Making a murderer discussion with spoilers
- Thread starter ctdub
- Start date
Taken from the other thread.
I don't totally rule out Steve. I would be skeptical of the ex boyfriend and the roommate though. I'm also interested in who was calling Teresa when she was upset. They really didn't discuss that, but could it have been Steve calling her according to article I read.
I don't totally rule out Steve. I would be skeptical of the ex boyfriend and the roommate though. I'm also interested in who was calling Teresa when she was upset. They really didn't discuss that, but could it have been Steve calling her according to article I read.
I believe him to be guilty.
I do not believe that anything in the kid's statement to be true.
I believe the kid's lawyer and the lawyer's investigator should be in prison for what they did to the kid when they should have been representing him.
I believe Lenk planted multiple pieces of evidence.
I have lots of questions though, about evidence and other things. For instance, the roommate and friend guessed her Cingular wireless password? It was the birth dates of her sisters whom they had admittedly never met. GTFO!
I do not believe that anything in the kid's statement to be true.
I believe the kid's lawyer and the lawyer's investigator should be in prison for what they did to the kid when they should have been representing him.
I believe Lenk planted multiple pieces of evidence.
I have lots of questions though, about evidence and other things. For instance, the roommate and friend guessed her Cingular wireless password? It was the birth dates of her sisters whom they had admittedly never met. GTFO!
I have a feeling he did it, but based on what they shared about the trial in 3.5 episodes I think I would have voted not guilty. There are just too many unanswered questions. Too much doubt.
Where is the blood? How can she have been shot and dismembered in the garage and not one single drop of blood be found in there? Where's the blood in the house?
They never even tested the bed mattress for dna....
Colburn calling in the license plate on Nov 3, 2 days prior to car being found at auto salvage. That's crazy.
Her key not having any of her dna on it, but his?
Not questioning the boyfriend or roommate.
It's more disturbing what happened to Brendan. I agree his first lawyer should be disbarred at a minimum.
Why I still think Steve did it even though I said I would have voted not guilty. The judges have seen everything in this case and they aren't willing to grant him a new trial or appeal. The fact that no group like the innocence project is willing to take on the case. That tells me there is something we don't see or know from the documentary.
Steve's defense team was really strong. If I'm ever in serious legal trouble in Wisconsin I'd call those guys up.
Where is the blood? How can she have been shot and dismembered in the garage and not one single drop of blood be found in there? Where's the blood in the house?
They never even tested the bed mattress for dna....
Colburn calling in the license plate on Nov 3, 2 days prior to car being found at auto salvage. That's crazy.
Her key not having any of her dna on it, but his?
Not questioning the boyfriend or roommate.
It's more disturbing what happened to Brendan. I agree his first lawyer should be disbarred at a minimum.
Why I still think Steve did it even though I said I would have voted not guilty. The judges have seen everything in this case and they aren't willing to grant him a new trial or appeal. The fact that no group like the innocence project is willing to take on the case. That tells me there is something we don't see or know from the documentary.
Steve's defense team was really strong. If I'm ever in serious legal trouble in Wisconsin I'd call those guys up.
This sums up a lot of how I feel. With the interview on tape with Brendan the first one they taped it really seemed like the kid was just telling the police what they wanted so he could leave. So I have a hard time believing he was involved. I do think Steve invited him over while burning the body and it is possible Steve opened his mouth to the kid and that is where some of the story comes from. I also wonder if Steve doesn't have some kind of mental disorder like a multi personality or something.
It is so crazy how they have no evidence on Brendan yet he isn't eligible for parole till 2048. Just seems like you would have to have more then the confession of a kid. Like other said where is the blood then on the bed or garage? One the bullet in the garage that whole ordeal seemed really off to me. If they shot her with it seems like there would be ample DNA on it where you wouldn't have to wash the whole bullet to get a DNA sample.
Bottom line I think Steve did this and planned it. I think he was going to get away with it but the sheriffs planted extra evidence to make sure there was no way he would get off.
