ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags "Making a Murderer" , Brendan Dassey , documentaries , murder cases , Steven Avery , Teresa Halbach , tv shows

Reply
Old 28th December 2015, 10:21 PM   #1
Caper
Philosopher
 
Caper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,713
Steven Avery: Making of a Murderer

Anyone else watching this Netflix doc? I'm a few episodes in. I really want to believe this guy is innocent. But right now I can't come up with a plausible case for innocence. Anyone?
Caper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 12:36 AM   #2
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 22,687
Just done a google search. The guy is innocent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Avery.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 01:34 AM   #3
Caper
Philosopher
 
Caper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,713
I'm 5 episodes in. It's really a crazy documentary. It wasn't until the end of EP.5, where I think there might be a decent shot he is innocent. His nephews confession means nothing to me. The confession is much like that of Joe Dick of the Norfolk 4.

Still skeptical though. I know that the doc wants to lead me down a path and I know I personally really want to believe he is innocent.

Last edited by Caper; 29th December 2015 at 02:04 AM.
Caper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 01:37 AM   #4
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Well I'm not going to call him innocent on the basis of a Google search. I've just started to watch the doco.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 03:27 AM   #5
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,473
Someone killed the woman. Who? I'm not sure...but I'm forced to conclude it was probably Steven Avery.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 08:28 AM   #6
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
I finished it just before Christmas.

I came away unsure of either Avery's guilt or innocence. Another name for it I suppose is reasonable doubt. I don't think there was enough to convict.

I came away absolutely sure of Dassey's innocence. That kid needs a new trial.

The documentary comes across slanted I think because none of the officers, prosecutors, or family members of Teresa Halbach would speak to the filmmakers. All you see is people from the Avery side. Regardless, there looks like some pretty shady shenanigans went on and honestly I found some of it shocking.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 08:07 PM   #7
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
Just done a google search. The guy is innocent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Avery.
How can you say this with such certainty? Innocent of the attempted rape? Without doubt. The murder? This is a very open question. I can't see how anyone can say innocent without doubt.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 08:10 PM   #8
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 5,711
Originally Posted by SomedayGirl View Post
I came away absolutely sure of Dassey's innocence. That kid needs a new trial.
I'm only watching Episode 4 at the moment, but I am finding it very distressing - the way Dassey was treated was unbelievable. The amazing thing is that the detectives and investigators obviously had no inkling that what they were doing was wrong as they knew everything they did was being recorded and obviously had no problem with that. And his lawyer was appalling.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 08:51 PM   #9
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
Stick with it, Matthew. You'll be more than distressed.

His first lawyer was fer **** but the investigator for his lawyer...I just can't even express my contempt. And it's legal in many districts but shouldn't be - the theory of the crime proposed by the prosecution is completely different from Avery's to Dassey's trials. Even though they conflict, the result is two convictions. It's mindboggling.
.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony

Last edited by Agatha; 6th January 2016 at 11:50 AM. Reason: to remove rule 10 breach
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 09:14 PM   #10
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
What I find fascinating is that the series commenced filming 10 years ago. No trying to cobble together loosely connected sources years after the event, we have real people behaving in real time. Very well made.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2015, 11:35 PM   #11
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
I'm only watching Episode 4 at the moment, but I am finding it very distressing - the way Dassey was treated was unbelievable. The amazing thing is that the detectives and investigators obviously had no inkling that what they were doing was wrong as they knew everything they did was being recorded and obviously had no problem with that. And his lawyer was appalling.
The police interrogation of Dassey was disgraceful. It should have been rejected as evidence. And that's only the bit that's recorded! Goodness knows what the kid was subjected to before the cameras were turned on.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 03:33 AM   #12
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,111
Originally Posted by Caper View Post
Anyone else watching this Netflix doc? I'm a few episodes in. I really want to believe this guy is innocent. But right now I can't come up with a plausible case for innocence. Anyone?
After trawling the internet for ideas I discovered this.

Framing is the least of it. Somebody killed this woman. If it wasn't Avery, it was the cops. Everything I have learned about this case tells me it was the cops. They murdered her in cold blood and burned her body. They pinned it on Avery so they could get out from under a massive lawsuit they were sure to lose.

So, I look at it this way: if I lived up there, I'd a hell of a lot rather have Avery on the street than one of those cops in a patrol car, following me on the highway.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 04:04 AM   #13
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
After trawling the internet for ideas I discovered this.

