,
had forcible sex with an emotionally vulnerable woman after previously prosecuting the woman
. "

https://www.wicourts.gov/sc/opinion/...f&seqNo=113968



You are wrong - Kratz's victim says otherwise. This has nothing to do with Steven Avery and everything to do with Kratz's criminal and out of control behavior.
I must have missed that because he wasn't formally charged. I will have to look into it more at some point.
08-09-2017 , 07:05 PM
Quote:
We already know from the coerced 'confession' from Brendan Dassey how police in this neighborhood can manufacture testimony.
This is unbelievable. You are literally saying, anyone who admits or claims anything happened that doesn't fit your worldview was coerced and anyone who says something that does fit wasn't. That is so fallacious I do not even know where to begin.
08-09-2017 , 07:08 PM
To clarify for the mouth breathers, I am not saying not being formally charged means he didn't do it. I am just saying I missed it because the stuff I was reading about it last night was referring to charges and didn't include that allegation.
08-09-2017 , 08:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
I must have missed that because he wasn't formally charged. I will have to look into it more at some point.
Yes, these are some of the complaints leading to Kratz's dismissal which you have misrepresented and minimized.

When people seem to know more about the case than you do, just try to be humble and realize you don't know everything.
08-09-2017 , 08:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
This is unbelievable. You are literally saying, anyone who admits or claims anything happened that doesn't fit your worldview was coerced and anyone who says something that does fit wasn't. That is so fallacious I do not even know where to begin.
No, I am not 'literally saying' what YOU wrote.

I am 'literally saying' what I wrote.

Do you understand the difference?

Why you insist on misrepresenting me is your own affair.

However, your engaging in such underhanded tactics should help explain why few people take you seriously.
08-09-2017 , 08:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oski Making a Murderer
I don't think you are ******ed, either. However, I can't help but notice you continue to make a strong case for it.
Frayleyight seems to have a compulsion to disagree about each and every detail, whether justified or not, as if incessant nitpicking will somehow make the larger picture go away.
08-09-2017 , 08:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
This would have been a jury trial? I guess I hadn't thought about that.
Unless they both agreed to just a bench trial.

The risks are super-high going to trial for both sides, not to mention just the costs of a two-week trial, paying OT for officers, publicity, etc.

I think if he was offered $4MM he would insta-take it. He would give 40% to his lawyer and lead a good life.

There is a chance at a jury trial where they could offer him $100,000. Or $100 million on top of what he was asking. Too much uncertainty.
08-09-2017 , 10:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
Unless they both agreed to just a bench trial.

The risks are super-high going to trial for both sides, not to mention just the costs of a two-week trial, paying OT for officers, publicity, etc.

I think if he was offered $4MM he would insta-take it. He would give 40% to his lawyer and lead a good life.

There is a chance at a jury trial where they could offer him $100,000. Or $100 million on top of what he was asking. Too much uncertainty.
True, it would I think feel more risky to avery because 4 million dollars is still a lot of money for him.

But I think avery probably wins a jury trial most of the time because he was a bit of a local hero.
08-09-2017 , 10:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
To clarify for the mouth breathers, I am not saying not being formally charged means he didn't do it. I am just saying I missed it because the stuff I was reading about it last night was referring to charges and didn't include that allegation.

SA wasn't arrested, charged, let alone called convicted of rape...besides the time he was falsely arrested, charged, and convicted...
08-09-2017 , 10:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Yes, these are some of the complaints leading to Kratz's dismissal which you have misrepresented and minimized.

When people seem to know more about the case than you do, just try to be humble and realize you don't know everything.
When have I not admitted I was wrong about something?

Don't really think you know more about the case than me because we just talked about this a couple days ago and you didn't bring up the rape allegations. So its probably something you just learned.

I also didn't misreperesent anything. He was indeed removed from office for the reasons I stated. not because he was accused of rape.
08-09-2017 , 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
No, I am not 'literally saying' what YOU wrote.

I am 'literally saying' what I wrote.

Do you understand the difference?

Why you insist on misrepresenting me is your own affair.

However, your engaging in such underhanded tactics should help explain why few people take you seriously.
Literally has more than one meaning. Maybe quit focusing on semantics and focus more on the problem at hand, your special pleading which I pointed out several times.

Quote:
Literally:
used for emphasis or to express strong feeling while not being literally true.
"I have received literally thousands of letters"
08-09-2017 , 10:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
SA wasn't arrested, charged, let alone called convicted of rape...besides the time he was falsely arrested, charged, and convicted...
I was talking about kratz there. But so what? Avery has multiple women claiming he raped them, and the claims are suppored by family members and old friends of his.

Kratz has one rape allegation from a women he admitted to having consensual sex with.

Are both true? Maybe. But given averys history of abuse toward women, and the strong implication that he raped TH it is fair to say Avery most likely raped the women and girl claiming he raped them. As for kratz, its hard to say.
08-09-2017 , 10:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
When have I not admitted I was wrong about something?

Don't really think you know more about the case than me because we just talked about this a couple days ago and you didn't bring up the rape allegations. So its probably something you just learned.
I've known about it for a long time.

My bad for assuming someone who posts non-stop about this case knew anything about it.