I also would like the back story on the family because the way police talk they were a really evil family with sick perversions. If it wasn't Steve it was Brendan's brother and the other guy who saw head lights. IMO
Trust me, after reading through hundreds of court decisions - I can say with some certainty that there's way too many judges out there who care more about rubber stamping previous decisions than actually take the time or trouble to actually review the evidence and arrive at their own independent conclusion.
Keep this case in mind, Callins v Collins, Feb. 22, 1994 was an appeal (writ of certiorari)* filed by a Texas inmate (Callins) against the Texas Director of prisons trying to stop his execution. The appeal had been dismissed by the 5th Circuit Ct of Appeals and had been appealed to the US Supreme Court, which also eventually denied the appeal in a decision written by Justice Scalia. *(A writ of certiorari means that the upper court reviews the entire court record and files from the previous case.)
Justice Scalia, in his opinion cited to another case that was then pending before the S Court, known as McCollum v. North Carolina. Scalia referenced that case as an example of someone for whom the death penalty should be applied. Scalia wrote: "It looks even better next to some of the other cases currently before us which Justice Blackmun did not select as the vehicle for his announcement that the death penalty is always unconstitutional--for example, the case of the 11-year old girl raped by four men and then killed by stuffing her panties down her throat. See McCollum v. North Carolina, No. 93-7200, cert. now pending before the Court. How enviable a quiet death by lethal injection compared with that!"
McCollum was a mentally retarded man who was convicted as being the perp who held the young girl down while 3 other men raped her and that it was he who stuffed her panties down her throat choking and killing her. Scalia was convinced of his guilt and just like the Callin's case had voted not to grant the appeal which would have allowed it to go back to trial.
Problem is this: McCollum, after serving some 30 yrs in prison was CLEARED by DNA evidence as it was NOT HIM, but yet another man who was actually the perpetrator of the crime and tied to it by his own DNA.
So, the very person who a Supreme Court Justice used as his shining example of someone who was guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt and who clearly needed to have the death penalty applied to him - turned out to be completely INNOCENT! Justice Scalia, despite having the entire record available to him and his staff saw no problems in that record even though they did exist and the record, if reviewed by an unbiased person the problems would have been glaring. But it was more important for Scalia to try and support his position in favor of the death penalty than care about the actual guilt/innocence of a particular individual.
Point being, judges are political creatures way too often and see what they want to see and often don't give a damn about individuals rights, guilt or such other "trifling" things if recognizing them would run contrary to their preconceived notions and political philosophies.
I kept thinking about motive...what could Steve's motive have been? Maybe I missed something.
Given only what I saw on the doc, I would not have voted guilty. There's gotta be some other evidence that wasn't presented in the show.
Given only what I saw on the doc, I would not have voted guilty. There's gotta be some other evidence that wasn't presented in the show.
hes the dumbest criminal alive if he killed her when his million dollar payday was just around the corner. Also why wouldn't he just crush the car and dispose of the bones in some lake with a concrete block tied to it.
The tampered blood is his old evidence file should've been allowed. The kids lawyer and investigator should be charged. Trying to force a confession out of your client and the lawyer not being present during interrogation is incompetent and should be grounds for being barred.
The news broadcast assured that he wouldn't receive a fair jury. My only friends from that area put on my FB that he was " guilty as sin" and they didn't see one episode. They just remember Katz on the news convicting him every night.
The tampered blood is his old evidence file should've been allowed. The kids lawyer and investigator should be charged. Trying to force a confession out of your client and the lawyer not being present during interrogation is incompetent and should be grounds for being barred.
The news broadcast assured that he wouldn't receive a fair jury. My only friends from that area put on my FB that he was " guilty as sin" and they didn't see one episode. They just remember Katz on the news convicting him every night.
Here's a post from one of the local tv reporters from the doc. Interesting that Ken Kratz responds to this post and even addresses some posters on her Facebook page.
https://www.facebook.com/angenettel/posts/1307889239236608
https://www.facebook.com/angenettel/posts/1307889239236608
Pretty cool that the attorney that was impeaching Kachinskey in episode 10 is a professor of my sons at Northestern Law, Len Rubinowitz.