Framing is the least of it. Somebody killed this woman. If it wasn't Avery, it was the cops. Everything I have learned about this case tells me it was the cops. They murdered her in cold blood and burned her body. They pinned it on Avery so they could get out from under a massive lawsuit they were sure to lose.

So, I look at it this way: if I lived up there, I'd a hell of a lot rather have Avery on the street than one of those cops in a patrol car, following me on the highway.
So what's your view? Did the cops frame Avery? What evidence do you have? Have you watched the documentary or are you just posting the musings of some random bozo on the web?

Not a massive discovery by the way.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 04:54 AM   #14
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,111
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
So what's your view? Did the cops frame Avery? What evidence do you have? Have you watched the documentary or are you just posting the musings of some random bozo on the web?

Not a massive discovery by the way.
I know nothing about the case, but was interested to try to answer Caper.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 05:00 AM   #15
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I know nothing about the case, but was interested to try to answer Caper.
Caper asked if you were watching the documentary and if you could come up with anything. But thanks for playing.....
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 04:40 PM   #16
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
The police interrogation of Dassey was disgraceful. It should have been rejected as evidence. And that's only the bit that's recorded! Goodness knows what the kid was subjected to before the cameras were turned on.
Actually most of his interrogations were taped and they're fascinating, headache- and rage-inducing reading. Both written and video versions can be found here:

http://www.convolutedbrian.com/dasse...ons_links.html

lionking, I don't think officers framed Avery in the traditional sense. I don't believe they killed Teresa Halbach and then placed evidence at his place. I think she was killed by someone, the cops believe it is Avery but the case is flimsy so they augmented it by planting evidence that would point to his guilt. The take down of Dassey is just collateral damage on that path.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony

Last edited by SomedayGirl; 30th December 2015 at 04:43 PM.
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 04:44 PM   #17
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 5,711
Originally Posted by SomedayGirl View Post
lionking, I don't think officers framed Avery in the traditional sense. I don't believe they killed Teresa Halbach and then placed evidence at his place. I think she was killed by someone, the cops believe it is Avery but the case is flimsy so they augmented it by planting evidence that would point to his guilt. The take down of Dassey is just collateral damage on that path.
I think we had extensive discussion on the "other" thread over what you should call it when police "frame" someone who is guilty. I don't think there was ever a unanimous decision on that.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 04:57 PM   #18
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
Matthew, I'm sorry but I don't know which thread you mean. I was just trying to clarify that I think the officers in Avery's case did plant evidence but not to create a case but rather to enhance one they thought they had.

You may not be there yet but during closing arguments the special prosecutor tells the jury (paraphrasing):

If you don't find that Steven Avery killed Teresa Halbach, you're saying the police did it. I personally don't believe those are the only two options.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 05:04 PM   #19
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 5,711
It's one of the many sidebar discussions from the Knox/Sollecito thread.

I think I was agreeing with you. It seems to me (I'm only up to Episode 7 so far) that it's conceivable that Avery is in fact guilty, but even more likely that the police planted evidence. Just because the latter is true, doesn't make the former impossible.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 05:24 PM   #20
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
Yikes, THAT thread. lol I've checked into it periodically but it seems very circular and persinickety so I haven't kept up with it.

As I said above, I think Avery may have done it. I don't think so to the level of beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty. If you disregard the evidence that is most shady (the key, the bullet, and Avery's blood in the vehicle) it's even harder for me to get there.

One bit of evidence the series left out - sweat with DNA matching Avery was found on the hood latch of the RAV4. Personally I put that in the key/bullet/blood pile. There were no prints of Avery's anywhere on the vehicle including there, Avery was clearly not the neatest person, and was apparently quite the sweat-er. A sock or teeshirt from the house rubbed on the spot could account for it.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 05:45 PM   #21
Modified
Philosopher
 
Modified's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,153
Originally Posted by SomedayGirl View Post
I don't think officers framed Avery in the traditional sense. I don't believe they killed Teresa Halbach and then placed evidence at his place. I think she was killed by someone, the cops believe it is Avery but the case is flimsy so they augmented it by planting evidence that would point to his guilt. The take down of Dassey is just collateral damage on that path.
Agreed, except I do think it's possible that the cops don't believe Avery is guilty. The prior case shows that they don't care either way, even when there is much less at stake.
Modified is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 06:05 PM   #22
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,473
Quote:
I don't think officers framed Avery in the traditional sense. I don't believe they killed Teresa Halbach and then placed evidence at his place. I think she was killed by someone, the cops believe it is Avery but the case is flimsy so they augmented it by planting evidence that would point to his guilt.
Yes; this.

