International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   Trials and Errors (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=106)
-   -   Steven Avery: Making of a Murderer Part 2 (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=321151)

JREF2010 26th June 2017 06:16 AM

Mod Info This is a continuation of http://www.internationalskeptics.com...] this thread. As is usual, the split point is arbitrary and participants are free to quote from the closed thread if they wish.
Posted By:Agatha





Theres supposedly a release/bond filed for Brendan.

So will the State file to keep him locked up again?

The Defense is moving forward as they should. The State has to decide to go against the 7th new ruling or drop the whole thing.

STATE is the unknown for now....the options seem to be.

Re-Trial more 16yr old confession crap & no evidence found of Brendan anywhere. Does the State want to waste more money ? probably not.

FULL 7th Re-Vote:
To have one more 7th Vote of everyone is another option for the State. Its cheaper than a retrial and more likely, imo.
Seems silly because whats the point really of having the 3-Judge thing if anyone who loses asks for the Full Vote? I suspect this request will probably be rejected too. But it is cheaper than a retrial.

DROP IT: State could toss Kratz under the bus as a loser poster boy. The new politicians can have photops with Brendan on TV and take his "popular vote" side on tv. They could spin it in their favor and use the already tainted sweatyProsecutor as the bad-egg loser whose to blame for wasting all the states money. and the politicians can then start some more Brendan Bill! geeez... very likely if the popular vote in Wisconsin is to Free Brendan.

Beg the US Supreme Court to review and overturn it back to a Guilty verdict...probably seems a big request when all the MCSD has is a video tape with no scientific evidence of Brendan a 16yr old retarded kid being asked by Weaslegart "so we'll come out and tell you...who shot her in the head?!? you can home if you tell us the right answer we want to hear""we're your friends...Im going to rub your leg with my hand and get you candy "
Highly unlikely isnt it?


This is where Factbender/Weaslegart screwed up. When TF sent the request for PoofyHair Lab gal to put Avery in the garage or trailer, he probably should have requested some last minute DNA of Brendan in there too or maybe had Lenk and Colburn find something of the victim in Brendans pant pocket.

Is it too late for Lenk and AC to go back to the trailer and find maybe something with the victims DNA and Brendans? Maybe Lenk and AC could find something of the victims in Brendans pant pocket... like they found the bullet and key on Steve placing him in the trailer and garage much much later.
Maybe they could lay another Key in the middle of the floor but this time its in Brendans trailer with Brednans DNA on a "spare key" from the SUV. Maybe find a bullet all the investigators missed the first 12 times they went through the garage? hmmm...

If Brendans released should he stay in MCSD?

Samson 26th June 2017 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JREF2010 (Post 11898268)
Theres supposedly a release/bond filed for Brendan.

So will the State file to keep him locked up again?

The Defense is moving forward as they should. The State has to decide to go against the 7th new ruling or drop the whole thing.

STATE is the unknown for now....the options seem to be.

Re-Trial more 16yr old confession crap & no evidence found of Brendan anywhere. Does the State want to waste more money ? probably not.

FULL 7th Re-Vote:
To have one more 7th Vote of everyone is another option for the State. Its cheaper than a retrial and more likely, imo.
Seems silly because whats the point really of having the 3-Judge thing if anyone who loses asks for the Full Vote? I suspect this request will probably be rejected too. But it is cheaper than a retrial.

DROP IT: State could toss Kratz under the bus as a loser poster boy. The new politicians can have photops with Brendan on TV and take his "popular vote" side on tv. They could spin it in their favor and use the already tainted sweatyProsecutor as the bad-egg loser whose to blame for wasting all the states money. and the politicians can then start some more Brendan Bill! geeez... very likely if the popular vote in Wisconsin is to Free Brendan.

Beg the US Supreme Court to review and overturn it back to a Guilty verdict...probably seems a big request when all the MCSD has is a video tape with no scientific evidence of Brendan a 16yr old retarded kid being asked by Weaslegart "so we'll come out and tell you...who shot her in the head?!? you can home if you tell us the right answer we want to hear""we're your friends...Im going to rub your leg with my hand and get you candy "
Highly unlikely isnt it?