I don't think either Steven or Brendan are guilty.
A) What would Steven's motive be to kill her? Doesn't make sense. The guy was on tap for a big pay day from the state of Wisconsin.
B) There is a huge motive for the Manitowac police department to cover this up and pin it on Avery.
C) Why was there no blood, DNA, evidence anywhere in the trailer or the garage. You're telling me if he shot Theresa Halbach in the garage that he would be able to clean all of that blood completely up? No way. Nothing in the trailer either.
A) What would Steven's motive be to kill her? Doesn't make sense. The guy was on tap for a big pay day from the state of Wisconsin.
B) There is a huge motive for the Manitowac police department to cover this up and pin it on Avery.
C) Why was there no blood, DNA, evidence anywhere in the trailer or the garage. You're telling me if he shot Theresa Halbach in the garage that he would be able to clean all of that blood completely up? No way. Nothing in the trailer either.
Interesting insight from local tv reporter.
I'd be curious who they were interested in (his friend). Steve Tadych's story was sketchy.
https://www.facebook.com/angenettel/posts/1304825749542957
I'd be curious who they were interested in (his friend). Steve Tadych's story was sketchy.
https://www.facebook.com/angenettel/posts/1304825749542957
He is guilty as sin and the documentary does not tell you everything that happened.
I got this from http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movie...-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php
The most damning is that Haibach's camera and palm pilot were found in the remains of the fire.
If you read the entire transcript Brendon confess in detail to everything that he and Steven did to her. He also mentions to his mom on a phone call that Steven had been molesting him.
-- The documentary said that part of Avery's criminal past included animal cruelty. To my recollection, it didn't specify exactly what that animal cruelty was. I know that for some of our readers, knowing is enough to want to see Avery get the death sentence regardless of whether he murdered Halbach: He doused a cat in oil and threw it on a bonfire (this is not relevant to the murder trial, but it certainly diminishes the sympathy some of us felt for him).
-- Past criminal activity also included threatening a female relative at gunpoint.
-- In the months leading up to Halbach's disappearance, Avery had called Auto Trader several times and always specifically requested Halbach to come out and take the photos.
-- Halbach had complained to her boss that she didn't want to go out to Avery's trailer anymore, because once when she came out, Avery was waiting for her wearing only a towel (this was excluded for being too inflammatory). Avery clearly had an obsession with Halbach.
-- On the day that Halbach went missing, Avery had called her three times, twice from a *67 number to hide his identity.
-- The bullet with Halbach's DNA on it came from Avery's gun, which always hung above his bed.
-- Avery had purchased handcuffs and leg irons like the ones Dassey described holding Halbach only three weeks before (Avery said he's purchased them for use with his girlfriend, Jodi, with whom he'd had a tumultuous relationship -- at one point, he was ordered by police to stay away from her for three days).
-- Here's the piece of evidence that was presented at trial but not in the series that I find most convincing: In Dassey's illegally obtained statement, Dassey stated that he helped Avery moved the RAV4 into the junkyard and that Avery had lifted the hood and removed the battery cable. Even if you believe that the blood in Halbach's car was planted by the cops (as I do), there was also non-blood DNA evidence on the hood latch. I don't believe the police would plant -- or know to plant -- that evidence.
I got this from http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movie...-evidence-making-a-murderer-didnt-present.php
The most damning is that Haibach's camera and palm pilot were found in the remains of the fire.
If you read the entire transcript Brendon confess in detail to everything that he and Steven did to her. He also mentions to his mom on a phone call that Steven had been molesting him.
-- The documentary said that part of Avery's criminal past included animal cruelty. To my recollection, it didn't specify exactly what that animal cruelty was. I know that for some of our readers, knowing is enough to want to see Avery get the death sentence regardless of whether he murdered Halbach: He doused a cat in oil and threw it on a bonfire (this is not relevant to the murder trial, but it certainly diminishes the sympathy some of us felt for him).
-- Past criminal activity also included threatening a female relative at gunpoint.
