Making a Murderer

[DogFace]

Like you said, we are looking at things very differently. You are having fun with playing detective and trying to find anyone else in the world to pin it on besides the guy who did it.

I don't believe all these cops and the FBI conspired to frame a career criminal like Avery. He was doing fine on his own. Every criminal says they are innocent. Avery was right once, that is like hitting the felony powerball, it doesn't happen twice.

If you really think the police moved burnt remains of an innocent woman around I will never get through to you.

Was the blood sample tampered with?

 

[DogFace]

Like you said, we are looking at things very differently. You are having fun with playing detective and trying to find anyone else in the world to pin it on besides the guy who did it.

I don't believe all these cops and the FBI conspired to frame a career criminal like Avery. He was doing fine on his own. Every criminal says they are innocent. Avery was right once, that is like hitting the felony powerball, it doesn't happen twice.

If you really think the police moved burnt remains of an innocent woman around I will never get through to you.

I know you don't want to believe it's possible a trusted establishment in our society can commit crimes but there is evidence that this happens.

 

[Nightman]

I know you don't want to believe it's possible a trusted establishment in our society can commit crimes but there is evidence that this happens.

I believe cops mess up intentionally and unintentionally all the time and I know they screwed up in Steven's first case.

But that has nothing to do with what happened to Teresa H. Steve doesn't get a 'Commit a Free Murder' card to make up for the time he wrongfully served,

 

[Nightman]

Was the blood sample tampered with?

No

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I know you don't want to believe it's possible a trusted establishment in our society can commit crimes but there is evidence that this happens.

Oh it's very possible. Certainly law enforcement has had its share of "bad apples". I can see them doing things with his case in order to make him appear even more guilty that he was. But I can not see them going into cohoots with either A: the real killer or B: they (law enforcement) being the real killer(s) just to get S. Avery off the streets.

As BK pointed out, him being convicted of this crime would not stop the lawsuit as part of his previous incarceration.

Nor would the $36 mil come out of the pockets of law-enforcement. What do people think, that whey would simply write the guy a check, shut down the county and get rid of all law enforcement? That's not how it works.

I read a lot of true-crime, I watch a lot of true-crime and I've never heard of a case of someone in law-enforcement killing an innocent person just to set someone else up... has it ever happened? Probably, but it's got to be incredibly rare. And the only way I could see it happening was if the law-enforcement person involved was going to get some sort of huge payoff– and there was no huge payoff here.

In addition trying to keep a conspiracy secret a secret works a heck of a lot easier when you only have one person involved, but if this spun out so that that law-enforcement was more involved in the actual killing of the girl or working with the real killer– well now you've got numerous people involved... and with more people the more likelihood someone talks. Again if there was some sort of huge payoff the cops were going to split is one-thing, but with no big pot to split and with the murder of an innocent... I simply do not buy it.

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

It was in the series. The test they performed normally takes a lot longer than the week it took the fbi in this case. There are many problems with the test regardless. It's only been used in the OJ trial before or since. The lab admitted to contaminating the blood.
They also used the entire sample because of this leaving the defense with not way to test it. Here one persons theory about this test. The defense posed similar findings.
http://brobible.com/entertainment/a...ained-blood-evidence-making-murderer-garbage/

Gotcha. I saw all that. Honestly, there is a lot there. I think the PoPo definitely did some planting, but I still think there is a lot of smoke around Avery, especially after reading about his past encounter with her and his shady phone play.

 

[DogFace]

Oh it's very possible. Certainly law enforcement has had its share of "bad apples". I can see them doing things with his case in order to make him appear even more guilty that he was. But I can not see them going into cohoots with either A: the real killer or B: they (law enforcement) being the real killer(s) just to get S. Avery off the streets.

As BK pointed out, him being convicted of this crime would not stop the lawsuit as part of his previous incarceration.

Nor would the $36 mil come out of the pockets of law-enforcement. What do people think, that whey would simply write the guy a check, shut down the county and get rid of all law enforcement? That's not how it works.

I read a lot of true-crime, I watch a lot of true-crime and I've never heard of a case of someone in law-enforcement killing an innocent person just to set someone else up... has it ever happened? Probably, but it's got to be incredibly rare. And the only way I could see it happening was if the law-enforcement person involved was going to get some sort of huge payoff– and there was no huge payoff here.

In addition trying to keep a conspiracy secret a secret works a heck of a lot easier when you only have one person involved, but if this spun out so that that law-enforcement was more involved in the actual killing of the girl or working with the real killer– well now you've got numerous people involved... and with more people the more likelihood someone talks. Again if there was some sort of huge payoff the cops were going to split is one-thing, but with no big pot to split and with the murder of an innocent... I simply do not buy it.

It's not so much the law suit that infuriated them. It was this low life having the nerve to embarrass and challenge them. The deposition had to be extremely embarrassing for them. I guarantee it angered them.
I think they feel they are above reproach. Especially from the likes of "an Avery".

 

[DogFace]

No

Well if you don't think a sealed container being opened and the vial with a hyperdemic needle hole in it signs of tampering than this isn't worth discussing any more. I'm not sure what anyone else could call that. Pretty sure that's the definition of tampering with something.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

-She was last seen with Steve Avery and he specifically asked for her. She didn't make or answer any phone calls after getting to Avery's propert. What 25 year woman doesn't live on her phone.

Maybe you should review what year it is before making conjecture.

Its 2005. The first iphone doesnt come out until 2007.

People didnt live on their dumb flip phones in 2005 like we do on our smart phones in 2016.

