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 Brendan Dassey , murder cases , Steven Avery , Teresa Halbach

Reply
Old 20th July 2020, 02:32 AM   #401
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 7,703
And round and round we go.
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 20th July 2020, 09:25 AM   #402
Lerxst
Muse
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Big D
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by Essexman View Post
He said “I guess they got it all on film or tape or whatever, what we did that night”
And? I've listened to it and I heard what he said. Why don't you explain how this amounts to a confession.
Lerxst 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 20th July 2020, 01:22 PM   #403
bobdroege7
Illuminator
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,084
Originally Posted by Essexman View Post
He said “I guess they got it all on film or tape or whatever, what we did that night”
I am curious, how much weight do you give that statement?

On a scale of 0 to 10?
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is online now   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 20th July 2020, 01:51 PM   #404
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
Does anyone know if the prosecution says he burned the body in the pit in one piece or in many pieces?
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 20th July 2020, 03:45 PM   #405
Lerxst
Muse
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Big D
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Does anyone know if the prosecution says he burned the body in the pit in one piece or in many pieces?
I would encourage you to read the trial transcript yourself:

http://stevenaverycase.com/steven-av....GDQ2E578.dpbs

I'm focusing on closing statements from Kratz, and then Buting and Strang (defense), and then Kratz's rebuttal.

The State does not really state one way or the other. Kratz talks about what they theorize Avery would have needed to do in order to destroy the evidence after the fact and that they believe the burn pit was the primary burn site (implying more than one), but that bones were also found in the Janda's burn barrel. There is also the evidence of her personal effects like cell phone, PDA, and clothing also being found at the same burn site.

Avery's defense team then challenges that by bringing up the fact that the bones were moved but that the State has never explained how. They bring up the quarry as well, which is only a 1/4 mile away.

Kratz's rebuttal concedes that bones were moved, but he argues that regardless, if the bones were burned somewhere else and then moved to both the burn pit and the burn barrel (remember there are no less than 7 different possible burn sites on the Avery property alone) that someone would have had to do that completely undetected. And what an incredibly unlucky coincidence that multiple people witnessed fires in multiple areas right next to Avery's trailer that he of course initially denied.

I have seen supporters of Avery bring up details or ask questions like this, but I have to wonder why does it matter? The State does not have to prove that every single part of their theory is true, they only need to meet the burden of proof for what they have charged him with. In other words, they only need to show that he burned her remains, they do not need to prove what he did to her remains before he burned them, nor do they need to prove there was only one burn site. The only way the defense can explain how her remains were found in his burn pit is to claim they were planted there, and of course nothing in the way of supporting evidence for that has ever surfaced.
Lerxst 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 20th July 2020, 03:53 PM   #406
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
Originally Posted by Lerxst View Post
I would encourage you to read the trial transcript yourself:

http://stevenaverycase.com/steven-av....GDQ2E578.dpbs

I'm focusing on closing statements from Kratz, and then Buting and Strang (defense), and then Kratz's rebuttal.

The State does not really state one way or the other. Kratz talks about what they theorize Avery would have needed to do in order to destroy the evidence after the fact and that they believe the burn pit was the primary burn site (implying more than one), but that bones were also found in the Janda's burn barrel. There is also the evidence of her personal effects like cell phone, PDA, and clothing also being found at the same burn site.

Avery's defense team then challenges that by bringing up the fact that the bones were moved but that the State has never explained how. They bring up the quarry as well, which is only a 1/4 mile away.

Kratz's rebuttal concedes that bones were moved, but he argues that regardless, if the bones were burned somewhere else and then moved to both the burn pit and the burn barrel (remember there are no less than 7 different possible burn sites on the Avery property alone) that someone would have had to do that completely undetected. And what an incredibly unlucky coincidence that multiple people witnessed fires in multiple areas right next to Avery's trailer that he of course initially denied.