-- In the months leading up to Halbach's disappearance, Avery had called Auto Trader several times and always specifically requested Halbach to come out and take the photos.
-- Halbach had complained to her boss that she didn't want to go out to Avery's trailer anymore, because once when she came out, Avery was waiting for her wearing only a towel (this was excluded for being too inflammatory). Avery clearly had an obsession with Halbach.
-- On the day that Halbach went missing, Avery had called her three times, twice from a *67 number to hide his identity.
-- The bullet with Halbach's DNA on it came from Avery's gun, which always hung above his bed.
-- Avery had purchased handcuffs and leg irons like the ones Dassey described holding Halbach only three weeks before (Avery said he's purchased them for use with his girlfriend, Jodi, with whom he'd had a tumultuous relationship -- at one point, he was ordered by police to stay away from her for three days).
-- Here's the piece of evidence that was presented at trial but not in the series that I find most convincing: In Dassey's illegally obtained statement, Dassey stated that he helped Avery moved the RAV4 into the junkyard and that Avery had lifted the hood and removed the battery cable. Even if you believe that the blood in Halbach's car was planted by the cops (as I do), there was also non-blood DNA evidence on the hood latch. I don't believe the police would plant -- or know to plant -- that evidence.
Why would Steven put her body in the Rav4 when he needed to move her a short distance to the burn pile? Change of plans maybe?
And why were bones found in two burn piles?
And no blood found anywhere in the house or garage? After stabbing her and slitting her throat and shooting her.
Bullet and car key found way after the fact?
Also, why risk the huge settlement he would have been receiving?
What was his motive?
And why were bones found in two burn piles?
And no blood found anywhere in the house or garage? After stabbing her and slitting her throat and shooting her.
Bullet and car key found way after the fact?
Also, why risk the huge settlement he would have been receiving?
What was his motive?
His motive was he wanted to have sex with her and it obviously wasn't going to be consensual. Answering the door in his robe another time, specifically requesting that auto trader send her out, calling her *67 so she'd actually answer his calls. The guy was a creep.
I agree with many that some evidence was planted, but still think he did it.
I wonder if Brendon got to watch that one Wrestlemania.
I agree with many that some evidence was planted, but still think he did it.
I wonder if Brendon got to watch that one Wrestlemania.
After reading about those phone calls linked above, assuming true, it's hard to argue for Steve. I do think the cops approached it with a "prove Steve did it" rather than a "find out who did it" mindset, which they shouldn't be doing. They did the wrong thing, but got the right guy. Hopefully someone can help the kid get out sooner. He probably saw or knew of what happened, but couldn't really process everything that was going on. There's a main board discussion with double digit number of pages, I don't think I have the energy to dig in to that.
Clear some of the evidence appears to have been planted. Particular the key and blood in the RAV4. That doesn't necessarily mean Steve didn't do it but it brings everything into question.
If Steve has an IQ of 75 Brandon must by about half that. His confession makes absolutely no sense he's basically just guessing at what police want him to say. Most damning it appears from the lack of blood in the bed room the girl was never actually stabbed. Also the police never ask obviously follow up questions at the end like what happen to the gun, what kind of gun, what kind of knife etc. It appears they just want him to say she was shot but don't want to bring out any details that might mess up the story they have got him to stay
Most damning against Steve is the body in the burn pile. Yes you could plant the key & DNA but somebody killed her and burned the body within 100 yards of his trailer. That really narrows down the suspects.
If Steve has an IQ of 75 Brandon must by about half that. His confession makes absolutely no sense he's basically just guessing at what police want him to say. Most damning it appears from the lack of blood in the bed room the girl was never actually stabbed. Also the police never ask obviously follow up questions at the end like what happen to the gun, what kind of gun, what kind of knife etc. It appears they just want him to say she was shot but don't want to bring out any details that might mess up the story they have got him to stay
Most damning against Steve is the body in the burn pile. Yes you could plant the key & DNA but somebody killed her and burned the body within 100 yards of his trailer. That really narrows down the suspects.
Was wondering the same thing - hopefully they let his parents send him the VHS recording.
