In most cases the order would surely go go 3, 1, 2, and 2 is an extremely distant 2.

In this case the order definitely goes 2, 3, 1 and 1 is a little bit closer than 2 above, but still way off.

Also in this case "accidental" in 2 needs to be switched out to "intentional".

These 2 statements contradict each other.

it was in episode 1

Lol sauce

Pretty sure you can throw an IQ test. I'm not convinced Steve is a legit low iq.

Agreed that you can throw an IQ test, but most people wouldn't do that if they took it when they were 6 years old.

Is it fair to assume that your reasoning for saying "his prior acts show he is prone to violence - more than a normal well adjusted adult" is to imply that because he was more prone to violence, he is more likely have committed this murder than someone else that was a well adjusted adult?

No. If you recall, the discussion was about whether he was prone to beating Jodi.

We have quite enough facts about him from the doc to understand his nature. For some reason, you think it is important and possible to rehabilitate SA's character beyond the scope of the question: "Did SA commit murder."

I don't recall anyone here arguing that because SA had prior bad acts that he killed Teresa. I'm not. I believe SA did not kill her; most here believe the same.

However, you choose to depart from that by also trying to claim SA is a harmless regular Joe, when it appears he is not.

Pointing a gun at anyone for any reason beyond self defense certainly is evidence of a violent, maladjusted person.

Throwing a cat in a fire is evidence of something worse.

I do not believe SA is shown to have done anything in his life to demonstrate a change of his nature.

So, personally, even though I am sympathetic to SA, I find it absurd anyone would try to convince us that he is a person of good character.

I don't even know if we are reading the same thread.

I'm not sure how any of those things are relevant. That's just bias which takes away from actual evidence.

Watched this whole thing over the last couple days. I started convinced he was being framed by crooked cops because of the lawsuit. But by halfway through, I was having doubts. Now having just finished it, I think both steve avery and brendan are guilty with like 95% certainty. It would be a really tough spot as a juror.

What really turned me was the niece who told the cops that Brendan had been acting strange and sad, lost a lot of weight etc. When she asked him what was up, he confessed to her that he saw Steve burning the body. This is so important yet the show seemed to gloss over it. This is brendan confessing to a family member before the cops could have possibly coerced him. It is also consistent with how people always seem to get caught, by not keeping their mouth shut.

The tv show paints him as a complete imbecile who just nodded his head and said 'Yea' to every question asked. The actual *transcripts show him giving actual details that weren't hinted at in the questions themselves. When asked how he cleaned up with Steve after the murder he says something like "with bleach, gas and a blowtorch". What the ****? I can't buy that he's dropping details like that just out of nowhere. It's true that he's nearly ******ed, but just in the sense that the police were able to trick him into believing he wouldn't get in trouble if he confessed.

*http://convolutedbrian.com.s3.amazon...Transcript.pdf

In which part of the documentary does it appear he is not?

Why does that part make it appear he is not?

What part of the documentary shows bias towards Steven Avery?

What makes you think that part is bias towards Steven's favor?

You'll probably choose not to answer these questions and that is fine, but I hope you get the point. The documentary can't be biased towards Steven Avery and at the same time make it appear he is something worse than the average Joe I am saying I think he is. It's one or the other. And from the documentary I watched biased or not, I saw a pretty typical guy that seemed to have a decent nature about him.

That is unless you feel the documentary made him look like a bad person but in reality you also feel he is "where the devil resides in comfort", so just looking "bad" is actually an improvement and that's where the documentary is biased.

I don't feel it's necessary to rehabilitate his character. I'm simply pointing out the fact that unfair character assassination had a clear role in him landing in jail the first time and still seems prevalent throughout his town and his peers based on the documentary I watched. I'm calling attention to the fact that either A) I'm completely missing some some glaring red flag about this guy or B) Statements like dalerobk2, AngerPush and BustoPro made could be considered more unfair character assassination that has no real credibility.

I guess we simply have 2 different definitions of ass.hole as biggetje mentioned.

I seem to be a bit more forgiving.

Well the girl got on the stand and said she lied to the cops about that and Brendan really told her that he was sad because his first gf dumped him. She seemed genuine enough in her apology.

His weight loss was later stated to be because he thought that his gf dumped him for being overweight.

