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

10-26-2017 , 02:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Few things about this claim

1) There is no evidence ryan ever had this piece of paper
Ryan is said to have referred to this day planner on November 3rd when people were at Teresa's home getting her phone records. It later ended up in the hands of the police.

Quote:
2) there is no evidence the defense didn't have this piece of paper
It's tough to prove a negative - but it's not about the day planner itself, but about the witness who talked to Teresa on the phone on the morning of her disappearance. Since the day planner was in the car at the time of the call, but not in the RAV4 when it was supposedly 'discovered' on November 5th, how did police get hold of it?

Whatever became of Denise Heitl's statement to police showing that the day planner was in Teresa's RAV4 on the day she disappeared? If the defense had this information, the day planner would be an obvious clue as to who the killer was. Police had this information and didn't follow up on it - apparently because the evidence pointed away from the guy whose guts they hated.

Quote:
3) there is no evidence that the piece of paper was in her car rather than a home office.
When you get around to reading the papers submitted, you will find among them the affidavit of Denise (nee Coakley) Heitl, who swears under oath that Teresa Halbach talked to her on the phone on the morning of October 31st, 2005. Teresa was driving between appointments, consulted her day planner, and took note of this appointment for the following day.

This is supported by phone records and Teresa's handwritten notation on her day planner for this appointment.

Again, the facts support Zellner's claim.

Quote:
All of Zellners conclusions on this matter are unwarranted. If you want to lay out why all 3 of these are more likely the case or even justifiable to conclude I will listen.
So you see, not at all 'unwarranted' - in fact, very well supported.
10-26-2017 , 03:24 PM
Just FYI: on Jan 20, 2006 police learned that Hillegas had in his possession the day planner on November 3rd 2005 - even before Teresa was reported missing.
10-26-2017 , 07:31 PM
Right, I read it. It doesn't establish that Halbach was in her vehicle or that she didnt return home before going to her next appointment.

The next appointment she went to was 2 hrs after this phone call, the affadavit from denise states Teresa told her she was on her way to an appointment.

It is possible she left the book in her car but more likely that she either was at home during this call or simply just returned home sometime in that 2 hr period. Which removes any requirement for this planner to be in the car.

Also, saying ryan gave police the paper is again.. Just speculation. But all of this is speculation.
10-26-2017 , 07:33 PM
It does appear according to the expert some of those images were downloaded in april. The images have timestamps under them. So I was wrong about that.
10-26-2017 , 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Right, I read it. It doesn't establish that Halbach was in her vehicle or that she didnt return home before going to her next appointment.

The next appointment she went to was 2 hrs after this phone call, the affadavit from denise states Teresa told her she was on her way to an appointment.

It is possible she left the book in her car but more likely that she either was at home during this call or simply just returned home sometime in that 2 hr period. Which removes any requirement for this planner to be in the car.

Also, saying ryan gave police the paper is again.. Just speculation. But all of this is speculation.
Yes, everything you said is speculation.

Zellner just presented a sworn statement and some phone records that back it up.

It makes no sense Teresa would leave her planner for which jobs she was going to that day at home.

As I expected, you'd rather speculate than accept the facts that don't agree with your theory.
10-26-2017 , 08:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
It does appear according to the expert some of those images were downloaded in april. The images have timestamps under them. So I was wrong about that.
Thanks for admitting your mistake, and acknowledging I was right all along.

That puts you far ahead of those trolls who are so far gone they put people on ignore so that they will never know when they make mistakes.
10-26-2017 , 09:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkasigh Making a Murderer
I don't know if it's off-topic or not. It doesn't seem relevant to me, but for all I know some new development in the case that I am unaware of may make it significant.

That's why I'm asking for someone to explain the connection.
Unfortunately for Zellner, no matter how brashly she flaunts her porn histogram, it won't change the fact that the images her expert found on the computer are not even new evidence. This information (if not the actual images) is already included in the Wisconsin DCI report (which was turned over to the defense):



http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...s.pdf#page=116
10-26-2017 , 10:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Yes, everything you said is speculation.

Zellner just presented a sworn statement and some phone records that back it up.

It makes no sense Teresa would leave her planner for which jobs she was going to that day at home.

As I expected, you'd rather speculate than accept the facts that don't agree with your theory.
Sure it does, she did have a PDA. Lots of people leave notes and a paper trail at a home office. What makes no sense is if she was already on her way to her next appointment why it took her over 2 hrs to get there after her phone call. It is speculation to say the planner was in her car at all let alone after she left home.