 

[Dodger12]

Avery has filed his appeal and you can find the motions at the below link.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/295258417/Steven-Avery-motions-filed-1-11-2016

Not surpisingly, he now blames his defense counsel, the judge and a juror. What's funny is that the juror in question suposedely told the other jurors that "he is ******* guilty..." in the jury room. That, of course, contaminated and influenced the other jurors thus depriving Avery of an impartial jury. you really can't make this up.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

Avery has filed his appeal and you can find the motions at the below link.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/295258417/Steven-Avery-motions-filed-1-11-2016

Not surpisingly, he now blames his defense counsel, the judge and a juror. What's funny is that the juror in question suposedely told the other jurors that "he is ******* guilty..." in the jury room. That, of course, contaminated and influenced the other jurors thus depriving Avery of an impartial jury. you really can't make this up.

I believe, he has been researching, writing and representing himself (and in the motion as well). I have to say...I dont know anyone thats guilty that would spend 10 years learning law to represent himself. That is a lot of work, esp for someone of his brain caliber.

 

[Dodger12]

I believe, he has been researching, writing and representing himself (and in the motion as well). I have to say...I dont know anyone thats guilty that would spend 10 years learning law to represent himself. That is a lot of work, esp for someone of his brain caliber.

You don't know anyone who would spend 10 years representing himself because maybe you don't know anyone that's doing life in prison (I'm just assuming, of course). Many of these guys are jailhouse lawyers and while you and I think it's a lot of work, it's not like these guys have a whole lot to do.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

You don't know anyone who would spend 10 years representing himself because maybe you don't know anyone that's doing life in prison (I'm just assuming, of course). Many of these guys are jailhouse lawyers and while you and I think it's a lot of work, it's not like these guys have a whole lot to do.

assumptions....

You might want to read about my buddy Dan: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Killer-s-Passion-confession-I-was-like-a-1957898.php

 

[Nightman]

Well if you don't think a sealed container being opened and the vial with a hyperdemic needle hole in it signs of tampering than this isn't worth discussing any more. I'm not sure what anyone else could call that. Pretty sure that's the definition of tampering with something.

Every single one of those vials has a hole in the top. That is how your blood gets into the tube(the top stays on to avoid spillage and contamination). If someone wanted blood from the vial they simply take the top off.

Do you know how hard it is to stick a properly sized syringe back thru that hole for someone without training and practice? Then you have to worry about the diffference in pressure. You have to pull and pull just to get a tiny amount in the syringe.

Once again you can just take the lid off. As for the box, this sample was used to free Steve Avery in 96 and 03. That is why the seal was broken. They needed to test his blood to free him with the new DNA tests. Once he is freed there is no need to re-seal the box with evidence tape. It was just sitting in the evidence room at the Clerk's Office.

Plus they wouldn't use a sample that had EDTA in it. That is basic framing 101. He had plenty of new blood taken when he got arrested in 2005 and even joked about it on camera.

 

[Nightman]

Maybe you should review what year it is before making conjecture.

Its 2005. The first iphone doesnt come out until 2007.She

People didnt live on their dumb flip phones in 2005 like we do on our smart phones in 2016.

She never made another call after meeting with Avery. The iphone has no bearing on this case. She was very active on her phone.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

She never made another call after meeting with Avery. The iphone has no bearing on this case. She was very active on her phone.

That's pretty damning evidence right there.

 

[Nightman]

Oh it's very possible. Certainly law enforcement has had its share of "bad apples". I can see them doing things with his case in order to make him appear even more guilty that he was. But I can not see them going into cohoots with either A: the real killer or B: they (law enforcement) being the real killer(s) just to get S. Avery off the streets.

As BK pointed out, him being convicted of this crime would not stop the lawsuit as part of his previous incarceration.

Nor would the $36 mil come out of the pockets of law-enforcement. What do people think, that whey would simply write the guy a check, shut down the county and get rid of all law enforcement? That's not how it works.

I read a lot of true-crime, I watch a lot of true-crime and I've never heard of a case of someone in law-enforcement killing an innocent person just to set someone else up... has it ever happened? Probably, but it's got to be incredibly rare. And the only way I could see it happening was if the law-enforcement person involved was going to get some sort of huge payoff– and there was no huge payoff here.

In addition trying to keep a conspiracy secret a secret works a heck of a lot easier when you only have one person involved, but if this spun out so that that law-enforcement was more involved in the actual killing of the girl or working with the real killer– well now you've got numerous people involved... and with more people the more likelihood someone talks. Again if there was some sort of huge payoff the cops were going to split is one-thing, but with no big pot to split and with the murder of an innocent... I simply do not buy it.

The best I can come up with, is when they are facing jail time for being dirty cops. They will kill or frame someone to stay out of jail. And everyone knows about planting a throw down weapon if they make a bad call on shooting someone.

But Lenk and Colburn weren't even named in the civil lawsuit. They wouldn't risk their careers and freedom to frame a guy like Avery, especially with how much attention his case created. If they got caught a second time then they might be personally liable and it would be for $100 million.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

She never made another call after meeting with Avery. The iphone has no bearing on this case. She was very active on her phone.

Its blatantly highlighted in purple for you....I'm not understanding the issue.

Coupled with the bus driver and propane tank guy both stated they say her on the property 3:30pm-4pm and say her vehicle driving away.

So Steven killed her in this 30 minute window with people watching and drove away in her vehicle...and no one saw or heard anything...and still not a single drop of her blood.

Dude is a Oceans 11 MASTERMIND.

 

[Dodger12]

assumptions....

You might want to read about my buddy Dan: http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Killer-s-Passion-confession-I-was-like-a-1957898.php

That's sad....is he sending out appeals?

 

[65fastback2plus2]

That's sad....is he sending out appeals?

Nope...I dont know any other convicts studying to be lawyers in jail to send out their own appeals either.

My buddy Dan just admitted guilt to get the process over with. I was there at the movie with him the night he saw it (if you read the article).