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

10-13-2017 , 01:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
David Irving is probably the leading expert on nazi history and the third reich...
He is not. In his libel action against Lipstadt and Penguin Books, his reputation -- already wonky -- was shredded by actual experts filing scholarly book-length reports to the court which exposed his misuse of documentation and his dishonest advocacy for the Nazis.

Quote:
...; he also happens to be a holocaust denier. If I were to get into an argument with a holocaust denier would it be sufficient to argue "david irving said" as a basis for what conclusions are justified? Or should we each present arguments? That is why its fallacious.

Not to mention, Zellner has a history (at least in this case) of lying and making unforgivable blunders that an attorney shouldn't make.
This part of the argument is OK, but Zellner is perhaps more a Barnum than an Irving.
10-13-2017 , 04:25 PM
I am not trying to compare zellner to irving. I am just illustrating why that kind of argument doesn't work.
10-14-2017 , 05:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackize5 Making a Murderer
Argument from authority is pretty valid in this situation.
No it isn't her motion was unadulterated bs & that's not even including the brain fingerprinting crap & she didn't even file properly.


Quote:
I mean we're talking filings and statements of an expert in her field vs the speculations of a raving autist.
Jasus you said that with no sense of irony at all didn't you?
Tell me again about the Krazy Konspiracy involving the Manitowoc LE the FBI & & God knows who else. Tell me again about the wild speculation re RH, Teresa's bother and anyone else who isn't Avery or Dassey.
Truly pathetic projection from the Cult of Avery Dassey & Zellner.
10-15-2017 , 08:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
No it isn't her motion was unadulterated bs & that's not even including the brain fingerprinting crap & she didn't even file properly.



Jasus you said that with no sense of irony at all didn't you?
Tell me again about the Krazy Konspiracy involving the Manitowoc LE the FBI & & God knows who else. Tell me again about the wild speculation re RH, Teresa's bother and anyone else who isn't Avery or Dassey.
Truly pathetic projection from the Cult of Avery Dassey & Zellner.
Corpus vile is not a lawyer.

Corpus is only a troll who is so cowardly he puts people who disagree with him on 'ignore'.

Corpus vile pretends the whole system of appeals reviewing judicial decisions is a 'cult'.
10-17-2017 , 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Yea, I don't for the life of me know how anyone can apologize for her actions.
Avery & Dassey's groupies slavishly hang on to her every word, which is who she's pandering to imho. She's an utter joke.
10-21-2017 , 08:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer

She should also stop misrepresenting her evidence to the public.

Like the prosecutor did at a media conference spectacle based solely on oral testimony...
10-21-2017 , 08:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
Avery & Dassey's groupies slavishly hang on to her every word, which is who she's pandering to imho. She's an utter joke.

You mean the “innocent until proven guilty and fair and impartial investigation” groupies. Truly nut jobs...
10-21-2017 , 10:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
Like the prosecutor did at a media conference spectacle based solely on oral testimony...
Kratz never misrepresented his evidence. He simply told the public what Dassey confessed to them. Even if you think its unprofessional, it certainly isn't comparable to what Zellner is doing.
10-21-2017 , 10:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
You mean the “innocent until proven guilty and fair and impartial investigation” groupies. Truly nut jobs...
Considering both of these men had fair trials and were proven guilty, who the **** are you talking about?
10-22-2017 , 10:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
You mean the “innocent until proven guilty and fair and impartial investigation” groupies. Truly nut jobs...
They were proven guilty by separate courts of law after receiving a fair trial.

They did have a fair & impartial investigation & nobody itt has provided any credible evidence that the investigation was corrupt.

Those who reject multiple court of law verdicts while never validly specifying how their trials were unfair, but deem innuendo sufficient for the likes of the victim's family members or ex boyfriend, those who assert conspiracies while providing no evidence to support such assertions, those who bandy about creepy cultist sounding lexicons such as "guilter" to label those they consider unbelievers of their dogma, those who show a rather slavish devotion to sleazy unethical lawyers & pseudo scientific techniques such as brain fingerprinting, those who raise various bars be they police procedural, due process or burden of proof, for special little guys, those who refuse to back up their assertions with anything remotely tangible, never mind credible, are indeed akin to a cult & a bunch of nutjobs.