All the phone records establish is that she did talk to her.
10-26-2017 , 10:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
Unfortunately for Zellner, no matter how brashly she flaunts her porn histogram, it won't change the fact that the images her expert found on the computer are not even new evidence. This information (if not the actual images) is already included in the Wisconsin DCI report (which was turned over to the defense):



http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...s.pdf#page=116
Was she arguing ineffective counsel or a Denny violation there though? Guess it doesn't matter because there is nothing ineffective about not presenting this kind of conjecture in court.
10-27-2017 , 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Sure it does, she did have a PDA. Lots of people leave notes and a paper trail at a home office. What makes no sense is if she was already on her way to her next appointment why it took her over 2 hrs to get there after her phone call. It is speculation to say the planner was in her car at all let alone after she left home.

All the phone records establish is that she did talk to her.
+1

For more reasons why it's ludicrous, read here:
https://np.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurde...ly_a_page_she/


Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Was she arguing ineffective counsel or a Denny violation there though? Guess it doesn't matter because there is nothing ineffective about not presenting this kind of conjecture in court.
She's claiming the "new computer forensic technology reveals" these images.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...on.pdf#page=46
10-27-2017 , 06:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Sure it does, she did have a PDA. Lots of people leave notes and a paper trail at a home office. What makes no sense is if she was already on her way to her next appointment why it took her over 2 hrs to get there after her phone call. It is speculation to say the planner was in her car at all let alone after she left home.

All the phone records establish is that she did talk to her.
Yes, the phone records shows that Denise did talk to her during the time Teresa set aside for Auto Trader activities, and Denise swears to the content of the conversation. This is evidence.

So this evidence indicates the day planner was in the car when Teresa was on her way to her Auto Trader appointments. Teresa made handwritten notes on the planner in the car when this appointment was made.

No one has produced any evidence that Denise was mistaken or lied. No one has produced any evidence that Teresa went home after this call. That is where all the speculation is.
10-27-2017 , 01:22 PM
She's claiming the "new computer forensic technology reveals" these images.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...on.pdf#page=46[/QUOTE]

Right but I think she is arguing ineffective counsel. That they should have used this.
10-27-2017 , 01:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
Yes, the phone records shows that Denise did talk to her during the time Teresa set aside for Auto Trader activities, and Denise swears to the content of the conversation. This is evidence.

So this evidence indicates the day planner was in the car when Teresa was on her way to her Auto Trader appointments. Teresa made handwritten notes on the planner in the car when this appointment was made.

No one has produced any evidence that Denise was mistaken or lied. No one has produced any evidence that Teresa went home after this call. That is where all the speculation is.
The call was made two hours before her next appointment. There is no reason to assume she physically wrote this down vs using a pda or that she wrote this down then returned home vs didn't return home.

Unless you can show what she was doing for two hours that excludes her from returning home and you can show that the planner was in her car vs her using a pda.. You can't say what you're saying.
10-27-2017 , 02:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoorSkillz Making a Murderer
http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...ts.pdf#page=96

That's the general area, you can browse down from there.

Her computer expert and chart mistakenly say 9/18/2006, but the actual computer records say 9/18/2005.

Later on, her criminal psychology expert says the searches were in 2005 and that based on the porn-search histogram provided by Zellner he's able to conclude only Bobby could have made those searches.

It's all a load of desperate bull****.
Thank you kindly. So that depressing and horrible list of porn searches was generated between 05.57 and 22.04, UTC -6, on Sunday 18 September 2005, per the data table reproduced in the defence's own document. That was some time before the murder.

So the '2006' claim which appears immediately above in the appeal document would appear to represent either incompetence or dishonesty on the part of the appellant's lawyer or her assistants. And this does not relate to the computer's date of accession into custody or the date of origin of certain contentious images, both in April 2006. The appellant's lawyer has simply misstated the date of those 18 September 2005 searches by one year.

You certainly cannot determine, by 'psychology', who was using a computer when certain operations were carried out. That would be voodoo.
10-27-2017 , 02:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
It does appear according to the expert some of those images were downloaded in april. The images have timestamps under them. So I was wrong about that.
I would certainly wonder why those images (reproduced in very primitive black and white) are supposed to come from files originated on 19 April, two days before the computer was seized.
10-27-2017 , 04:12 PM
To be clear, the date of the images lists a date in april. But it is unclear if that is some kind of cached date, a date the images were pulled up from a saved file, or the date they were searched for.

The only clear date we have for searched google images is a date in sept 2005.. Which was a Sunday.