I haven't checked your link, but I will now. However, the clear problem with this is that in every location checked, there was no evidence of gas, bleach or a blow torch being used to clean. Also, it would have been impossible to clean only Teresa's DNA, blood, flesh and hair, yet leave all the other Avery's DNA, blood, flesh and hair as well as animal blood.

I'd cry too if my cousin admitted he saw my other cousin burning a body yet my family is forcing me to now lie in a court room to authority figures. She's stuck in a serious ethical quandary and she knows her speaking with police is the reason her cousin might get life in prison.

I'm not familiar with forensics or what was actual done to check for traces of a cleanup. I'm sure they went all out and didn't find much, so I agree it's weird. Though, there was evidence of Brandon's bleached pants from the night he helped steve clean up "something".

But on a human level, reading these transcripts and watching the full interviews, it's hard for me to unsee a kid being broken down by skilled interrogators and confessing to a crime he actually committed, buckling under the guilt and trying his best to navigate his way into the least severe punishment. You can see the wheels spinning. At first he's trying to let a little bit of truth out so he doesn't get too much in trouble. The cops keep repeating that they already know everything and if he doesn't tell the complete truth he's going to be in a ton of trouble, but if he tells the truth he won't be

He first admits to helping steve clean up something but pretends he only suspect it was blood. Then it gets progressively and progressively worse until he just outright admits raping her and helping him get rid of the body, says steve was planning it a few days. When asked what he thinks his punishment should be he says something like 'a few years'. The tv show paints him as like a truly mentally handicapped kid but he's not, just standard dumb.

"Standard dumb" lol.

Fruit snacks, you think they were able to successfully clean everything up with bleach, gas and a blow torch, and not leave any evidence behind? Just seems so unlikely/strange that they were able to clean everything, and then fumbled around in the jeep and left blood behind.

http://convolutedbrian.com.s3.amazon...Transcript.pdf[/QUOTE]

Also, I don't know if you know this, but this is the day after Len Cachinsky's PI "interviewed" Brendan and arranged the meeting for the next day for Weigert and Fassbender. So he hadn't just come up with the story, it was fed to him the day before by Cachinsky's goon.

The sad, yet almost comical part of this is that Brendan is trying to stick to the story he was fed by slimebag from the day before. He admits to the most horrific things but Weigert and Fassbender still tell him he is lying because his story doesn't fit with the State's new allegations of how the crime went down. They clearly spoon feed him the changes in the story which are not less or more damning at all, they are just different.

It's just a complete joke what a circus this is. There is just no justifying what these to goons did here. It's disgusting.

I think it's very likely the cops planted evidence and almost certain the cops were operating in some ethically grey areas which are outright illegal. The account above of the brother/exboyfriend trespassing and finding the car days before its official discovery seems possible. That one cop calling in asking about the plate #s from his cell phone is obviously sketchy.

As for them somehow being able to clean up the blood, I really have no clue. Steve Avery planned it out and was confident enough he wouldn't get caught. According to brendan they took her unharmed from the bedroom to the garage where they stabbed her to death. What was she laying on when they stabbed her? Could he have but something down beforehand that they then burned in the fire? He says they burned a cabinet and all the sheets. The cabinet seems strange to me, did it somehow get splattered with blood at some point?

As for not using the crusher and other things, all I can think of is they had to hide this from family members in addition to the police. The above story of the cops finding the car days before officially reported and removing the key comes to mind too. Maybe steve put it off just a day too long and when he went down to crush the car found the key missing and couldn't move the car. He just hoped he somehow lost the key and it wasn't something more serious.

na m8, if you watch the interrogation from the POV that he's raped and assisted in the murder but is trying to cover his own ass but slowly breaks down and tells the truth, you can see right through brendan.

All those pauses and delays and stuttering is when the tiny wheels in his brain are turning as fast as they can to come up with consistent lies but he's just too damn stupid. It isn't just him consistently saying yes and being led in one direction or another. They go over and over the events of the night but in a weird order (probably some technique) and his account converges to him raping and assisting in the murder of the girl. The progression is logical too. At first he says he just helped clean blood, then he came into garage and saw the body already dead in the back of the truck, then he saw steve move the body from bedroom to garage, then he helped move the body, then he raped, then he stabbed etc.