Quote:
As I said above, I think Avery may have done it. I don't think so to the level of beyond a reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty.
I agree. I can see other plausible scenarios well enough to have doubts.

Quote:
If you disregard the evidence that is most shady (the key, the bullet, and Avery's blood in the vehicle) it's even harder for me to get there.
Those things came from somewhere. If we buy the argument the police took Avery's blood from the evidence locker, we still have to ask where they got the key and the bullet with the victim's DNA on it?

Someone killed her. I have a hard time believing the police officers involved would be more afraid of Avery's lawsuit than potential murder charges -or even charges of interferring with justice. If they couldn't pay the judgement they could have filed bankruptcy; but if they were caught tampering with the crime scene, they would face losing criminal charges of their own.

So it seems more likely they were damn sure he did it, and they wanted to make sure he faced the charges.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 06:33 PM   #23
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
Originally Posted by DragonLady View Post

Those things came from somewhere. If we buy the argument the police took Avery's blood from the evidence locker, we still have to ask where they got the key and the bullet with the victim's DNA on it?
I am troubled that her key has none of her DNA on it, only Avery's. That seems implausible, as does it not being found until the seventh search of the bedroom where it happens to fall out of hiding when an officer with a conflict of interest is on scene. As for where it came from I'm going to guess the vehicle. Same problem with the bullet...missed thru several sweeps of the garage, happens to turn up when an officer with a conflict of interest is there. The DNA on it was so scanty the test for it could only be run once, and was contaminated by the lab during that one time only test. As for where her DNA came from I'd guess the vehicle again, it had her blood in the back. Pretty sketchy in both instances and without them (the only evidence of her inside the house and garage), Avery's blood in the vehicle, and the sweat on the hood latch the case is considerably less sure.

Quote:
Someone killed her. I have a hard time believing the police officers involved would be more afraid of Avery's lawsuit than potential murder charges -or even charges of interferring with justice. If they couldn't pay the judgement they could have filed bankruptcy; but if they were caught tampering with the crime scene, they would face losing criminal charges of their own.

So it seems more likely they were damn sure he did it, and they wanted to make sure he faced the charges.
This is my belief as well.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony

Last edited by SomedayGirl; 30th December 2015 at 06:49 PM.
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 10:56 PM   #24
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
The more I'm watching this doco, the angrier I'm getting. Avery may well be guilty, I'm divided. But the way the police and court stitched up the accused was disgusting.

Among the many issues which worry me is that Avery is no Rhodes Scholar, yet he left blood, but no fingerprints in the SUV. Halbach was allegedly butchered in Avery's shack, yet no trace of blood or tissue at all. He was no criminal mastermind. Things just don't add up, and I can't see how he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th December 2015, 11:59 PM   #25
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Jeez, the quality of the forensics is redolent of the Lindy Chamberlain case.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 12:06 AM   #26
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,473
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
The more I'm watching this doco, the angrier I'm getting. Avery may well be guilty, I'm divided. But the way the police and court stitched up the accused was disgusting.

Among the many issues which worry me is that Avery is no Rhodes Scholar, yet he left blood, but no fingerprints in the SUV. Halbach was allegedly butchered in Avery's shack, yet no trace of blood or tissue at all. He was no criminal mastermind. Things just don't add up, and I can't see how he is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
(sigh) I agree. I'm really surprised either of them were convicted, as it seems there's enough "reasonable doubt" to drive a steamboat through.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 07:13 AM   #27
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
Both cases are pretty stinky but Dassey's is the one that really gets me. For Avery (leaving aside the questionable evidence), he's the last person known to see her alive, her vehicle is found on the Avery salvage yard, and her possessions and remains are found in his burn barrel and burn pit.

For Dassey there's literally nothing - even granting the questionable evidence - except his own very conflicting words, a pair of jeans with bleach stains that police took possession of four months after the crime, and that he was with Avery for a couple hours on October 31. No one ever saw him with Halbach, there's no evidence he ever had any contact with her, and there's no physical evidence of him in Halbach's vehicle or in Steven Avery's house and garage. I just don't see how a jury comes to a unanimous decision that he raped and killed Teresa Halbach with that.