Even if we give the fact that this was most likely Bobby (a fact that can certainly be disputed) it doesn't really do much. Lots of people have morbid curiosity and look up gross images on the web. Even if Bobby has some kind of disorder that makes him crave such images, all that gives him is a motive. Which is far from connecting him to the crime.
10-27-2017 , 04:16 PM
To make it even more confusing.. Some of the images couldn't have been searched by bobby. He was at work at 10pm on sunday and some of the searches happened after that.
10-27-2017 , 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
The call was made two hours before her next appointment. There is no reason to assume she physically wrote this down vs using a pda or that she wrote this down then returned home vs didn't return home.
The handwritten notation on the day planner indicates Teresa physically wrote this down. I can't understand why this is not readily apparent. Have you not seen the day planner?

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...ay-planner.pdf

I don't 'assume' Teresa wrote it down - it's obvious she did.

I have zero evidence Teresa returned home after this call at 11:35 AM when this appointment was made. Do you?

Quote:
Unless you can show what she was doing for two hours that excludes her from returning home and you can show that the planner was in her car vs her using a pda.. You can't say what you're saying.
Unless you can show that Teresa returned from her car on her way to an appointment (as stated in the affidavit) to her home, you can't say what you are saying.
10-27-2017 , 04:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 57 On Red Making a Murderer
I would certainly wonder why those images (reproduced in very primitive black and white) are supposed to come from files originated on 19 April, two days before the computer was seized.
I suppose it's possible whoever was left in the house didn't anticipate the computer would be seized.

Sometimes the police do not give advance notice of what they will do.
10-27-2017 , 05:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
The handwritten notation on the day planner indicates Teresa physically wrote this down. I can't understand why this is not readily apparent. Have you not seen the day planner?

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...ay-planner.pdf

I don't 'assume' Teresa wrote it down - it's obvious she did.

I have zero evidence Teresa returned home after this call at 11:35 AM when this appointment was made. Do you?



Unless you can show that Teresa returned from her car on her way to an appointment (as stated in the affidavit) to her home, you can't say what you are saying.

You are not understanding what I am saying. The witness testified that Teresa was on her way to an appointment and pulled over to the side of the road to write down what she was saying. Her next appointment was 2 hrs after this call. We agree on all of that right?

Say we take the witness for her word and that she has all of her details right in remembering this call. For the sake of argument I am willing to do that.

There is a 2 hr break here. Whos to say Teresa didn't use her pda to copy the notes and returned home to create a paper trail for her office. Completely plausible given the evidence. If we don't know either way we must maintain a null hypothesis. Meaning we can't demonstrate she had this planner with her when going to avery's. If at all during her car ride.
10-27-2017 , 05:08 PM
I think where we are having a disagreement is you think I am saying SHE DID return home and I am not. I am saying its equally as likely she did or rather likely enough that concluding she didn't is unjustified.
10-27-2017 , 08:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
You are not understanding what I am saying.
I do - it's not complicated.

Quote:
The witness testified that Teresa was on her way to an appointment and pulled over to the side of the road to write down what she was saying.
That is what the witness said. So, if we agree on this then we do agree that the day planner was in the RAV4 as of that phone call.

Quote:
Her next appointment was 2 hrs after this call. We agree on all of that right?
I don't know exactly what appointment Teresa was on her way to when she received this call. It's about an hour drive from the vicinity of Teresa's home to the area near Avery Salvage, assuming no stops.

https://www.distance-cities.com/dist...-to-hilbert-wi

Or if it was Schmitz in New Holstein that's about 23 minutes:

https://www.distance-cities.com/dist...-to-hilbert-wi

If it was Zipperer then it was about 50 minutes...

https://www.distance-cities.com/dist...-to-hilbert-wi

Assuming no stops for gas, or soda, cigarettes, taking pictures of pretty cows, or lunch.

Quote:
Say we take the witness for her word and that she has all of her details right in remembering this call. For the sake of argument I am willing to do that.

There is a 2 hr break here.
According to the reconstructed timeline (assuming that is correct) then there is about a two hour time between when Teresa is in her car taking a call from Denise and the first appointment the police have supposed.

Quote:
Whos to say Teresa didn't use her pda to copy the notes and returned home to create a paper trail for her office. Completely plausible given the evidence.
We could dream up all kinds of fanciful scenarios.

Quote:
If we don't know either way we must maintain a null hypothesis. Meaning we can't demonstrate she had this planner with her when going to avery's. If at all during her car ride.
All we know for certain - based on the evidence - is that on the morning of the day she disappeared the day planner was in Teresa's car and that she said she was on her way to an Auto Trader appointment.

There is no evidence she turned around and went home to ditch the day planner, and there is no plausible motive for her to do so.