Sadly, that line in particular put into perspective the level in which Brendan functioned mentally. Makes what his first lawyer and investigators did to him that much more repulsive.
When he asked his mom what the word "inconsistent" meant and she didn't know either, that made me incredibly sad.
What that lawyer did to that poor kid is really really pathetic. He stated in the series that in his opinion, before he ever took the case, that Steve has guilty and made Brendan help him. That Steve was this big bad evil guy and here was this poor mentally challenged kid that Steve took advantage of. That kid had no chance at all and what was really sad was when he wanted to change lawyers and went in front of the judge to ask to dismiss his lawyer you could see how he was easily persuaded. He couldn't even articulate to the judge the things his lawyer was doing that made him feel like he wasn't getting fair representation so he threw out well he thinks I am guilty. It was almost like he is just such a passive person that the idea of trashing the lawyer in front of him made him uncomfortable. If he would have just said well I was interrogated by my investigator for a statement then my lawyer let them interrogate me with out him being present then the judge would have let him dismiss his lawyer. The fact he couldn't even come up with that to help himself shows he wasn't very smart. He should have been treated like a grade school kid but since he was around 16 - 17 years old they treated him like an adult. Courts really let this kid down and what really makes me sad for the kid is he is in a federal jail with really bad dudes. No telling what the kid has went through while in jail.
I agree Tater, I'm watching it right now with my wife and when they couldn't figure out what the word inconsistent meant that was extremely sad. Either the kid is pulling off a great Edward Norton impression or he's just that stupid and had nothing to do with any murder whatsoever. The fact they were so willing to take his story as fact when almost none of it (quite possibly none of it) could be back up whatsoever.
I'm on the fence as to whether Steve did it or not and the sheer fact that so much of the evidence seems planted taints everything else in my opinion. It is a bit disturbing about the phone calls and the robe is a bit creepy but I also have to look at things not through the glasses of what would happen at my house but if that would be totally out of the ordinary for the bumbling idiots that this family consisted of and I really don't think that would be too out of the norm and certainly not enough to make me jump to murder because he wanted to have sex with her. Personally I've been out to insureds houses when they new I was coming and the lower the level of house the more relaxed they are with cleaning up and clothing.
I'd be curious to hear from @CowboyJD on this one in regards to how long they had the crime scene locked down and if 8 days is normal?
I'm on the fence as to whether Steve did it or not and the sheer fact that so much of the evidence seems planted taints everything else in my opinion. It is a bit disturbing about the phone calls and the robe is a bit creepy but I also have to look at things not through the glasses of what would happen at my house but if that would be totally out of the ordinary for the bumbling idiots that this family consisted of and I really don't think that would be too out of the norm and certainly not enough to make me jump to murder because he wanted to have sex with her. Personally I've been out to insureds houses when they new I was coming and the lower the level of house the more relaxed they are with cleaning up and clothing.
I'd be curious to hear from @CowboyJD on this one in regards to how long they had the crime scene locked down and if 8 days is normal?
Haven't watched it.
I want to and just haven't gotten around to it.
8 days would be a long time for a crime scene to be locked down, but not unprecedented.
All I can say right now is I've been involved in litigation in a high profile case like this (Frtiz and Williamson...the subject of John Grisham's book "An Innocent Man"), and based upon that one experience, the media presenter definitely starts with a perspective and theory about the story and can and will ignore facts that don't fit the narrative and/or just plain make crap up to enhance the narrative he or she is intent on presenting.
I want to and just haven't gotten around to it.
8 days would be a long time for a crime scene to be locked down, but not unprecedented.
All I can say right now is I've been involved in litigation in a high profile case like this (Frtiz and Williamson...the subject of John Grisham's book "An Innocent Man"), and based upon that one experience, the media presenter definitely starts with a perspective and theory about the story and can and will ignore facts that don't fit the narrative and/or just plain make crap up to enhance the narrative he or she is intent on presenting.