I find it particularly galling that prosecutors use two very different theories of the crime to obtain the two convictions (ex., they say Avery acted alone at his trial but that Dassey acted with Avery at Dassey's trial). They can't both be true. I don't see how it's even legal to do such a thing but in many places it is.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 01:21 PM   #28
Samzilla
Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 189
What I find most interesting is how the DNA was allowed. It was admittedly contaminated and it was acknowledged by the state that they broke protocol to pronounce it as a match and not inconclusive. To top it all off, the lady who testified to all this did not state in her report that protocol was broken to pronounce it as a match.

Regardless of Avery's innocence or guilt, how was this allowed to fly?

Of course, if I've misunderstood this DNA situation, please correct me.
Samzilla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 02:57 PM   #29
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,473
Quote:
Regardless of Avery's innocence or guilt, how was this allowed to fly?
I don't understand that, either. It speaks to a very broken system, IMO.
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 04:59 PM   #30
Modified
Philosopher
 
Modified's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,153
Originally Posted by SomedayGirl View Post
For Dassey there's literally nothing - even granting the questionable evidence - except his own very conflicting words
Not to mention, from the interrogations it's quite clear that you can get him to say anything you want, and possibly to believe it himself.
Modified is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 05:32 PM   #31
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Originally Posted by Modified View Post
Not to mention, from the interrogations it's quite clear that you can get him to say anything you want, and possibly to believe it himself.
It was said early in the doco, if I remember correctly, that Avery's IQ was 70. If anything Dassey's seems lower. This looks not to have been taken into account.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 05:38 PM   #32
Modified
Philosopher
 
Modified's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,153
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
It was said early in the doco, if I remember correctly, that Avery's IQ was 70. If anything Dassey's seems lower. This looks not to have been taken into account.
IIRC they mentioned a 70 IQ for both, and a slightly lower verbal IQ (whatever that is) for Dassey. Dassey is obviously far more malleable though.
Modified is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 09:30 PM   #33
Ampulla of Vater
Master Poster
 
Ampulla of Vater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 2,785
You guys need to understand it is not a documentary. It was produced by Avery's defense and many facts from the trial were left out. Avery called Halbach's phone multiple times during that day. He used *67 so she could not tell who was calling her. Then he called her late in the afternoon, presumably to make it look like he was looking for her when she didn't show up. That is the one time he did not block his number. The implication is it was because he knew she wasn't going to see it anyway.

I was surprised to read about the prosecution's evidence which was never mentioned in the series. That said, I think what they did to Brendan was a travesty.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st December 2015, 10:50 PM   #34
DragonLady
Illuminator
 
DragonLady's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,473
Quote:
Then he called her late in the afternoon, presumably to make it look like he was looking for her when she didn't show up.
??? But she DID show up. His house was the last place she was known to be.

As I said upstairs, I believe he probably killed her. But "probably" isn't supposed to be enough to convict someone.

Is there a really good site somewhere that tells both sides of the story, or where the whole court transcript can be read?
__________________
http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499

“She would be half a planet away, floating in a turquoise sea, dancing by moonlight to flamenco guitar.” ~ Janet Fitch

The Gweat and Tewwible Winged One
DragonLady is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2016, 01:32 AM   #35
Ampulla of Vater
Master Poster
 
Ampulla of Vater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 2,785
I've found transcripts and articles, including a soundcloud interview with Krantz by looking through the links here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/

There are court briefs, CoA opinions and trial transcripts on one of the links on this site. I have saved them all to my dropbox so I'd rather not link you directly to what I've saved. If you don't see it though, let me know and I will PM you the links to my personal dropbox files.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2016, 01:43 AM   #36
Ampulla of Vater
Master Poster
 
Ampulla of Vater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: North of the White Line of Toldt
Posts: 2,785
Originally Posted by DragonLady View Post
??? But she DID show up. His house was the last place she was known to be.

As I said upstairs, I believe he probably killed her. But "probably" isn't supposed to be enough to convict someone.

Is there a really good site somewhere that tells both sides of the story, or where the whole court transcript can be read?
The theory is he was going to claim she didn't show up. That was before it was known there were witnesses to her vehicle being at his place.

I agree with you. He probably did kill her but the evidence shown in the Netflix series is quite thin. Keep looking though, there is more evidence against him which doesn't look good, aside from the "planted" evidence.