This is where Factbender/Weaslegart screwed up. When TF sent the request for PoofyHair Lab gal to put Avery in the garage or trailer, he probably should have requested some last minute DNA of Brendan in there too or maybe had Lenk and Colburn find something of the victim in Brendans pant pocket.

Is it too late for Lenk and AC to go back to the trailer and find maybe something with the victims DNA and Brendans? Maybe Lenk and AC could find something of the victims in Brendans pant pocket... like they found the bullet and key on Steve placing him in the trailer and garage much much later.
Maybe they could lay another Key in the middle of the floor but this time its in Brendans trailer with Brednans DNA on a "spare key" from the SUV. Maybe find a bullet all the investigators missed the first 12 times they went through the garage? hmmm...

If Brendans released should he stay in MCSD?

From my vantage point, it would bring the US Supreme Court into total disrepute to be implicated in the continued captivity of Brendan.
Nothing should surprise when form so often trumps function in justice, but that would shock me beyond belief.

Chris_Halkides 30th June 2017 11:35 AM

The Reid method and false confessions are treated
 
A discussion of confessions and how this relates to the Dassey case, courtesy of Cornell.

quadraginta 30th June 2017 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samson (Post 11898836)
From my vantage point, it would bring the US Supreme Court into total disrepute to be implicated in the continued captivity of Brendan.
Nothing should surprise when form so often trumps function in justice, but that would shock me beyond belief.


I was pretty shocked when a sitting SCOTUS Justice, as part of a formal dissent, expressed the opinion that there was no Constitutional basis for preventing the execution of the actually innocent as long as the trial which declared them guilty had crossed all the "t"s and dotted all the "i"s. Later evidence be damned.

Tough to top that one.

Samson 30th June 2017 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 11903735)
I was pretty shocked when a sitting SCOTUS Justice, as part of a formal dissent, expressed the opinion that there was no Constitutional basis for preventing the execution of the actually innocent as long as the trial which declared them guilty had crossed all the "t"s and dotted all the "i"s. Later evidence be damned.

Tough to top that one.

I guess some would have shed few tears when his hunting was curtailed.

wasapi 30th June 2017 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quadraginta (Post 11903735)
I was pretty shocked when a sitting SCOTUS Justice, as part of a formal dissent, expressed the opinion that there was no Constitutional basis for preventing the execution of the actually innocent as long as the trial which declared them guilty had crossed all the "t"s and dotted all the "i"s. Later evidence be damned.

Tough to top that one.

It is shocking. Also difficult to comprehend.

BStrong 3rd July 2017 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides (Post 11905297)
A discussion of confessions and how this relates to the Dassey case, courtesy of Cornell.

Excellent Link.

Any case dealing with confessions by minors can be problematic.

Cases involving a minor with diagnosed mental illness or deficiencies even more so.

Chris_Halkides 27th July 2017 11:47 AM

Illusion of Justice, by Jerry Buting
 
I am about halfway through Jerry Buting's book, "Illusion of Justice." I am tempted to ask, "Did Manitowoc County frame an innocent man or a guilty one?" I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to know how the criminal justice system works in practice.

DragonLady 27th July 2017 08:30 PM

Quote:

I am tempted to ask, "Did Manitowoc County frame an innocent man or a guilty one?"
Yes; that's the question on my mind, too. But after all these thousands of pages of comments and discussion, I have no answer.

I'm fairly certain Dassey is innocent. Beyond that, the waters just seem to get murkier and murkier the deeper we go.

quadraginta 28th July 2017 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides (Post 11936296)
I am about halfway through Jerry Buting's book, "Illusion of Justice." I am tempted to ask, "Did Manitowoc County frame an innocent man or a guilty one?" I would recommend this book to anyone who wants to know how the criminal justice system works in practice.


I think it is a good question, but it provokes another one. Is there any difference in our system of justice between framing an innocent man and framing a guilty one?

Both require an abandonment of the rule of law.

It is easy to allow the emotional satisfaction of believing we are seeing a guilty man punished to sway our conclusions about a trial which does just that, but it ignores the more crucial question of the effect on the fundamental legitimacy of our trial system.