I read an article yesterday that said that two jurors have come forward and said that the jury believed that the police planted evidence. They also said they were afraid for their own safety if they did not find him guilty and that is why the mixed conviction. The 1 guilty and 1 not guilty verdict was an agreement they made and to send a message to the appellate courts so that he could get a new trial outside of the county.
The author of this article sums up my view on this case.
http://flavorwire.com/554591/it-doesnt-matter-whether-steven-avery-did-it
http://flavorwire.com/554591/it-doesnt-matter-whether-steven-avery-did-it
I found that interesting as well. They either know something we may not, or they've simply decided that all ammo (appeals?) has been spent, and they've simply decided to put their resources to more winnable cases.
The kid really looked like crap (as one would expect) in the closing episode, really beat down. Steven appeared to look reasonably healthy, although he is accustomed to prison, to say the least. No real point with this, just the huge difference I observed in their general appearance in the final episode.
Guilty or not guilty one thing came across to me very clearly. Law enforcement, the prosecutors and judges came across as douche bags.
The sheriff's department acted like guilty kids caught with their hand in the cookie jar during the depositions.
The lack of blood and DNA evidence in the trailer or garage tells me that poor girl was murdered somewhere else.
My theory is the sheriff's deputy that called in the license plate on Nov. 3 found the SUV with the body in it and they saw it as a way to get out of a very expensive and embarrassing situation.
Why none of the people close to the victim was ever a person of interest is very suspect to me.
The sheriff's department acted like guilty kids caught with their hand in the cookie jar during the depositions.
The lack of blood and DNA evidence in the trailer or garage tells me that poor girl was murdered somewhere else.
My theory is the sheriff's deputy that called in the license plate on Nov. 3 found the SUV with the body in it and they saw it as a way to get out of a very expensive and embarrassing situation.
Why none of the people close to the victim was ever a person of interest is very suspect to me.
Last edited:
I've watched the whole thing and read all articles linked in this thread and others but this being the most damning still isn't clicking for me. Anyone care to explain?
Sorry to be so late to the party on this. Just watched it.
Here is what I think happened. Hopefully some of you will take the time to read and tell me what is wrong with my theories.
At least 5 (likely more) members of Manitowoc law enforcement were in a situation where their reputation and livelihood was potentially at stake. Three (or more) had totally screwed Avery on his first conviction and sent him to jail for something he did not do. Two more cost him 8 more years of imprisonment when they did not take action when the call was placed to let the county know that they might have put the wrong guy in jail. Colburn took the call and reported it to Lenk...nothing happened.
Avery's lawsuit not only put those individuals in the line of fire, but the potential was there to bankrupt the entire county, or at least put it in a world of hurt. That doesn't even take into account the complete destruction of the reputation of the entire local law enforcement division.
So, a group of these individuals decided to fix this issue. They staked out Avery, and waited for the right opportunity. When they saw a woman alone on his property, and determined that Avery was also there alone, they had their chance.
She drove away in her car, they pulled her over in what looked like a normal police stop. Took her somewhere. Killed her. Burned her body. Now, let's remember that she wasn't reported missing for 3-4 days. This gives them ample time to burn her, plant the bone fragments in Avery's burn pit, plant her vehicle on his property, etc.
When Colburn called in her vehicle plate, I think he was confirming that it was registered in her name and not someone else. That way finding the vehicle would clearly implicate Avery. They may have planted Avery's blood in the vehicle at that time, or come back later to strengthen her case.
There is no doubt that the key was planted, as well as the bullet fragment. The lack of the victim's DNA on the key, proves it was a plant. The lack of blood in the garage/bedroom, proves that the bullet was a plant.
As to the EDTA test...that whole thing seemed fishy. Even if there was no EDTA in the samples that they sent to the FBI, did the FBI also do a DNA test on those samples? I don't think so. How do we know that Lent didn't prick his finger and put his own blood (sans EDTA) on those swabs?
