Except your fire expert states quite definitively that it's impossible to burn a body in an open fire pit. I don't remember BD offering much information on the fire itself, anyway.
Firstly which expert says this - when and where?
Secondly it's a straw man argument; Nobody claims an entire body was burnt in the pit, some of it was found in burn barrels, so it's entirely possible that Avery divided up the body into barrels to make it burn quicker.
In Brendan's statement, he explains how they used tires, and a rake to stoke the fire - so exactly what more you need I'm unsure.
Within about 5mins of the car being found, everybody and their dog knew it was covered in branches and the licence plate was missing. It doesn't take a boy-genius to say "yeah we put branches over it" because that is what he saw on the news. Duh.
I could say I did all of that stuff. I could sit opposite two detectives and we could have a camera on me. Doesn't make any of it true though. There is absolutely zero evidence to show that she was raped, zero evidence to show that she was even
in SA's bedroom (where apparently all this stuff happened). Heck even I know if you slit someone's throat and stab them in the stomach you're going to have a hard time cleaning that up. It's ludicrous to imagine two rednecks (one with mental difficulties) could (a) clear that up 100% and (b) do it so that it didn't even look like they'd cleaned it up. There is
zero evidence of it happening, and
zero evidence of a clean up. Hell, there's not even marks on the bed where she was supposedly tied up. Don't you think somebody tied-up, pleading for their life would make some sort of mark on the bed frame?
This is easy because it's fresh in my mind. This idea was clearly planted by the detectives, they repeatedly asked BD "what did Steven then do with the car", "did he go in it", "did he open it up, maybe at the back", "where did he open it"... In the end they get annoyed and just say "did he open the hood" and BD just goes along with them. That's all. Clear and pointed coercion. Go back and watch it, that was one of the most obvious bits in the interview tape.
As above. Every body knew the car was discovered covered in branches etc, everybody knew they found bones in the firepit.
This has already mostly been discussed here;
https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/making-a-murderer-the-avery-case-spoilers.18712417/page-16
On the bedroom;
It's impossible to say how much evidence was cleaned up, furthermore - it's impossible to say how much blood there was, in Brendan's testimony - the cut to her throat sounded more like a scratch and she certainly didn't die, he says she was stabbed, but we don't know exactly how she we stabbed. Stab wounds can produce totally different amounts of blood, it's possible to stab someone and there be literally no blood at all (internal haemorrhage) or there can be enormous amounts, either we can't say how - Brendan does say they burnt bloodstained sheets in the burn pit (from his confession)
Furthermore; Steven Avery had almost
6 days from the day Halbach went missing, until they found her car on his lot - that's 6 whole days to clean up, destroy or burn whatever evidence there might be, on a junkyard with an almost infinite amount of places to burn/dispose of things, it seems quite plausible to me that he had enough time to clean everything up.
It's also not true to suggest there was zero evidence of any cleanup, in Avery's trailer they found numerous empty bottles of bleach, in the garage (where Brendan claims she was shot and where they found Halbach's DNA on a bullet fragment) the garage floor provided a positive luminol test, (reacts with blood and / or bleach) furthermore, the jeans Brendan handed into the detectives were badly stained with bleach........................................ after.... Brendan confessed that they tried to clean up the blood from the garage with bleach....
On the car;
Think carefully and logically about this;
If it's true that the police planted forensic evidence, then they literally must have planted all the evidence - because it makes no sense how they'd just plant bits of it, they must have planted all of it in order to successfully frame and convict Avery. Because only the police would possess the required knowledge to actually pull this off, and the following must be true;
- Teresa Halbach murdered by the police - or they arranged it.
- Her body burnt in a burn pit and barrels outside Steven Avery's trailer (without anyone knowing) the state forensic pathologist claimed the remains were burnt in situ, so she would also be part of the framing.
- The car moved to the junkyard and planted by the police
- Steven Avery's blood planted on the dashboard by the police
- Steven Avery's skin cells planted on the hood latch
- Teresa Halbach's blood planted in the back of the Jeep
- The bullet fragment from the garage, had DNA transferred to it and planted there by the police
- Brendan Dassey's full confession purely occurred due to good luck
Think about it properly and put yourself in the shoes of the Jury, then consider the following;
If Steven Avery is innocent - somebody else must have murdered Halbach. It couldn't have been a random person off the street, whoever did it - wanted to frame Avery, they must have done it in a way which required very good knowledge of crime scenes, forensics, DNA and stealth - in order to pull it off without being seen or detected by anyone at any time. That's without explaining how the DNA and blood needed was actually harvested.
The only people who could do that are the police, in order to tamper the DNA evidence (the bullet) you'd need samples and a laboratory, in order to plant the evidence - you'd need to go in and out multiple times without being seen (the car, the blood, the bullet, the bones, her cell phone remains and personal items, etc)
When you resolve that down - the only possible answer is that the police murdered Halbach in order to frame Avery, nobody else could have done it - at this point, the entire conspiracy theory fails,
because it's just insane.
I put it to you, that it's total folly to suggest, that Teresa went to the Avery residence - was murdered by assailants unknown, who weren't seen or heard, and left absolutely no trace whatsoever, at a time when Avery/Dassey/Family were all there - on the premises at the time, all that to happen and nobody saw a thing -
it's ridiculous.
Explain the fact you have a Supreme court judge that says the interview made her "sick". That person isn't like us, they're not watching some dramatised TV show, she's probably seen hundreds of interview tapes, if not thousands. Including ones with coercion, confessions... the works. To have someone of her power, her capability, her knowledge of the law say that interview made her "sick" -- that is absolutely damning of the whole thing.
Well, the other supreme court judges disagreed - that's why they're all still in jail.
And consider this;
To claim the confession was coerced is one thing, but Brendan also confessed
to his own mother on a recorded prison phone call - so are you going to claim she was also coercing him?
I do have one question that nobody has been able to provide a satisfactory answer to and I challenge you to answer it;
In Steven Avery's interview with detectives, he stated that he hadn't burnt anything that night - specifically he hadn't burnt anything for a few weeks, before Teresa Halbach came to visit;
(page 16, paragraph 3)
https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...df28318735c70f/1491943339563/STEVEN+NOV+9.pdf
In a phone call between Steven Avery and Barb Janda, he explains how Brendan did come over that night, and how they had *the* bonfire that night, and Brendan was home before 9.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KYLXZcI7_0 (0:20 seconds into the video, is the specific part)
Funny how Netflix left that one out huh? If Steven Avery is so innocent - why is there a glaring, critical inconsistency in his version?