I suggest that there is no ethical difference at all between the two, and that both are equally corrosive to our respect for rule of law and its importance to our society.

DragonLady 28th July 2017 01:39 AM

Quote:

I suggest that there is no ethical difference at all between the two, and that both are equally corrosive to our respect for rule of law and its importance to our society.
I think I agree. I think I'd like to see all those involved in either planting evidence or turning a blind eye when others do it prosecuted.

Samson 28th July 2017 07:10 AM

If Steve killed her he also drove from the property with her body in the back seat of her own car and returned to his trailer to phone Jodi.

Is there a different possibility? I can't divine it from the evidence in chief.

Maybe there is a way to do this without a Steven Spielberg script.

Chris_Halkides 31st July 2017 09:34 AM

Discovery of a needle in a haystack
 
From pp. 243-244 of the book Illusion of Justice, by Jerry Buting comes his cross examination of Sherry Culhane. This passage covers the issue of the negative control with respect to the bullet fragment.

"Q. At no time, in this report, do you ever disclose, that in order to make that finding, you had to deviate from a protocol, did you?"
A. No"
Q, Anyone reading this report would never know..."
A. Without discovery, no.
SNIP
"Q. --ma'am, you did not disclose, in that report, that official report, that Courts, and juries, and judges, and lawyers, and everybody else relies on, that in order to make that call, you had to do something so rare you have never done it before, did you?
A. No, I did not."

Professor Paul Giannelli said with respect to the DNA evidence in the Duke lacrosse case that the defense should not have to search through a haystack to find the exculpatory needle. Yet that is what happened in the Avery case.

marplots 31st July 2017 12:29 PM

The phrase, "exculpatory needle" sounds like it means a single, hyper-probative, get-out-of-jail-free, bit of undeniable evidence which blows the whole case open, recasts all the other evidence in a new light and clears our boy.

Is that what this is? Because I'm seriously smelling some exaggeration here.

Chris_Halkides 31st July 2017 01:02 PM

Exculpatory information can come in all degrees
 
When DNA shows up in a negative control, one repeats the work. Period. The fact that her supervisor OK'd reporting a result from this batch is meaningless. No one can be sure how she contaminated it. Why even perform the control if you are going to ignore it?

IMO because of the result from the negative control, the profile on the bullet is worth nothing, and I would hope that the jury would have discounted it accordingly. The information that the lawyers eventually turned up about the negative control is exculpatory. How exculpatory it is can be debated, but it certainly falls into that broad category.

marplots 31st July 2017 01:35 PM

Exculpatory refers to facts which show the defendant to be innocent. These are of the "he couldn't have done it because he was in Madrid" type. In other words, evidence that shows it was not possible for him to have done it (or at least strongly imply that).

A technician who makes a mistake, or even committed fraud, can only taint whatever evidence the technician handled, and that's certainly worth noting but the prosecutor can just drop the whole line of evidence. Bad evidence doesn't have to be exculpatory and in this case, I don't think it is.

Samson 31st July 2017 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marplots (Post 11940260)
The phrase, "exculpatory needle" sounds like it means a single, hyper-probative, get-out-of-jail-free, bit of undeniable evidence which blows the whole case open, recasts all the other evidence in a new light and clears our boy.

Is that what this is? Because I'm seriously smelling some exaggeration here.

I am comfortable with another approach.
There is extreme controversy about a piece of vital evidence that seems damning.
The man seems to have a remarkably strong alibi, hard to break.

Therefore I will take the provisional view there is an explanation that does not involve Avery in the bullet evidence and wait for forensics that are not controversial.
In fairness, his blood in the Rav4 needs explanation. But as I said above, the narrative seems to require him to drive off with her body in the back seat (her blood in the back seat confirmed and the car was reliably seen leaving) and return somehow and make a phone call at 5pm. It does not compute.