I don't think Avery had anything to do with it. It was a total set up, and I am glad I don't live anywhere near that backward-*** county.
p.s. As to the later revelation that Avery purchased manacles like the ones his nephew described, those could have been found during the searches of Avery's house and the idea could have been planted in Brendan's mind, just like they appeared to plant the rest of that ******** story in his mind. Was there any mention of marks on the bed where the chains/manacles were in contact with the wood? Didn't think so. I also wonder if they didn't steal that burn barrel off of Avery's property before burning the body and bringing the remains back to spread in his burn pit. That would explain why there were remains found in the barrel as well.
Here is what I think happened. Hopefully some of you will take the time to read and tell me what is wrong with my theories.
At least 5 (likely more) members of Manitowoc law enforcement were in a situation where their reputation and livelihood was potentially at stake. Three (or more) had totally screwed Avery on his first conviction and sent him to jail for something he did not do. Two more cost him 8 more years of imprisonment when they did not take action when the call was placed to let the county know that they might have put the wrong guy in jail. Colburn took the call and reported it to Lenk...nothing happened.
Avery's lawsuit not only put those individuals in the line of fire, but the potential was there to bankrupt the entire county, or at least put it in a world of hurt. That doesn't even take into account the complete destruction of the reputation of the entire local law enforcement division.
So, a group of these individuals decided to fix this issue. They staked out Avery, and waited for the right opportunity. When they saw a woman alone on his property, and determined that Avery was also there alone, they had their chance.
She drove away in her car, they pulled her over in what looked like a normal police stop. Took her somewhere. Killed her. Burned her body. Now, let's remember that she wasn't reported missing for 3-4 days. This gives them ample time to burn her, plant the bone fragments in Avery's burn pit, plant her vehicle on his property, etc.
When Colburn called in her vehicle plate, I think he was confirming that it was registered in her name and not someone else. That way finding the vehicle would clearly implicate Avery. They may have planted Avery's blood in the vehicle at that time, or come back later to strengthen her case.
There is no doubt that the key was planted, as well as the bullet fragment. The lack of the victim's DNA on the key, proves it was a plant. The lack of blood in the garage/bedroom, proves that the bullet was a plant.
As to the EDTA test...that whole thing seemed fishy. Even if there was no EDTA in the samples that they sent to the FBI, did the FBI also do a DNA test on those samples? I don't think so. How do we know that Lent didn't prick his finger and put his own blood (sans EDTA) on those swabs?
I don't think Avery had anything to do with it. It was a total set up, and I am glad I don't live anywhere near that backward-*** county.
p.s. As to the later revelation that Avery purchased manacles like the ones his nephew described, those could have been found during the searches of Avery's house and the idea could have been planted in Brendan's mind, just like they appeared to plant the rest of that ******** story in his mind. Was there any mention of marks on the bed where the chains/manacles were in contact with the wood? Didn't think so. I also wonder if they didn't steal that burn barrel off of Avery's property before burning the body and bringing the remains back to spread in his burn pit. That would explain why there were remains found in the barrel as well.
Last edited:
I saw this on the main board. The embedded YouTube video was an interesting listen, even though I don't think I believe it. Basically, a former investigator thinks Avery could have been a victim of a serial killer who not only kills, but then enjoys framing people and watching someone else take the fall. Said serial killer allegedly did this multiple times.
http://uproxx.com/tv/making-a-murderer-edward-wayne-edwards/
http://uproxx.com/tv/making-a-murderer-edward-wayne-edwards/
I'm with you. Don't see how this changes anything. Whoever burned the body and wherever the body was burned, you would expect those things to be with the bones. Whether it happened on Avery's property or the remains were moved there.
I really can't buy that the sheriff's office conspired to murder a woman simply for the purpose of saving money. The only thing those officers in particular stood to lose was their job and I doubt that would have even happened. That's a hell of a risk to save a $40,000/year job not to mention framing a guy is a far cry from actually murdering a young woman for the purpose of framing someone you don't like. You might have 1 monster that would do that but getting 4 others to agree? Additionally, none of those guys stuck me as too damn bright. To me the best fit of the evidence and motives is what was linked in a prior post about Bobby Dassey and his step dad committing the crime and then framing Steve for it. The cops, although not in cooperation with Dassey, help Bobby and Scott frame Steve. It explains the location of the remains at the quarry where the body was originally burned and then the fragments in Dassey's barrel with the bulk in Steve's barrel. I think the cops illegally searched the salvage yard and found the car which was when Colburn called in for the plate. Then they directed the volunteers, who just happened to have a camera, where to look. The key, the bullet, and the ignition blood were planted but I think Teresa's blood is legit. Also, the Scott and Bobby alibis are ridiculous. They both went hunting at the same place at different times but passed each other on the road to and from and waved...utter ********. I think you had two independent parties looking to frame the same dude and it worked out for everyone, except Steve.