You literally just found out today the real testimony about Kratz's rape of women he had power over due to his office.

Quote:
I also didn't misreperesent anything. He was indeed removed from office for the reasons I stated. not because he was accused of rape.
You didn't know what Kratz was accused of, and made up some bull which minimized the seriousness of using his position to force unwilling women to have sex with him (he raped them).

Last edited by proudfootz; 08-09-2017 at 10:41 PM. Reason: added
08-09-2017 , 10:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Literally has more than one meaning. Maybe quit focusing on semantics and focus more on the problem at hand, your special pleading which I pointed out several times.
The fact is I was 'literally saying' what I literally wrote, not the made up strawman bull YOU wrote.

If you are incapable of knowing the difference you are going to be at a disadvantage.

My special plea is for you to stop misrepresenting others on this site, and stop misrepresenting the case which you apparently know very little about.
08-09-2017 , 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
I was talking about kratz there. But so what? Avery has multiple women claiming he raped them, and the claims are suppored by family members and old friends of his.

Kratz has one rape allegation from a women he admitted to having consensual sex with.

Are both true? Maybe. But given averys history of abuse toward women, and the strong implication that he raped TH it is fair to say Avery most likely raped the women and girl claiming he raped them. As for kratz, its hard to say.
You don't know enough about the women (that is a plural, meaning more than one) who have made serious allegations against Kratz.

You don't know enough about the case to comment. Anyone who believes anything you write is bound to be misled.
08-10-2017 , 12:50 AM
I thinks it's statements like these, said continually with such authority so late in the game, that highlight people's frustration with your thinking

Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Are both true? Maybe. But given averys history of abuse toward women, and the strong implication that he raped TH it is fair to say Avery most likely raped the women and girl claiming he raped them. As for kratz, its hard to say.

You're talking about the rape he was framed for in 85, the implication contained in a coerced confession that was never used in court, and the alleged rape of his young niece which was investigated and ruled unfounded, as evidence of his history of abuse towards women..
08-10-2017 , 01:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
I've known about it for a long time.

My bad for assuming someone who posts non-stop about this case knew anything about it.

You literally just found out today the real testimony about Kratz's rape of women he had power over due to his office.
So when you said kratz was accused of rape and when I said he wasn't then you responded with "I was just showing how easy it was to make accusations against people" after oski agreed he wasn't accused of rape. You did all this knowing he was accused of rape and didn't say anything about it because you just assumed everyone knew and was what.. playing games with you? lol.. Ok.



Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
You didn't know what Kratz was accused of, and made up some bull which minimized the seriousness of using his position to force unwilling women to have sex with him (he raped them).
Now he raped multiple women you say? Did multipe women accuse him of rape?
08-10-2017 , 02:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
The fact is I was 'literally saying' what I literally wrote, not the made up strawman bull YOU wrote.

If you are incapable of knowing the difference you are going to be at a disadvantage.

My special plea is for you to stop misrepresenting others on this site, and stop misrepresenting the case which you apparently know very little about.
Let me lay it out for you..

BD says he raped and murdered TH (coreced)
Avery's niece says he raped her (coerced)
Averys friends wife says he raped her (coerced)
Not even sure what you think about the family members who claim avery was having a sexual realtionship with this underage girl, you haven't said. I assume they were also coerced accordng to you?

Woman says kratz rapes her (not coerced, telling the truth)

Why was the woman who says kratz raped her not coerced but the young girl who said avery raped her was? What steps did you take to reach this conclusion?

This is why I said you were special pleading, when I used the word "literal" I meant it in the way I defined the word.

Beyond that, you are indeed accepting testimony, confessions etc.. Only when they fit your narritave and saying they are coerced when they don't. Thats what I was saying.
08-10-2017 , 02:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by marke. Making a Murderer
I thinks it's statements like these, said continually with such authority so late in the game, that highlight people's frustration with your thinking




You're talking about the rape he was framed for in 85, the implication contained in a coerced confession that was never used in court, and the alleged rape of his young niece which was investigated and ruled unfounded, as evidence of his history of abuse towards women..
History of abuse toward women

Avery was flashing his cousin,This was reported by a neighbor and when confronted with this avery ran his cousin off the road and threatened to kill her.

avery wrote threatening letters to his ex wife and threatened to kill her while in prison

avery assaulted his girlfiend jodi in sept 2004

This as well as the underage neice who claimed he raped her, whos mother claimed he raped her, whom averys friends and family claimed he was involved in a sexual relationship with.

And the lady who signed an affadavit claiming avery raped her and threatend to kill her if she told anyone.
08-10-2017 , 02:16 AM
Also, again. As pointed out the rape allegation wasn't "unfounded" the case was dropped until the end of the murder trial.
08-10-2017 , 08:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by marke. Making a Murderer
I thinks it's statements like these, said continually with such authority so late in the game, that highlight people's frustration with your thinking

You're talking about the rape he was framed for in 85,

the implication contained in a coerced confession that was never used in court,

and the alleged rape of his young niece which was investigated and ruled unfounded,

as evidence of his history of abuse towards women..
It's this history of ginned up accusations against Steven that makes me take any further accusations with a grain or two of salt.

It's also these kind of dubious accusations which give me very reasonable doubt about the murder conviction.

      
m