Chris_Halkides 31st July 2017 02:31 PM

exculpatory versus inculpatory evidence
 
Evidence which would tend to indicate the innocence of the defendant. link 1
"Any evidence that is favorable to the defendant in a criminal trial is considered exculpatory. Likewise, any evidence favorable to the prosecution is inculpatory." link2

There is nothing in these definitions which says that any one piece of exculpatory evidence must prove innocence. It is one stone on the scale, so to speak.

quadraginta 31st July 2017 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marplots (Post 11940360)
Exculpatory refers to facts which show the defendant to be innocent. These are of the "he couldn't have done it because he was in Madrid" type. In other words, evidence that shows it was not possible for him to have done it (or at least strongly imply that).


I don't believe this is a reasonable explanation of "exculpatory" as it is applied in a court of law.

This is;
Quote:

exculpatoryadj. applied to evidence which may justify or excuse an accused defendant's actions, and which will tend to show the defendant is not guilty or has no criminal intent.
Quote:


A technician who makes a mistake, or even committed fraud, can only taint whatever evidence the technician handled, and that's certainly worth noting but the prosecutor can just drop the whole line of evidence. Bad evidence doesn't have to be exculpatory and in this case, I don't think it is.

That would be best left up to a jury.

Apparently the DA felt a need to try and conceal the fact, while still trying to present the results as untainted evidence. That should tell you something about his opinion of how a jury would react.

Elagabalus 31st July 2017 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samson (Post 11940365)
...In fairness, his blood in the Rav4 needs explanation. But as I said above, the narrative seems to require him to drive off with her body in the back seat (her blood in the back seat confirmed and the car was reliably seen leaving) and return somehow and make a phone call at 5pm. It does not compute...

And? You mean by using his legs and walking back to the house? How far away was the Rav4 parked? Didn't he use a cell phone? Where are the cell towers? And how accurately can they determine where he was?

Samson 31st July 2017 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elagabalus (Post 11940584)
And? You mean by using his legs and walking back to the house? How far away was the Rav4 parked? Didn't he use a cell phone? Where are the cell towers? And how accurately can they determine where he was?

Was that the crown case he parked up and walked back? ;)

johnny karate 3rd August 2017 01:13 PM

In true James Randi fashion, Zellner calls out the "guilters".

Ampulla of Vater 4th August 2017 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny karate (Post 11944100)
In true James Randi fashion, Zellner calls out the "guilters".

And here is a response put together by some "guilters":