I have seen supporters of Avery bring up details or ask questions like this, but I have to wonder why does it matter? The State does not have to prove that every single part of their theory is true, they only need to meet the burden of proof for what they have charged him with. In other words, they only need to show that he burned her remains, they do not need to prove what he did to her remains before he burned them, nor do they need to prove there was only one burn site. The only way the defense can explain how her remains were found in his burn pit is to claim they were planted there, and of course nothing in the way of supporting evidence for that has ever surfaced.
Interesting. Sounds like a great plan to make sure nothing unusual seems to be going on, despite the natural curiosity fires arouse.
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 21st July 2020, 03:57 AM   #407
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
It is not easy being green but blue is the colour of my true love's eyes.
Confusing but a midsized SUV heading in the direction of a cell phone that pings a few miles away is all interesting and captures the attention of Kathleen Zellner.
She has unlimited cash resources and says Steve never left the farm.
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 21st July 2020, 06:35 AM   #408
bobdroege7
Illuminator
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,084
We have a dead body, where is the Coroner's report?

Oh....

Where's Quincy?
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is online now   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 24th July 2020, 01:03 PM   #409
Essexman
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by bobdroege7 View Post
We have a dead body, where is the Coroner's report?

Oh....
No they didn’t have a dead body. They had charred bits of bones and ashes hence a forensic anthropologist was used instead.
Essexman 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 24th July 2020, 02:01 PM   #410
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
Originally Posted by Essexman View Post
No they didn’t have a dead body. They had charred bits of bones and ashes hence a forensic anthropologist was used instead.
The body was reduced to charred bits of bone in the open pit? At the very least it must have been cut up prior?
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 24th July 2020, 03:05 PM   #411
Lerxst
Muse
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Big D
Posts: 639
Just read the transcripts, that would be better than just JAQing:

Quote:
6 Q. Okay. Do you -- Do you agree here with
7 Dr. Eisenberg that it's clear in this case that
8 bones were moved?
9 A. I agree that bones were moved.
10 Q. In the human -- When I say bones, I'm talking
11 about human --
12 A. Human remains.
13 Q. -- human remains.
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Okay. You -- you -- you do agree with that?
16 A. I do.
17 Q. Okay. And based on the recovery method that was
18 used here, are you able to offer an opinion, to a
19 reasonable degree of scientific certainty, about
20 where these human remains were burned?
21 A. No, I'm not.
22 Q. Why not?
23 A. Well, the fact is, that because I don't have any
24 records from which to examine that would actually
25 indicate to me that there are bones in the
1 original location, where they were burned, I
2 can't offer an opinion on that.
From Dr. Scott Fairgrieve at Avery's trial. I've tried to point out that it doesn't really matter if the remains were burned entirely in the burn pit or not...it cannot reliably be determined from the evidence. Remains were found there, and that is the problem for Avery.
Lerxst 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 24th July 2020, 03:42 PM   #412
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
Originally Posted by Lerxst View Post
Just read the transcripts, that would be better than just JAQing:



From Dr. Scott Fairgrieve at Avery's trial. I've tried to point out that it doesn't really matter if the remains were burned entirely in the burn pit or not...it cannot reliably be determined from the evidence. Remains were found there, and that is the problem for Avery.
I believe it is common ground there was a decent long fire in the burn pit. Yes Avery has a problem, but not that he dismembered and burned a body in that pit. The problem is that the Essexmen in this world all believe that he did, yet it is not supported by any known science.
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 24th July 2020, 04:12 PM   #413
bobdroege7
Illuminator
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 3,084
Originally Posted by Essexman View Post
No they didn’t have a dead body. They had charred bits of bones and ashes hence a forensic anthropologist was used instead.
that's not the problem.

Threatening to arrest the coroner is a problem.
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is online now   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 24th July 2020, 04:32 PM   #414
Lerxst
Muse
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Big D
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I believe it is common ground there was a decent long fire in the burn pit. Yes Avery has a problem, but not that he dismembered and burned a body in that pit. The problem is that the Essexmen in this world all believe that he did, yet it is not supported by any known science.
Why does it have to be? If it could be proven that he did not dismember her body and burn it in that fire pit, how does that help exonerate him? Explain how the incriminating evidence got there if he did NOT commit the crime.

