Making a murderer - The Avery case (Spoilers)

[Felon]

From what I have seen, the Police basically direct him to say exactly what they want based on their knowledge of the murder. When he doesn't say what they want they just become more and more blunt and obvious about what they want him to say. Feeding a mentally impaired kid a load of information about a murder they say he has committed when he is all alone with aggressive police officers is bad. Its been proven time and again that people will say and admit to things they haven't done if they are scared enough. Either he is a genius at misleading the police or he was a very scared boy who the police manipulated to get what they wanted. He even says plenty of stuff that simply isn't true and doesn't make sense in order to give the police what he thinks they want.

The way they made him write his confession should be a red flag for you as well. I don't know if he is guilty but I sure as hell know that the way the police dealt with him was ridiculous.

Brendan volunteers specific information that only both he and the killer could only know, like how she was shot in the head - this was later revealed to be correct, with the forensic examination of the skull fragments, showing damage consistent with a gun shot.

The police have a gap in their evidence - specifically, why is Halbach's blood in the back of her Rav 4 - but her remains are in the burn put? Brendan fills that gap in his statement by explaining how Avery initially wanted to dispose of her body at the Quarry by driving her down there and throwing her in, he changes his mind at the last moment and burns her instead (removing her body from the Rav 4)

Lastly, please provide evidence showing how the police officers were aggressive or unreasonable with him within the context; a suspect in the most serious offence you can commit, when he was known to be there and known to be there at the time of the disappearance, I maintain that they were quite decent with him, considering the circumstances.

I urge you to read his full written statements, because there's a ton of information in there that he volunteers freely on his own accord;

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta.../1452480329562/Transcript+-+March+1,+2006.pdf

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...76bfb/1452792626497/dassey_okelly_5_12_06.pdf

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...dda3ba5af/1452473032041/13May06Transcript.pdf

They are welcome to try and get information out of him but they fed him all the information that they got from him. Thats not getting information, thats just patting yourself on the back for persuading the suspect to parrot back what you have told them.

The onus is on you, to demonstrate what they fed him - I see no evidence that they fed him information, they encouraged him to talk (as any detective will do) when someone is being difficult, but to say they actually fed him evidence that he regurgitated back - and then call it a confession, is false and didn't happen, again - you need to demonstrate this and provide evidence that it happened, because as far as I've concerned I've seen none.

The one that nobody has answered in this entire thread or anywhere - is why did Dassey confess to Raping Halbach? There's no evidence it happened - why so easily admit to it?

Apply occam's razor;

I maintain, he couldn't deal with it - he couldn't handle the gravity of what he'd done - when under pressure from a special agent and a detective, he caved in - it's a far more likely and reasonable explanation.

I don't think anyone has suggested that the police planned the murder and set him up. What is suspect is the way the police handled everything post murder.

Well, people claim that the police had a motive - I agree that they did, therefore it follows that if evidence was planted - then the police themselves planted it or were involved in planting it, which was indeed an angle used by Avery's defence team in his trial.

If police planted all the evidence, then they're actively setting him up - which means that they were also involved in murdering, or arranging in the murder of Halbach - OR they by sheer luck, they came across her body after the fact and made it look like Avery - which is easy to prove wrong, because her complete body was burned in Avery's burn pit, right outside his door, her remains were not transported there.

Have fun explaining that one away...

This isn't an argument for Averys guilt though is it. The police can't say "we're pretty sure he did it; if he didn't then who was it" and then the defence is expected to provide an alternative.

It's an argument against the theory that the police murdered, or arranged the murder of Halbach via a third party - why would they pick her? Why would they embark on the most complicated, difficult and risky method of framing Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey, when there are potentially far simpler and easier methods of getting out of paying the Avery suit.

 

[MikeTheNative]

That's before we get to the problems that DNA and blood causes, in this situation - the third party would have to have had access to Avery's blood and planted it on Halbach's Rav 4 - well enough to fool the forensic team and blood-spatter analysts, because the blood wasn't just splattered around inside the Rav 4 with a spray - it was in-line with how someone with a cut (Avery's hand) would deposit it, and with how a bloodied body (Halbach) would leave it.

There was no Avery finger prints in the car though. Somehow he managed to just cover his finger prints while still bleeding in the car?

 

[Musty Pie]

There was no Avery finger prints in the car though. Somehow he managed to just cover his finger prints while still bleeding in the car?

Well the answer to this is obvious.

He wore gloves to ensure no prints, but these gloves had a hole just precisely where the cut on his finger was...

furthermore, he didn't need to clean up THIS crime scene which he left un-crushed on his properly, why bother?

 

[Felon]

There was no Avery finger prints in the car though. Somehow he managed to just cover his finger prints while still bleeding in the car?

There were a number of prints on the car, from recollection - 8 prints that could be compared - however matched against nobody in particular, however a number of prints that were found had no ridge detail or were damaged during lifting by forensics and couldn't be compared, so we'll never know for sure.