  • In question 4, you claim that "Ms. Halbach’s fingerprints are on the driver’s door handle." According to trial testimony, there was no standard of Teresa's fingerprints available for comparison. We would love to know how you determined her prints were on the driver's door handle.
  • In question 24, you claim Colborn "searched the bookcase for 1.5 hours" on November 5. According to trial testimony, Colborn "did all the photographing that night", then looked at "a bookcase type piece of furniture next to the bed and a desk next to that", spending "an hour or so" in the bedroom. We'd love to know how you determined trial testimony is incorrect, and turned spending an hour or so photographing and searching the bedroom into 1.5 hours searching only the bookcase.
  • You claim in question 31 that blood on our exemplar key in the experiments you'd like us to perform must not be detectable, because "none of Mr. Avery’s blood was detected on the sub-key by the Wisconsin State Crime Lab." We'd love to see the test where they attempted to detect blood on the key but could not, as trial testimony says they did not test for blood. Interestingly, you sent the key to your expert doing RSID testing, but apparently did not have him test the key for blood, either.
  • In question 36, you claim family members were "approaching the fire" in Avery's burn pit between 7:30-11pm. We'll have to assume you're not referring to Brendan, who was at the fire helping Avery to burn Teresa's body. Can you explain which family members you have discovered were approaching the fire?
  • In question 41, you claim prosecution presented "2 inconsistent theories in the Avery and Dassey trials about the cause of death". You admit that "Avery = gunshot to the head", but then claim "Dassey = stabbing and throat cut". We'd like to point you to the Dassey transcripts, and such quotes as "the cause of death was gunshot wounds to the head", "the manner of death was homicide and the cause of death was gunshot", "he stayed as the silent sentinel for Teresa Halbach's last moments while his uncle fired 11 shots into her body"... it seems quite clear to us that the manner of death in Brendan's trial was also gunshots to the head. Can you explain to us how you interpreted those statements to mean the cause of death was "stabbing and throat cut"?
  • In question 43, you claim "Brendan’s confession is so similar to the fictional story in James Patterson’s book/movie 'Kiss The Girls'". Can you reference which pages from the book or scenes from the movie you thought were strikingly similar to Brendan's confession? In the movie there is a scene where a woman is tied to a bed, but she is alive, clothed, and not raped or stabbed. In the book there is a scene where a woman's hands are tied in front of her, not to a bed. Could you reference the page number where a woman is tied to a bed, raped, and stabbed as Brendan described in his confession?
  • In question 48 you claim "bullet fragment (Item FL) got red paint on it", but according to your expert's affidavit, there is no confirmation the red substance on the bullet is paint. You repeat this claim in three separate questions, so we're hoping you can provide the proof that substance is paint.
  • You repeatedly claim Avery's burn pit fire was going from 7:30-11pm, so we'd love to see the evidence you obtained that it began at 7:30 and was put out by 11. That seems to contradict your own client's affidavit, which claims the fire began "around 7pm" and "was almost over" by 8:57pm. It also contradicts witness testimony that the fire was still 4-5 feet high at 11pm, and Avery was sitting there watching it.
  • In question 65 you claim "that Ms. Halbach’s bloodstain pattern in the rear cargo area demonstrated that the RAV-4 was moving while Ms. Halbach’s body was in the rear cargo compartment." As your blood pattern analyst did not mention this in his signed affidavit, we're wondering how you determined this information.
  • In question 71, you claim "Pamela Sturm was the only searcher provided with a camera by Mr. Hillegas." Of course, according to trial testimony, Pam claims it was SB who gave her his camera, not Mr. Hillegas. And, of course, she is the only searcher who asks to be given a camera. Can you share how you determined this was a lie?
  • In question 73, you claim "unidentified blood deposits on the rear cargo door" excluded both Avery and Brendan. We assume you're referring to item A-23, but lab reports state the DNA profile obtained was "insufficient for interpretation." Can you share with us how you developed a DNA profile from that stain that excluded both Steven and Brendan?
  • In question 75, you claim Ryan was not present at Teresa's house at 7:18pm on 11/3. Can you provide evidence that is correct? A statement from someone who was there at that time, his credit card being used elsewhere, security footage showing him elsewhere, etc, would be sufficient.
  • In question 77, you claim Teresa and Scott had a romantic relationship. We're aware BC claimed that the two had slept together a few times, but we're unaware of any actual evidence of a romantic relationship. Did you uncover some in your investigation? Can you provide the evidence Ryan was aware of this romance?
  • In question 79, you state Ryan claimed to be at Teresa's house with Kelly "all afternoon until midnight or 1 a.m". At trial, Ryan claimed Kelly showed up "a few hours after [he] got there", right around that 7:18pm phone call. Can you share the secret interview where Ryan claims Kelly was there all afternoon with him?
  • In questions 81 and 92 (yes, you accidentally repeated questions), you claim "all but one" of Teresa's teeth were "missing" from the burn pit. According to trial testimony, 24 dental fragments were recovered. Can you explain this apparent discrepancy?
  • In question 86, you claim "the microscopic examination of the hood latch swab fail[ed] to reveal any evidence that the swab ever touched a hood latch." According to your expert, analysis revealed "fine mineral grains and other particles of airborne dust (e.g., pollen)", "qualitatively consistent with the size range and composition of debris collected from the hood latch of an exemplar 2012 Toyota Rav 4." Can you explain how that counts as no evidence the swab ever touched a hood latch? If your theory is correct and this is a groin swab, can you explain why Avery had mineral grains and pollen on his groin?

johnny karate 4th August 2017 11:17 AM

Hard to know how much of that is valid, if any of it is. And in fairness, the same could be said of Zellner's questionnaire.

But it's hard for me to take anything seriously from people who are fine with Ken Kratz's shenanigans, but question the ethics of another lawyer.

Samson 4th August 2017 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny karate (Post 11945331)
Hard to know how much of that is valid, if any of it is. And in fairness, the same could be said of Zellner's questionnaire.