Occam's razor leads us to what we must conclude. No need to construct a complicated scenario that is not supported by the evidence in the case.
Lerxst 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 24th July 2020, 07:13 PM   #415
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,236
Fire Pit

The trial testimony of Forensic Anthropologist Leslie Eisenberg and Arson Expert Rodney Pevytoe basically put a pin in the dubious theory that some, if not all, of the bones found in Avery's burn pit were moved there from another location. No bone breakage due to transport was found, a fragment or more of virtually every bone below the neck was found in the burn pit, and the bones/portions of Teresa Halbach's clothing were found intertwined with debris (e.g., wiring and oils from 5 steel belted tires) in the burn pit. Notice how you didn't hear about any of that pesky evidence in Making of a Murderer? Once you add Halbach's charred personal belongings being found in a barrel and DNA/Ballistics evidence directly linking Avery to this horrific crime, the combo theory (e.g., Halbach murdered by someone else AND the police framed Avery) put forth by the defense becomes nothing more than a fantasy narrative.
JTF 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 24th July 2020, 10:47 PM   #416
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
Originally Posted by JTF View Post
The trial testimony of Forensic Anthropologist Leslie Eisenberg and Arson Expert Rodney Pevytoe basically put a pin in the dubious theory that some, if not all, of the bones found in Avery's burn pit were moved there from another location. No bone breakage due to transport was found, a fragment or more of virtually every bone below the neck was found in the burn pit, and the bones/portions of Teresa Halbach's clothing were found intertwined with debris (e.g., wiring and oils from 5 steel belted tires) in the burn pit. Notice how you didn't hear about any of that pesky evidence in Making of a Murderer? Once you add Halbach's charred personal belongings being found in a barrel and DNA/Ballistics evidence directly linking Avery to this horrific crime, the combo theory (e.g., Halbach murdered by someone else AND the police framed Avery) put forth by the defense becomes nothing more than a fantasy narrative.
Yes all that is well known
but what is not well known is a sequence that allows for Steven Avery to lure a young woman to a destination, expect no one to be disturbed by this cessation of presence. She could be expected to have concern from employers and social contacts immediately.
Prosecutors are sure she was dead while he had a very loving conversation by phone with Jodi....

Please impress skeptics with a narrative that gets him doing all these things like a celebrity chef, chopping board to stove top to oven to god knows what.

And this thread is not concerned with who has to prove what, but rather what happened in time slots and makes sense.
Do we refute cell phone pings far from the site?
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 25th July 2020, 05:46 AM   #417
Essexman
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Yes all that is well known
but what is not well known is a sequence that allows for Steven Avery to lure a young woman to a destination
He called her down to take photos of a car for sale like he had done in the past (wearing just a towel). On this occasion however the car Teresa took photos of was never put on the display court and a seat from it was taken out and ended up in the burn pit.

Odd thing to do with a car you plan on selling.
Essexman 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 25th July 2020, 05:58 AM   #418
Essexman
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
The body was reduced to charred bits of bone in the open pit? At the very least it must have been cut up prior?
Avery's bonfire was going for over 7 and a half hours. The last witness to see it was Blane Dassey and Kayla at 11.30pm after coming back from trick or treating. They all went to bed after this. We don't know exactly when it went out but Avery could have kept it going until 5am before anyone woke up.
Essexman 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 26th July 2020, 09:57 AM   #419
Lerxst
Muse
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Big D
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Yes all that is well known
Then why do you continually discount it?

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
but what is not well known is a sequence that allows for Steven Avery to lure a young woman to a destination, expect no one to be disturbed by this cessation of presence. She could be expected to have concern from employers and social contacts immediately.
But all of that did happen...she was missed and in fact there was a search for her that ended up in the last place she was known to have been...the Avery property.

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Prosecutors are sure she was dead while he had a very loving conversation by phone with Jodi....
Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't, perhaps you can tell us why this matters which you have failed to do so many times before?

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Please impress skeptics with a narrative that gets him doing all these things like a celebrity chef, chopping board to stove top to oven to god knows what.

And this thread is not concerned with who has to prove what, but rather what happened in time slots and makes sense.
The narrative is simple and is backed by the evidence. You are the one that claims it is complicated, doesn't make sense, and makes claims that are not backed by any evidence.

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Do we refute cell phone pings far from the site?
No, but as has been pointed out many times before this does not establish that she was with her phone. You greatly inflate the importance of the cell phone pings while denying all of the other evidence, like where her phone ended up.
Lerxst 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 26th July 2020, 10:51 AM   #420
Essexman
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by Lerxst View Post



No, but as has been pointed out many times before this does not establish that she was with her phone. You greatly inflate the importance of the cell phone pings while denying all of the other evidence, like where her phone ended up.
The cell phone pinged a cell tower 7 miles from Avery’s trailer. The cell tower had a 20 mile coverage.
Essexman 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 26th July 2020, 01:58 PM   #421
Lerxst
Muse
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Big D
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by Essexman View Post
The cell phone pinged a cell tower 7 miles from Avery’s trailer. The cell tower had a 20 mile coverage.
Which is probably why this reasoning went nowhere when it was tried by Zellner.

