Do you think the security tape used to secure evidence is some flimsy third rate adhesive which has to be reinforced with the mighty scotch tape is just how it works?

So absurd. The only reason it had a shoddy tape job was because someone had to actually cut the security tape and then retape it. Best case is again incompetence but either way it's a massive red flag. All these red flags stack up and cast a pall over all the evidence.

#reasonsbledoubt

What about Manitowoc cops being present at a crime scene where there's a clear conflict of interest? Failure to sign in to said crime scene by said cops with conflict of interest? Laser-beam focus on one suspect while ignoring other clear suspects?

Never interviewing family/close friends and at least getting an alibi from them is completely absurd.

Lenk lying about when he arrived at the site when the car was found. He's either committing perjury or had lied in his previous statement.

But nope, no serious misconduct.

I grew up in the country. One summer when I was about 13, a friend of mine and I went to this lake and we must have killed something like 100 toads with a pocket knife. At the age of 15 I used to shoot squirrels with a pellet gun that fired little arrow-dart like pellets. Now I'm not proud of that behavior, but I was a bored kid pre-internet. I've never done a violent thing in my life since then really. I also shoplifted about 3 times as a kid.

Am I a rapist or a murderer? Now imagine if I grew up in the country in Wisconsin on a salvage yard, and had an IQ of 70-80. These are really bored simple people we are talking about. Pure rednecks for sure, but that does not make them killers.

He was a grown man.

A problem with using some past malicious behavior (cat attack) of Avery as some indicator of true guilt is that it could be that all the other suspects also had done malicious things as well. For example,

1)Apparently Scott Tadych punched a girlfriend and threatened to kill her
2)Charles Avery apparently raped his wife, strangled her with a telephone cord, and threatened to kill her
3)Even Prosecutor Ken Katz sexually harassed a woman over a long period of time (and of course helped put an innocent person in prison)

I haven't made the effort to check out other people involved but I wouldn't be surprised if most of them had some record of aberrant behavior too. Poor Teresa H. was not living in a community of angels that had just one bad actor.

There's a good reason that you can't use things like that at a trial.

I'm sure by 15 with my normal IQ, I was probably about as mature as him at say 20 with his IQ and upbringing. BD at 16 was basically like a 7 year old child for example.

So... Jodi calls Steven Avery a monster and believes he's guilty.

http://www.hlntv.com/shows/morning-e...sive-interview

Bracing myself for the "She was just jealous!" "She was coerced!" "She's a drunk!" etc.

Planting evidence on someone who is guilty to make a stronger case is not incompetence, it's criminal.

We don't know all the details and there's all kinds of scenarios we can come up with. Even Brendan gives one scenario (I don't believe he was coerced into saying this part, but could be wrong), saying Avery put her in there to try to dispose of her another way, then decided to burn her instead).

By the time it was a homicide investigation, literally every piece of evidence pointed to Avery family, and specifically Steven, as a suspect. No evidence pointed to the family/close friends as suspects.


There's 2 pieces of evidence tape. We don't know how often the box was accessed legally. Maybe the jurors knew.


Manitowoc cops were allowed to be there by Calumet. We see a press conference saying they weren't used - I'd like to know the date of this press conference and I'd like to know how the cops being there was explained to the jury though.
Someone forgot to sign out once.
All the relevant Avery/Dassey family were interviewed and had DNA taken. No evidence they were ignored.

You don't seem to be able to grasp the concept of reasonable doubt. Semantics? Sure, man.

I don't disagree.

I think given the system of law we have, that he should have walked away not guilty on this 99.9% but in trying to figure out the actual truth of the matter, I think it seems like he did have something to do with it.

The police should easily be in jail, but I can understand a situation where they were concerned with the press, etc. that he gets away with it and they wanted that to not happen.

maybe his initial plan was to crush her in the car, but then realized that may not be the best plan and took her out and burned her. unfortunately for him, he didn't have an opportunity to crush the car.

Do we know what point in time the blood was found on the RAV4? Was it identified prior Lenk being on scene when he hadn't signed in?

After seeing all the evidence, if there's still reasonable doubt about someone's guilt, then they should be found not guilty.

Are you satisfied and can we move on now?

Maybe we can discuss how we feel about Jodi's accusations.

he didn't have an opportunity between October 31st and November 5th to crush it?

I've only watched 3 but I'm amazed so far. Everyone is telling me not to Google so I haven't

I believe the vehicle was first inspected on Nov 6th.

The defense claims Lenk could've planted the blood on Nov 5th.

Bones weren't found until 2-3 days later.

I don't really understand planting blood if you don't know the victim's dead, but hey that's just me.


1. He wasn't there the whole time, but rather sometimes at the cabin with family on a pre-planned trip (interesting info about it in the summary of Bryan Dassey's interview: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...06_exhibit_89/).
2. You can read the opinion of someone who works with car crushers here: https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...f=search_posts

Curious how the propane driver guy seeing a green SUV leaving the Avery property melds in with the railroading of Avery by PoorSkillz.

She was in jail at the time of the murder. All of her subsequent communication with Avery was recorded, either because she was in jail or he was. So if he was pressuring/threatening her into making him look good there's a recording of it, isn't there？ Ditto if he said anything incriminating to her.

Avery blood on vehicle does not show TH is dead. Even if she's found not dead, his blood being on her vehicle makes him a much more likely suspect. (we'll ignore the fact that if not dead she could testify)

re: edta test

Obviously there are some suspect circumstances surrounding the test but I can't get over the judge not allowing the defense to test it independently. Any good reason for this?