But it's hard for me to take anything seriously from people who are fine with Ken Kratz's shenanigans, but question the ethics of another lawyer.

In question 36, you claim family members were "approaching the fire" in Avery's burn pit between 7:30-11pm. We'll have to assume you're not referring to Brendan, who was at the fire helping Avery to burn Teresa's body.

I take that very seriously. I think it is extremely reprehensible for Brendan to help with the Teresa barbeque.
But strange to think no one still believes he did.
Avery guilters are in a parallel universe.

Samson 2nd September 2017 04:23 PM

Zellner claims Halbach was not killed anywhere near the Avery Auto Salvage, but clubbed to death–not shot– likely at her home in Hilbert, Wisconsin, about 30 miles away. Zellner says her latest findings back that up.

http://www.inquisitr.com/4472735/kathle ... very-case/

Clearly she is very likely to be correct. In the article also

"she points to Ryan Hillegas, Halbach’s on-again, off-again boyfriend as the likely killer. She dramatically links him to bumbling Manitowoc County Sheriff’s deputies who she says were duped so badly they planted evidence to cover their tracks."

What a perfect storm for Steven Avery.

Vixen 2nd September 2017 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samson (Post 11982208)
Zellner claims Halbach was not killed anywhere near the Avery Auto Salvage, but clubbed to death–not shot– likely at her home in Hilbert, Wisconsin, about 30 miles away. Zellner says her latest findings back that up.

http://www.inquisitr.com/4472735/kathle ... very-case/

Clearly she is very likely to be correct. In the article also

"she points to Ryan Hillegas, Halbach’s on-again, off-again boyfriend as the likely killer. She dramatically links him to bumbling Manitowoc County Sheriff’s deputies who she says were duped so badly they planted evidence to cover their tracks."

What a perfect storm for Steven Avery.


She's trying to fry snowballs. Whatever happened to that supposed 'tampered' with vial of blood she claims was used to plant Avery's DNA in the vehicle. Quietly dropped, hmmm?


Quote:

Avery maintains that Halbach left his property around 2:30 p.m. that day. He watched her drive away, he says. The state had a different version of events though, and the jury bought it. Ex-Calumet County District Attorney Ken Kratz said some of Avery’s story checked out, but that he was lying about where Halbach went after she took pictures of the van he had for sale. Kratz claims she did not leave the property, but that Avery lured her into his trailer, where she was raped and stabbed before being shot dead in his garage. Halbach’s cremains were found in at least two locations on the Avery property. The state says Avery and nephew Brendan Dassey burned the body in a Halloween bonfire. Zellner challenges that claim.

“We strongly believe this [new] information combined with the flawed forensic evidence used to convict Steven Avery will free him, once again,” Zellner said.
from article.

I recall another pundit, Jim Clemente, announced that JonBenet Ramsey's brother 'did it' and is now facing a multi-million dollar libel suit.

Perhaps Zellner will find herself on the wrong end of a suit herself.

Samson 2nd September 2017 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 11982216)
She's trying to fry snowballs. Whatever happened to that supposed 'tampered' with vial of blood she claims was used to plant Avery's DNA in the vehicle. Quietly dropped, hmmm?


from article.

I recall another pundit, Jim Clemente, announced that JonBenet Ramsey's brother 'did it' and is now facing a multi-million dollar libel suit.

Perhaps Zellner will find herself on the wrong end of a suit herself.

I always considered Avery to be innocent. The crime scene offers no narrative to explain how he did it. She was clearly killed in a different location so he is innocent. QED.

Ampulla of Vater 3rd September 2017 07:53 AM

Here is a link to a podcast you may be interested in. The podcast episodes are interviews with various authors of true crime books. The interviewer, Dan Zupansky, is really awful at interviewing, but for some reason he has a considerable number of followers, myself included. Dan is a journalist and an author, so perhaps his forte is in those areas.

I figured this particular interview may be of interest to some in this thread.

Matthew Best 3rd September 2017 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 11982216)
She's trying to fry snowballs. Whatever happened to that supposed 'tampered' with vial of blood she claims was used to plant Avery's DNA in the vehicle. Quietly dropped, hmmm?