We can only speculate about whether any prints were left, whether the ones which were damaged were the critical ones, whether there were no prints at all - we simply don't know.

The fact that Avery's prints were not identified on the Rav 4, does not undo all of the other evidence.

 

[Felon]

Honestly guys, I need to actually get some work done today, so I might not reply to any points for the rest of the day or until tomorrow, because I'm gonna get fired if I carry on like this

 

[deuse]

So now they know the person who saw her car and reported to a cop at a gas station.
And when the person saw the trial and saw\heard that the main cop was lying about where the car was spotted.

He sent 2 texts(which he saved) to Scot Tadych(he knew him) asking him to get Brandon's lawyer to get in touch. He did not.
None of this was mentioned in court. And the cop told lies when S Avery got sent down the first time. Hmmmm

 

[Musty Pie]

It is very suspicious, but as Screeeech rightly states we dont know how credible this witness is...

Certainly odd, and adds to the doubts.

 

[dowie]

But what about Teresa's car? If he can clean up a murder scene well enough to completely get rid of "most" DNA evidence, burn a body against many scientific suggests to say its near on impossible in the way the state claim, why didn't he just crush the car too? As apparently hes a criminal mastermind....

But that is just suggesting that the state's guess/narrative isn't correct, the bones were still found at his trailer, he might well have had to cut up the body and burn it in barrels. I'm not suggesting that everything the state predicted re: their narrative is correct.

We don't know how much DNA he had left to clean up, it is much easier to clean up stuff in his own trailer than the car that he's had to hastily hide on the scrap yard with multiple potential witnesses.

Crushing the car doesn't make it magically disappear, there are other people working at that scrap yard, it would be a bit obvious if the police are looking for X vehicle and a bunch of other people can see that Avery just crushed that exact vehicle.

Your right: yes the state would have to plant lots of evidence, but they had a good reason/motive to. So its not out of the realms of possibility. If its going to save them close to $40m dollars, I'm sure they would try anything.

This is silly, it isn't $40m dollars, it would have been bargained down but regardless it is the county not the state that owes it... so you're making a flawed argument there. This potential conflict of interest is the reason why investigators from ousted the country were brought in.

 

[dowie]

Thoughts on no coroner or expert in the field being called to the bone remains being found on the Avery property? Instead they are bagged up and delivered to the state coroner office a few days after.

She works for the county that Avery was suing, they were stating out of the investigation due to a potential conflict of interest. If it had been the other way around and she'd been involved and then turned out to be helpful to the prosecution the program would have pointed that out and various people would now be citing the fact that the coroner was working for the county Avery sued and maybe she planted the bones etc.. or was part of the conspiracy.

 

[dowie]

He sent 2 texts(which he saved) to Scot Tadych(he knew him) asking him to get Brandon's lawyer to get in touch. He did not.
None of this was mentioned in court. And the cop told lies when S Avery got sent down the first time. Hmmmm

I think you're getting this a bit muddled, which court are you referring to for a start?

 

[ColdAsIce]

She works for the county that Avery was suing, they were stating out of the investigation due to a potential conflict of interest. If it had been the other way around and she'd been involved and then turned out to be helpful to the prosecution the program would have pointed that out and various people would now be citing the fact that the coroner was working for the county Avery sued and maybe she planted the bones etc.. or was part of the conspiracy.

That's true Dowie, we probably would all be shouting conflict of interest if she was involved however i'm really surprised how blasé Screeeech is regarding the handling of key evidence.

• DNA of Teresa on the bullet along with the technician that conducted the test. Not only that but the bullet is no longer in a state in which it can be tested further. I'm sorry but this is a completely unreliable result and shouldn't be included as evidence.
• The belief that with some bleach Avery can completely remove all blood evidence from his trailer/garage.
• No Forensic Anthropologist called on site to examine the bones
  
• No arson investigator
  
• No photos of the bones at the site
• chain of custody not even close to be correctly followed

This stuff raises huge alarm bells. Steven Avery may well be guilty but you need to do the correct Police work!

 

[Irish_Tom]

I do give it credence yes, mostly because the information he gives, obtained on three separate occasions, is not only reasonably consistent - it's also packed with detail that aligns with the details found at the crime scene.

Snip!

Fair enough, you've obviously looked into this much more than I have.

I'm still completely undecided about this case, as I said after Season 1:

When I watched it I couldn’t believe how badly stitched up they both appeared to be.

I then read up on the case online and it seems the TV show was heavily biased in Avery’s favour; leaving out key evidence and testimony.

Ultimately I was left unsure, which I suppose means I would have to vote 'not guilty'.