Samson continues to press a fantasy narrative that has no basis in the facts of the case, while simultaneously claiming that the evidence backed narrative is a fantasy because minute, largely irrelevant details "don't make sense". This has been the MO of most though that don't believe he is guilty so I guess I can understand that.
Lerxst 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 26th July 2020, 02:17 PM   #422
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
Originally Posted by Lerxst View Post
Which is probably why this reasoning went nowhere when it was tried by Zellner.

Samson continues to press a fantasy narrative that has no basis in the facts of the case, while simultaneously claiming that the evidence backed narrative is a fantasy because minute, largely irrelevant details "don't make sense". This has been the MO of most though that don't believe he is guilty so I guess I can understand that.
I said I would change my mind if that is where the evidence leads.
So let's have a narrative that extends from Teresa arriving and the car being discovered after being moved several days into the investigation.
This would include detail like Teresa being persuaded to check Steve's etchings in the garage so he could contact shoot her in the head from behind.

Last edited by Samson; 26th July 2020 at 02:26 PM.
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 26th July 2020, 03:59 PM   #423
Lerxst
Muse
 
Lerxst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Big D
Posts: 639
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I said I would change my mind if that is where the evidence leads.
So let's have a narrative that extends from Teresa arriving and the car being discovered after being moved several days into the investigation.
This would include detail like Teresa being persuaded to check Steve's etchings in the garage so he could contact shoot her in the head from behind.
No thanks, I'd rather discuss the actual facts of the case.
Lerxst 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 26th July 2020, 04:06 PM   #424
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
Originally Posted by Lerxst View Post
No thanks, I'd rather discuss the actual facts of the case.
Yep. That is the idea.
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 27th July 2020, 05:27 AM   #425
Essexman
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by Lerxst View Post
Which is probably why this reasoning went nowhere when it was tried by Zellner.

Samson continues to press a fantasy narrative that has no basis in the facts of the case, while simultaneously claiming that the evidence backed narrative is a fantasy because minute, largely irrelevant details "don't make sense". This has been the MO of most though that don't believe he is guilty so I guess I can understand that.
Zellner never even made the claim to the appellate court anyway. Its something she made up on Twitter and Netflix because she knew her muppet audience would believe it. Same goes for the baseless claim she made on Netflix about cops taking Teresa's chapstick from her apartment to plant her DNA on the bullet. No mention of it in her legal briefs.
Essexman 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 27th July 2020, 02:21 PM   #426
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 8,980
Originally Posted by Essexman View Post
Zellner never even made the claim to the appellate court anyway. Its something she made up on Twitter and Netflix because she knew her muppet audience would believe it. Same goes for the baseless claim she made on Netflix about cops taking Teresa's chapstick from her apartment to plant her DNA on the bullet. No mention of it in her legal briefs.
Planting never interests courts, so it is kept to the rhetoric.
The dna on the bullet was planted, all but the blind see it.
This does not make Avery innocent, it may be noble cause corruption, but it sure as hell was planted.

Last edited by Samson; 27th July 2020 at 02:23 PM.
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 27th July 2020, 04:58 PM   #427
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,779
one of the prosecution's expert witnesses

"The prosecution put a forensic anthropologist on the stand who, it became clear, had been told by the prosecution before she began her assessment what answer she was supposed to give--that the bones hadn't been moved. And, of course, that was the opinion she ultimately gave in her testimony. However, on cross-examination, the defense was able to show not only that her opinion differed from that of the defense's expert witness, but that her opinion had no basis in science and, even worse, contradicted common sense. The forensic anthropologist ultimately seemed to back off from her opinion on cross-examination, admitting, once its fallacies were exposed, that she couldn't really give an opinion either way as to whether the bones had been moved." (p. 102, Blind Justice, by Mark Godsey). The author is a former prosecutor.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides 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 August 2020, 03:13 PM   #428
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,236
Fairgrieve's Tepid Response