And Brendan...
That all makes a lot of sense. The question I would have is...where was Theresa killed? If Bobby and Scott did it, did they do it in their trailer/house? If so, did Brendan see it all happen there and that is where the original story he told came from? The big hole in that theory is that I think the mom was home until 5 p.m., and people saw Theresa on the property about 3:30 p.m., then no one saw her after that, so they would have had to have grabbed her and held her somewhere.
Maybe Bobby did grab her and take her somewhere, rape her and kill her. Then he told his dad what he had done, and dad helped cover all of it up by framing Steve. That would explain why Theresa's blood was in the back of her vehicle. They took her from the site of the murder back to their property to burn her.
They could have easily taken that barrel to the murder site and burned her remains, then brought it back, put most of the remains in Steve's burn pit and put the barrel back where it originally was. I think it sure looks like the body was burned in the barrel. If so, someone else would have seen it happen had it happened on the property (Steve would have seen the Dassey's doing it or they would have seen Steve doing it).
It sure would have been nice to hear what the youngest brother remembers from that day. He could corroborate/shed some doubt on the stories told by Steve, or the two Dassey brothers and their step-dad.
I don't think there is any doubt that the police helped get Steve convicted, even if they did not murder the girl. If that is accurate, I totally believe that the jurors were afraid to find Avery not guilty. Some of them might have felt that they would be the next person to go missing in that county.
I would argue that some of those guys stood to lose a lot more than their job. They could lose their livelihood and their families could be out on the streets. They could lose their pension and retirement benefits. They could lose their reputation and be forced to leave Manitowoc (and probably the state). If the county lost the lawsuit, and the insurance companies refused to pay, they could have been on the hook for multi-million dollar judgments. In short, they had everything to lose. Colburn and Lent had to have serious concerns that their names would be added to that lawsuit after they were deposed.
As far as getting 4 others to agree, my feeling is that it only took 2 to pull something like this off. It could have been more, and more had motive, but I could see 2 of them deciding to do this and pulling it off without involving the others. Based on the circumstances of the suspicious evidence in the case, my guess would be that Colburn and Lent were both involved in the frame up. Beyond those 2, the only thing that implicates other members of the police is motive.
I didn't remember Barb being home at the time Teresa went missing but that could be right. As far as to where Teresa was killed there are infinite possibilities. I think the evidence absolutely points to her body being burned at the quarry on the other side of the property. If you consider the 3 places remains were found...very small amount at quarry, very small amount in Tadych barrel, most of it in Steve's burn pit....I think that totally points to her being burned at the quarry, transported in the Tadych barrel, dumped on Steve's burn pit. It's a 40 acre property and I assume a quarry would be a big hole in the ground so I think she could have easily been burned there, especially at night, without anyone seeing. If the cops were the murderers and the framers why would there be any remains at the quarry or in the Tadych barrel? The placement of the car is strange but I think it is much more likely Tadych and Dassey could plant the car there without being seen than the cops could have.
I don't think Bobby was the main perpetrator, I think it was Scott. I also think it is quite possible Brendan does know about it to some degree. In the series his cousin testifies he had lost a lot of weight and was acting really strange after the disappearance. I think it's very possible he knew something and was under threat for his own safety or his mom's safety by Scott Tadych. I think it is interesting that Scott Tadych married Barb during Steve's trial. Did he do that to make it where she couldn't be forced to testify against him?
I think the cops theory has some weight...I just think the Tadych/Dassey theory has more.