Come on, what is he a ****ing hypnotist? I'd 100% buy the false confession line if brendan was literally ******ed but he isn't. The doc did a very good job of picking clips to make it seem that way, but he's a normal human. It's so much more likely that the cops just tricked a dumb kid into confessing than he was hypnotized by a prosecutor. Oh yea, and the cousin also shared the same delusion or temporary insanity / impulsive lying whatever.

I always roll my eyes when people talk about the relief of confessing and not carrying guilt or whatever. It seems like something for simple minded people who can't manage their thoughts but there are a lot of people like this. Brendan imo is one of them. He committed a rape/murder without putting much thought into it. He said something in a confession like it took him 2 weeks to wonder if he had 'done the right thing or not'. And he thought he was confessing with no consequences because the cops were on his side lol. So much more likely than being hypnotized.

Acting like Avery is a boy scout (tee hee no big deal he torched a cat and ran his cousin off the road pulling a gun out on her) is almost as bad as poorskillz acting like the police department has integrity.

To be clear we are talking about 2 distinctly different interviews. The youtube video shows the first of the 2.

The transcript is from the 2nd interview where they needed to change his story to line up with the state's theory.

I mean, these are the most obviously coerced confessions of all time. I don't even think there's been much debate about them until you got here. Hell, I think even PoorSkillz isn't touching this one.

Since I cant find one in text, here's a pic:




This seems legit to you?

You're trying to make your point by doing to me exactly what I'm stating has been done to Avery, then you go ahead and do it to Avery as well.

- Never said "he was a boyscout"
- Did not use a torch.

This thread is basically reinforcing to me how ****ed you are in America if you're a redneck with a rap sheet full misdemeanors, and you're taken in on a felony charge. Man best of luck to you getting a fair trial.

Theres no coercion and very little suggestion. I'm just skipping through and the kids dropping details all over the place. Honestly I think the one cop in the frame can't believe his ears and is on the edge of his seat. They sat down hoping this scared kid might give them something like "I heard screaming" "I saw Steve moving something that could have been a body". Instead this guy is telling them he raped the girl, stabbed her in the stomach and helped steve put her body on the fire. What little suggestion there was made it's way into the documentary. I think it was they needed him to say she was shot in the head? But pretty early on brendan tells them steve shot her 10 times. I don't remember any suggestion there. The cop probably said something like "what happened next?".

yes

I'm not a lawyer but I guess they usually want consistency and truth in statements. You won't get that with Brendan because he weaves in and out of telling the truth about the murder and trying to downplay his role while also trying to stay consistent with previous lies. He's an imbecile so he fails miserably at all of these.

Even with all this said I'm still leaving 5%. A 2 outter on the river that something else fishy happened. To me that's actually a significant number. It might be reasonable doubt, I said I would be in a real tough spot as a juror.

+1
Especially when fruit snacks says"well brendon ain't that dumb" lol lol lol

Yeah he gets interviewed for murder & then asks when will the interview finish so as he can go watch wrestle mania... Yeah fruit snacks hes not dumb.
A not so dumb person does not get interviewed without his lawyer in the 1st place.
And the bleached jeans that were never tested if my memory is correct, yeah any person who works/lives on a scrap yard with battery acid & brake fluid etc prob all over the place but it just had to be bleach.

I got 2 Q for ya Fruit Snacks
1: Do you think it is possible to clean a house & garage of all trace of a CLEAN-UP. I.E not just removing DNA/hair etc but LOOKING like it has never been touched in years?
2: If SA burned TH's body in the pit, Why is there bones in a quarry quite a distance away? And in turn Why did the MCPD mess the Crime scene-up so badly they removed bones from the pit etc (if they were so desperate to nail SA) before the crime scene Investigators got there.

Also you say that you are sure the MCPD planted evidence & could be criminally liable for it & then say SA/BD is guilty......
What planet do you live on for real?

Go read the rest of this thread with some good links provided & then wait for the SA trial documents that should be coming to a thread near you soon.

#Reasonabledoubt

I wish there were some honest interviews with the cops. Why did they all have it out for this guy so bad? I wonder if its just that small hick town kind of hatred of anyone different or if he really was like a town nuisance going around threatening to kill everyone.