Seeing as you appear to have a serious issue with the press conference, I yet again recommend you read the voir dire.
10-22-2017 , 11:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
Like the prosecutor did at a media conference spectacle based solely on oral testimony...
Please provide evidence that the jury was tainted by a press conference.
10-22-2017 , 05:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
Like the prosecutor did at a media conference spectacle based solely on oral testimony...
Yes, everybody who was anyone pointed out the ethical violations of Kenny 'The Serial Rapist' Kratz.

Sadly, prosecutors get away with this kind of **** because a lot of stupid people believe that a person must be guilty because they get arrested.
10-22-2017 , 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
You mean the “innocent until proven guilty and fair and impartial investigation” groupies. Truly nut jobs...
Innocent until proven guilty? That's crazy talk!

"Reasonable doubt is for innocent people" - Ken Kratz

What a ****ing moron, and what kind of chuckle**** do you have to be to be a fanboy of this ****heel?
10-23-2017 , 01:13 PM
[QUOTE=corpus vile;53012832]

Quote:
They were proven guilty by separate courts of law after receiving a fair trial.
.

Says you.
Quote:

They did have a fair & impartial investigation & nobody itt has provided any credible evidence that the investigation was corrupt.
Well, accept for that part about officers who were only providing assistance located all the key evidence. And the ex-boyfriend who was allowed to enter a secured crime scene for the reasons of...
10-23-2017 , 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer

Well, except for that part about officers who were only providing assistance located all the key evidence. And the ex-boyfriend who was allowed to enter a secured crime scene for the reasons of...
Yes, there is evidence that the 'investigation' was screwy - and the police even acknowledged it would look hinky if officers from the department involved in the wrongful conviction lawsuit participated.

It turns out the supposedly 'forbidden' cops publicly banned from the investigation due to conflict of interest issues were actually the ones who kept 'finding' the evidence used to accuse Steven Avery (the wrongfully convicted man whose lawsuit justified the ban) of murder in this case.

Follow that with the coerced 'confession' from the learning disabled boy, and the inflammatory press conference by Kenny 'The Predator' Kratz, and you have plenty of reason to treat the whole setup as dubious at best.
10-23-2017 , 07:02 PM
[QUOTE=golfnutt;53017628][QUOTE=corpus vile;53012832]

.

Says you.
What? No. Not says me, this isn't up for debate. Says the courts as last I checked both are convicted murderers. As in convicted after a fair trial in separate courts by separate juries after the defence gave it their best shot. I'm merely agreeing with the established facts & conviction. It's not just my opinion, like.


Quote:
Well, accept for that part about officers who were only providing assistance located all the key evidence. And the ex-boyfriend who was allowed to enter a secured crime scene for the reasons of...
You don't have any objective empirical evidence that the investigation was corrupt in anyway & you're again showing utter consistency where you reject courts for Avery & Dassey, yet deem innuendo & speculation sufficient for others, like ex boyfriends.

Things you personally disagree with (press conferences spring to mind) is not objective empirical evidence of corruption & you seriously need to realise this.

Not one of you, not a single one of you has provided anything credible, plausible, compelling or even tangible to challenge the conviction or support any suspicion of frame ups. Ditto for coercion, just a bunch of vague terms such as "clearly" & "obviously" and "universally accepted".

All you've done- all of you- is raise various bars & conflate stuff you dislike or disagree with personally, with actual objective evidence for your claims.

Avery is gonna die in prison. I personally think Rovner et al will be reversed & will probably go to SCOTUS, re Dassey.

We'll see what happens. You people have nothing. Zellner's motion was an utter crock. How some of you stubbornly cling to your beliefs while all the while providing zero of substance and zero evidence is quite frankly flabbergasting.