It appears - based on the evidence - she took notes on the day planner when she received phone calls while in transit. Teresa had no way of knowing whether she would receive further phone calls connected to her business during the rest of the day.
10-27-2017 , 09:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
Right but I think she is arguing ineffective counsel. That they should have used this.
I'm not sure she is arguing that and not that the new computer technology led them to realize it was Bobby doing these searches? Where does she say it was ineffective counsel to not show Bobby was doing these searches?

I'm not really sure what she's arguing anymore (her new theory seems to involve both Ryan and Bobby along with Colborn and the cops). It's absurd.


Quote:
Originally Posted by fraleyight Making a Murderer
The call was made two hours before her next appointment. There is no reason to assume she physically wrote this down vs using a pda or that she wrote this down then returned home vs didn't return home.

Unless you can show what she was doing for two hours that excludes her from returning home and you can show that the planner was in her car vs her using a pda.. You can't say what you're saying.
Also worth noting that for all of TH's many phone calls that morning up to 12:51pm the cell tower used was the one by her home.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 57 On Red Making a Murderer
Thank you kindly. So that depressing and horrible list of porn searches was generated between 05.57 and 22.04, UTC -6, on Sunday 18 September 2005, per the data table reproduced in the defence's own document. That was some time before the murder.

So the '2006' claim which appears immediately above in the appeal document would appear to represent either incompetence or dishonesty on the part of the appellant's lawyer or her assistants. And this does not relate to the computer's date of accession into custody or the date of origin of certain contentious images, both in April 2006. The appellant's lawyer has simply misstated the date of those 18 September 2005 searches by one year.

You certainly cannot determine, by 'psychology', who was using a computer when certain operations were carried out. That would be voodoo.
I don't think the porn-search histogram says anywhere what dates it represents, however the only search records shown are from 9/18/2005 and are sometimes misrepresented as 9/18/2006. Yes, the whole reasoning for pinning it all on Bobby is a desperate attempt that has no chance of actually working, and even if it were proven to be Bobby, what he searches for in his wank sessions is inconsequential to Avery's guilt/innocence.
10-28-2017 , 12:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by proudfootz Making a Murderer
I do - it's not complicated.



That is what the witness said. So, if we agree on this then we do agree that the day planner was in the RAV4 as of that phone call.



I don't know exactly what appointment Teresa was on her way to when she received this call. It's about an hour drive from the vicinity of Teresa's home to the area near Avery Salvage, assuming no stops.

https://www.distance-cities.com/dist...-to-hilbert-wi

Or if it was Schmitz in New Holstein that's about 23 minutes:

https://www.distance-cities.com/dist...-to-hilbert-wi

If it was Zipperer then it was about 50 minutes...

https://www.distance-cities.com/dist...-to-hilbert-wi

Assuming no stops for gas, or soda, cigarettes, taking pictures of pretty cows, or lunch.



According to the reconstructed timeline (assuming that is correct) then there is about a two hour time between when Teresa is in her car taking a call from Denise and the first appointment the police have supposed.



We could dream up all kinds of fanciful scenarios.



All we know for certain - based on the evidence - is that on the morning of the day she disappeared the day planner was in Teresa's car and that she said she was on her way to an Auto Trader appointment.

There is no evidence she turned around and went home to ditch the day planner, and there is no plausible motive for her to do so.

It appears - based on the evidence - she took notes on the day planner when she received phone calls while in transit. Teresa had no way of knowing whether she would receive further phone calls connected to her business during the rest of the day.

Just found something you might want to take a look at.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...13.pdf#page=19

According to Angie from auto trader Teresa called her at 11:10 and asked her to fax information over to her about an appointment. She also knew where this appointment was later, indicating she had received the fax.

The fax was not sent until after Dawn returned from lunch.

http://www.stevenaverycase.org/wp-co...13.pdf#page=61

So this does put her home around the time she spoke to Denise. Why would she leave her house, start scheduling appointments after leaving, then not actually go to any appointments for 2 hrs? That seems way less likely than Denise just making a mistake or having bad memory of a situation that happened over 10 years ago.

It appears she was home until after 12:45 when she called schmit to tell them she was on her way. Because she was asking for faxes and talking to people from auto trader up until this time.
10-28-2017 , 12:26 AM
Edit: Also she called the Janda residence at 11:43. I believe there was a voice mail asking for the address? Please tell me if I am wrong because this pretty much proves she was home after 11:43 and before 12:50 when she called schmit because how else did she get the address unless she picked up this fax.. Or hadn't left yet?

      
m