 

[Felon]

• DNA of Teresa on the bullet along with the technician that conducted the test. Not only that but the bullet is no longer in a state in which it can be tested further. I'm sorry but this is a completely unreliable result and shouldn't be included as evidence.
• The belief that with some bleach Avery can completely remove all blood evidence from his trailer/garage.
• No Forensic Anthropologist called on site to examine the bones
  
• No arson investigator
  
• No photos of the bones at the site
• chain of custody not even close to be correctly followed

A couple of points;

- Regarding the bullet - everyone agrees that the testing of the bullet was tainted by a procedural error, but it did still come back with a positive test for Halbach's DNA. Furthermore, the lab openly admit making a mistake - with no attempt to cover it up, so it doesn't really swing the needle either way in my opinion.

- Avery didn't actually get rid of all the evidence in his garage using bleach - because the spots pointed out by Dassey provided positive luminol tests, remember he had five days to clean everything up, from Oct 31st till Nov 6th. And don't forget, Dassey's confession alleged that Avery burnt the bloodstained sheets from the bed - he burnt an entire body, so burning some bedsheets and other stuff isn't exactly difficult for him to do. For example - I'm not exactly the guy in the cillit Bang advert, but if I stabbed someone in my bedroom and had five whole days to clean up the mess - I'm pretty sure I could clean it up in that time, one way or another - especially with a handy burn pit right outside my door rofl.....

- I've already addressed the point regarding the scene, a forensic scientist (John Ertl) and his photographer, were called as part of a crime lab, they processed the scene, not sure exactly what else you're looking for here.?

- Arson investigators and agents did attend the scene, the court makes specific reference to them in Avery's trial on Feb 16th, they specifically examined the burn pit, the aluminium smelter and some of the bone fragments.

- Photos of the bones at the site were taken and were shown to the Jury, the prosecution and defence make specific references to them in Avery's trial, however from what I can tell those photos weren't released to the general public or reporters - but there are many references to photographs of the bones in situ at the burn pit, before they were collected. I don't know why they weren't released - perhaps the family didn't want them releasing, but I'm just speculating there.

- Most of the problems people have with the chain of custody, stem from the fact that they haven't read the case file - they're making the analysis based only on Netflix, if you read the actual case files and the expert testimony, most of the so-called 'problems' can be answered quite easily, however people do like a good conspiracy theory don't they.........

 

[deuse]

I think you're getting this a bit muddled, which court are you referring to for a start?

Nope.

Watch the program

 

[dowie]

Nope.

Watch the program

You're not getting it muddled but you're unable to answer the question?

I have watched the program thanks, I think you're getting it muddled as you refer to "none of this being mentioned in court" unless they had a time machine how could it be given that the text messages weren't sent until after the first season was shown on Netflix?

If instead you're referring to his appeals you'd also be getting it rather muddled - those relate to his confession, the text messages have no relevance there.

If you think I'm wrong then please do explain.

 

[deuse]

You're not getting it muddled but you're unable to answer the question?

I have watched the program thanks, I think you're getting it muddled as you refer to "none of this being mentioned in court" unless they had a time machine how could it be given that the text messages weren't sent until after the first season was shown on Netflix?

If instead you're referring to his appeals you'd also be getting it rather muddled - those relate to his confession, the text messages have no relevance there.

If you think I'm wrong then please do explain.

If you look at the time line.
At S Avery's trial they never mention the guy(truck driver) who told the cop in a gas station\shop about the car.
The guy told the cop where to find the car, as it was dumped on the side of the road right by Scot Tadych's place.

The cop never said anything about that in court. I wonder why?

 

[Loosecannon]

There are that many issues with the case and with both the general police evidence side and other issues that this does just need to have a retrial.

The sheer number of issues raised in the programme where there are questions that remain unanswered, mean that even if they don’t prove him innocent, it does shown there are doubts which do need investigating more.

The defence lawyer is simply trying as many ways as she can to raise questions as that is her job!

 

[Felon]

The only way I think you can say there should be a retrial, is if you only consider the information presented by Netflix, even then you'd still have to be ignoring lots of key evidence - such as how Avery's blood got into the Rav 4, which is probably the hardest evidence to try and prove wrong, in the entire case.

If you actually consider the evidence contained in the case files and the court hearings - where you get both sides of the story without bias, it's a reasonably safe conviction.

In my eyes the best Zellner can do, is resort to what amounts to nothing more than speculation, backed up by cargo-cult science, (phoney brain scans, shooting bullets at bits of wood, cow bones and so on)

Furthermore Zellner doesn't make any real attempt to provide a competing alternate theory, for how Halbach died that's backed up by any evidence. Most of the vague theories she has are easy to prove wrong, because the forensic, eyewitness and circumstantial evidence combined, implicating Avery is very strong.

 

[PermaChanged]

Furthermore Zellner doesn't make any real attempt to provide a competing alternate theory, for how Halbach died that's backed up by any evidence.

She doesn't need to though, that's not what she's there for.

 

[IvanDobskey]

Why would Avery kill someone whilst he was awaiting a huge payout for wrongful imprisonment though? It just doesn't make sense.