Here is a link to an email supposedly authored by Krantz:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/h7nnb9xngy...f%202.png?dl=0

Here is the soundcloud interview with Krantz:
https://soundcloud.com/jake-tanner-s...ing-a-murderer

Here is a timeline of events being constructed by a redditor:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurd...ventsnew_info/

These are just some of the various posts available at reddit. Obviously many are just opinions, but there is some official information mixed in between.
Ampulla of Vater is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2016, 02:03 AM   #37
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Why no DNA of the victim in the trailer? This is one of the biggest problems in the prosecution case. This borderline intellectually disabled person somehow cleaned up every trace of DNA in a professional forensic manner? Yet was careless enough to leave blood, but no fingerprints, in the SUV? I don't think so.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2016, 11:47 AM   #38
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
One of the first things they did was go to Avery's house when she was reported missing. He said she'd been there. They asked to go in the trailer and Avery let them. The 4:35 call as misdirection doesn't make much sense considering what Avery actually did, which was say she'd been there.

Kratz is a fetid sack of weasel testicles and there's no reason anyone should believe anything he says.

1) in his email has nothing to do with whether or not he killed Halbach and it's in the documentary.

2) is nothing particularly strange. She'd been to his house before and done a good job so he wanted her to come back. The part about the receptionist and the towel are not in context and were not provided at the trial because she couldn't remember when it was said. (Funny Kratz has an exact date though, huh?) The sister's name was used because it was the sister's vehicle but Halbach would have known it was the Avery property, as mentioned she's been there before and the address is Avery Road. If she was bothered by him it's reasonable to assume she wouldn't have gone there.

3) There were remains in the burn barrel and that was in the doc, why does it matter if the filmmaker mentioned the phone? Remains identified as hers were also found at a quarry a half mile away.

4) was not presented at trial.

5) What does intertwined even mean? The bits of bone were generally small and were so meticulously removed...with a shovel, per testimony at trial shown in the doc...that they are probably over, under and around lots of things burned before and possibly after.

6) Okay. Nobody is saying those weren't her remains so why does it matter that evidence further confirming that weren't mentioned?

7) the calls should have been included in the documentary, no idea why they weren't. *67 calls are strange but if she was running late he might have been calling to find out where she was and trying to get her to not avoid his calls. During the 4:35 call he'd have been murdering her but Kratz wants you to believe Avery's clever enough to take a break from that to place misdirecting call but too dumb to get the car off of his property, her body out of his backyard, and her key out of his bedroom.

Point is what Kratz's email characterizes as "omitted evidence" was by and large redundant, not presented at trial, or actually in the documentary.

To me the most interesting thing the filmmakers left out was the DNA on the hood latch of the RAV4.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2016, 12:06 PM   #39
SomedayGirl
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 826
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Why no DNA of the victim in the trailer? This is one of the biggest problems in the prosecution case. This borderline intellectually disabled person somehow cleaned up every trace of DNA in a professional forensic manner? Yet was careless enough to leave blood, but no fingerprints, in the SUV? I don't think so.
Also sweat on the SUV but still no fingerprints. If he's wearing gloves how does that happen? If he's not, how does that happen? The forensics in this case are pretty squirrelly to say the least. No evidence of Theresa where it should be (the bedroom, the garage floor/ walls/ piles of junk, her own key), no evidence of Dassey anywhere. And as shown by the contaminated test of the bullet it's incredibly easy to leave traces of yourself behind everywhere you've been even when you're being careful.

Still think Avery might be guilty but not enough to convict, still convinced Dassey is innocent.
__________________
I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows, because it always coincides with their own desires.

--Susan B. Anthony
SomedayGirl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st January 2016, 12:11 PM   #40
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 40,667
Originally Posted by SomedayGirl View Post
Also sweat on the SUV but still no fingerprints. If he's wearing gloves how does that happen? If he's not, how does that happen? The forensics in this case are pretty squirrelly to say the least. No evidence of Theresa where it should be (the bedroom, the garage floor/ walls/ piles of junk, her own key), no evidence of Dassey anywhere. And as shown by the contaminated test of the bullet it's incredibly easy to leave traces of yourself behind everywhere you've been even when you're being careful.

Still think Avery might be guilty but not enough to convict, still convinced Dassey is innocent.
This is my view as well.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:45 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.