None of you advocates are fooling anyone who has objectively examined the facts & evidence regarding Ms Halbach's murder.
Your sex murderers are going nowhere.
10-24-2017 , 04:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
Things you personally disagree with (press conferences spring to mind) is not objective empirical evidence of corruption & you seriously need to realise this.
Corpus vile ignores the fact that it's not just the opinion of anonymous denizens of internet forums who point out the unethical behavior of the prosecutor, but respected members of the law profession who have called Ken Kratz out on this.
Quote:
Not one of you, not a single one of you has provided anything credible, plausible, compelling or even tangible to challenge the conviction or support any suspicion of frame ups. Ditto for coercion, just a bunch of vague terms such as "clearly" & "obviously" and "universally accepted".
Again, this is not just the opinion of many who have gone over these interviews in detail, but the opinion of the appellate court.

Quote:
All you've done- all of you- is raise various bars & conflate stuff you dislike or disagree with personally, with actual objective evidence for your claims.
Which just goes to show that corpus vile's claim here is a blatant lie - it isn't just opinions from amateur critics with as little knowledge as he has himself, but the professional opinion of experts in the relevant fields.

ETA: This post from corpus vile conforms to the trolling tactic of simply repeating 'there is no evidence' no matter what evidence is presented.
10-24-2017 , 05:54 AM
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-A...FiQVdJQ3M/view

Zellner files new/amended motion asking circuit court to reconsider. New arguments which differ from her old motion. New suspects. Claims which contradict her client's own sworn statements. Everyone yawns except Avery's groupies.

Wonder what the judge will make of this latest development...
10-24-2017 , 05:57 AM
Meanwhile, for those who are actually interested in the case here is a new motion from the defense which discusses some of the new evidence:

https://static1.squarespace.com/stat...T+1_Motion.pdf
10-24-2017 , 06:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by corpus vile Making a Murderer
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-A...FiQVdJQ3M/view

Zellner files new/amended motion asking circuit court to reconsider. New arguments which differ from her old motion. New suspects. Claims which contradict her client's own sworn statements. Everyone yawns except Avery's groupies.

Wonder what the judge will make of this latest development...
It's not Zellner's job to investigate the murder and prosecute a suspect.

She only need show that the investigation and evidence used against Steven Avery was seriously flawed, resulting in an unsafe verdict.

Even the police admitted that there was good reason to beware of bias against Steven Avery among the police who kept coming up with the dubious evidence used in the case under consideration.
10-24-2017 , 09:12 AM
Zellner throws more **** at the wall, hopes something will stick.
10-24-2017 , 01:33 PM
[QUOTE=corpus vile;53018833][QUOTE=golfnutt;53017628][QUOTE=corpus vile;53012832]


Quote:
Says you.
What? No. Not says me, this isn't up for debate. Says the courts as last I checked both are convicted murderers. As in convicted after a fair trial in separate courts by separate juries after the defence gave it their best shot. I'm merely agreeing with the established facts & conviction. It's not just my opinion, like.
Like his first trial where he was convicted of rape. I guess that isn't open for debate either.


Quote:
You people have nothing.
Funny.
10-24-2017 , 01:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfnutt Making a Murderer
Like his first trial where he was convicted of rape. I guess that isn't open for debate either.
The murder of Teresa Halbach is a completely separate case, and Avery's conviction for that murder has not at this point been overturned. And even when a conviction is overturned, it does not necessarily mean or imply that the person did not commit the crime. In England, the Court of Appeal, when overturning a conviction, will often note in its report that there was 'sufficient evidence to allow a jury rightly directed to convict', had the procedural errors at issue not occurred.

And, if you don't understand that 'innocent till proven guilty' does not apply to someone who has actually been convicted at trial, then you don't understand anything at all.
10-24-2017 , 02:20 PM
The stuff about Bobby searching for murder images and child porn is a total red herring, it is also not surprising he had google searched for pictures of teresa considering he was a witness to her last location and was questioned by police.

I have searched for pictures and stories about Teresa too, as has I am sure anyone else who has posted in this thread.

Now we have someone claiming they told Colborn they saw Teresas vehicle 12 years after the fact. Are we really supposed to take this seriously? Of course there isn't a paper trail to prove this. More nonsense by Zellner.
10-24-2017 , 02:22 PM
Quote:
She only need show that the investigation and evidence used against Steven Avery was seriously flawed, resulting in an unsafe verdict.
Again, she needs to provide evidence that is "NEW" and would change the outcome of the original trial. She has not done this yet.

      
m