What makes you think that claim has been "quietly dropped"? Is it part of the petition or not?

Vixen 3rd September 2017 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Best (Post 11982835)
What makes you think that claim has been "quietly dropped"? Is it part of the petition or not?

Because the results were promised in March and since then we have heard nothing further, so clearly Zellner is no longer pushing it.


Quote:

Avery's attorney, Kathleen Zellner, of suburban Chicago has told USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin that the testing should wrap-up by March. The slow pace has dampened the spirits of some Avery supporters.

“Slowly beginning to lose hope guys,” one person recently commented on the social media website Reddit. “Someone give me a pep talk! All seriousness, does anyone feel this case has stagnated in a big way and not for the good? Thought she had what she needed? Also I am sure some of the results would be back by now. I can’t help but feel a slide in the confidence levels. All in all my gut feeling is telling me this will not be resolved. Does anyone else feel this way?”

Eventually, the independent lab tests will be known to both Zellner and the Wisconsin Department of Justice, whose lawyers worked with Zellner to facilitate the testing. In court filings last August, Zellner made it clear she intends to file her highly anticipated post-conviction motion aiming to prove Avery's innocence after the results are available.
http://www.postcrescent.com/story/ne...t-up/96533558/


Grasping at straws, IMV.

Matthew Best 4th September 2017 01:11 PM

That's a story from January! The post-conviction motion has already been filed.

Haven't you got anything up to date?

Vixen 4th September 2017 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Best (Post 11984263)
That's a story from January! The post-conviction motion has already been filed.

Haven't you got anything up to date?

If you read the link, above, which Samson posted, you will see that the result has still not come through.

So it's now over a year.

Quietly dropped, as I said.

Do keep up.

Samson 4th September 2017 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 11984277)
If you read the link, above, which Samson posted, you will see that the result has still not come through.

So it's now over a year.

Quietly dropped, as I said.

Do keep up.

The main point of the thread is to decide if Steven Avery killed Teresa Halbach.
I say he did not, but I am not clear on your position Vixen.

Vixen 5th September 2017 03:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samson (Post 11984291)
The main point of the thread is to decide if Steven Avery killed Teresa Halbach.
I say he did not, but I am not clear on your position Vixen.

From what I know of the case, it is very clear he did it.

Samson 5th September 2017 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 11984805)
From what I know of the case, it is very clear he did it.

I have read Shaun Attwood's book and defence attorney Jerome Buting's book. The prosecution theory matches no part of the found crime scenes, and the science of cremation shows burning the body to bones in the fire pit is completely impossible. So Steven Avery is innocent of the crime. Not just IMO, but in the opinions of all objective analysts, with no dog in the fight.

Samzilla 6th September 2017 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vixen (Post 11984277)
If you read the link, above, which Samson posted, you will see that the result has still not come through.

So it's now over a year.

Quietly dropped, as I said.

Do keep up.

Unfortunately the blood samples provided to Zellner were of insufficient quantity to run either the radiocarbon or DNA methylation tests. This fact is noted in the motion Zellner filed back in June.

JREF2010 26th September 2017 06:06 AM

New evidence to be added to the motion it seems on the Avery case.

Dassey's en banc today....but the decision could be a long long time I read.
Wouldn't a person think he would be allowed a release, following two separate decisions in his favor, while he waits for the third decision?

Sinsaint 27th September 2017 08:06 AM

From the sounds of it it’s going to be a 3-4 split with no indication which side the deciding vote is leaning toward.

Chris_Halkides 27th September 2017 10:29 AM

Habeas schmabeas--Wisconsin style
 
Link. [quote] As it stands now, Dassey’s confession is the only legally relevant issue and it is being reviewed through the lens of a controversial statute called AEDPA, which sets an extremely high standard for defendants to receive habeas corpus relief.

Several times during Tuesday’s hearing, the panel of judges made reference to specific sections of AEDPA, prodding the defense and prosecution to explain how Dassey’s case did or didn’t meet at least one of the two standards. Did Dassey’s case “involve an unreasonable application of clearly established Federal law?” Or was it “based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding?” [endquote]


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-20, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.