Similar to Errol Morris, Godsey is far better at his chosen profession than he is as an author. Rather than examine the bone fragments in person, defense expert Scott Fairgrieve curiously chose to rely on photographs and written reports of the bone fragments found in Avery's fire pit. His tepid response to the expansive landscape of Leslie Eisenberg's testimony was that it was possible that the bones were transported to Avery's burn pit from another location.
JTF 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 August 2020, 06:45 PM   #429
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,779
Dr. Fairgrieve's view

""They said, 'So you didn't actually see the remains' — which is quite true — I saw all the photographs and all the documentation and everything that was disclosed by them, which is supposed to be a complete record. And I said, 'No, I didn't get a chance to go to the scene ... the scene had been so destroyed [by investigators] by the time I would've been there it just — there was no point," said Fairgrieve." Link1.

"Earlier that year, he had published a book entitled “Forensic Cremation Analysis” that was published by CRC Press in the United States....“There is a process to follow,” he said. “It's much like digging an archaeological site. It, in fact, uses many of the same techniques. But in this case those techniques were not used."" Link2

Chapter 28 in Jerry Buting's book, The Illusion of Justice, deals with the bones.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 1st August 2020 at 08:18 PM.
Chris_Halkides 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 2nd August 2020, 05:57 AM   #430
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,779
a mishandled crime scene

"“You couldn’t tell that she was only burned in the pit location,” Dr. Fairgrieve said. “A conclusion was rendered because the majority of her remains were found there, but it wasn’t a reasonable fact from this case. There were several investigative missteps...There were many forms of evidence that wouldn’t have made it in a courtroom in Canada but did in Wisconsin. There were big problems.”” link3
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides 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 2nd August 2020, 08:08 AM   #431
JTF
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,236
The Better Without The Bitter

Godsey and Buting certainly have the right to accept the better without the bitter, but it is clear that the analysis (e.g., Eisenberg, Pevytoe) of the bones/debris in Avery's burn pit was exhaustive. I'm assuming that Fairgrieve stayed clear of the fact that the bones/portions of the victim's clothing were melted and/or intertwined with debris found in Avery's burn pit. If he had looked at this issue, I would bet the farm that the author of “Forensic Cremation Analysis," would agree with the conclusions (e.g., bones, clothing, debris were burned at the same time) put forth by Pevytoe.
JTF 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 2nd August 2020, 09:36 AM   #432
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,779
The toothpaste can't be put back into the tube

Jerry Buting wrote, “Whether due to deliberate choice, unwarranted certainty, recklessness, incompetence, or indifference, none of the accepted scientific procedures for collecting burnt remains were followed. And once again, Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Office deputies and officers were at the center of the action.”

He continued, “The crime scene was handled in a shockingly cavalier fashion. No one took any pictures or made videotape of the contents of the burn pit…Dr. Leslie Eisenberg…was not summoned before the scene was irretrievably altered and crucial evidence lost.” This assessment is corroborated by an email from a state forensic scientist, John Ertl, as well as Dr. Fairgrieve’s remarks in the links previously given.

He also wrote [Summarizing Dr. Fairgrieve’s testimony] “If history were a guide, Steven Avery’s backyard was not where Teresa Halbach was cremated.”

From what I can gather Dr. Eisenberg gave an opinion on the cause of death that simply does not follow from the evidence. Her opinion on the primary site was rebutted by someone with at least equal and possibly greater professional expertise, who drew upon empirical knowledge to buttress his testimony. BTW Dr. Fairgrieve had never testified for the defense prior to the Avery case but had testified for the prosecution.

One cannot go back in time and undo the damage of a mismanaged crime scene. This alone limits what the prosecution can assert. If Diogenes with his lamp can find one piece of evidence in this case that is utterly untainted by incompetence or conflict of interest or both, he is skillful indeed.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 2nd August 2020 at 09:40 AM.
Chris_Halkides 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 2nd August 2020, 11:57 AM   #433
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,779
how the site was treated

Jonathan Mignealt wrote, "He bases that opinion on how police handled the site of the remains — poorly, said Fairgrieve. So poorly, he said it was impossible to determine with certainty where Halbach's remains were cremated.

“There is a process to follow,” he said. “It's much like digging an archaeological site. It, in fact, uses many of the same techniques. But in this case those techniques were not used.

“In the time I've been working with police in Ontario, I certainly have never seen a site handled like that. I've never come across anything where a scene has been handled like that."" Link
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides 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 12:05 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.