Steven Avery "screwed"

[6556]

Just finished watching the Nexflix documentary on Steven Avery.

This guy spent 18 years in prison before being released, innocent, proven by DNA evidence. Note that the same DNA evidence proved who was guilty, and that the police, during their investigation had been told that this other person was likely the guilty party.

After his release from prison, and while he is in the process of suing a number of people INCLUDING two Sheriffs, A local girl was reported 'missing' and then there's a audio clip of a cop asking " has Avery been arrested yet?" Before they knew a crime had been committed. Then the same two sheriffs discovered a set of car keys on Avery's bedroom floor. Discovered those keys after there had already been 4 other inspections (three weeks later) of the same place/room.

A real eye opener.

Lots of other info, really shows just how hard he and his nephew got screwed.


Worse part is.. there's a murder running around loose!


Might point out that this same DA/prosecutor was caught sex/texting a battered woman.

[law573]

I don't know that I'd be shedding too many big tears for Steven Avery. The netflix documentary was interesting in that it didn't really touch on anything with Teresa Halbach, the evidence against Avery, the testimony of his nephew who helped Avery rape, murder and dispose of Teresa's remains. It also doesn't cover the trial itself. I live near where this happened and had a front row seat during the whole affair. This was not some case of Steve Avery being railroaded. Steve Avery and Brendan Dassey raped Teresa Halbach, cut her throat, shot her and burned her remains. Brendan Dassey walked us through the crime, step by bloody step. Ample evidence was presented to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Avery and Dassey were sent to prison where they belong.

The documentary relies heavily on innuendo, where it concerns Avery raping and murdering Halbach, and is heavily edited to favor Avery's defense. Theresa Halbach's fate gave the The Innocence Project quite the black eye. DNA exonerated Avery from the rape conviction and set him free which was the right thing to do. The Halbach murder investigation was handled with extreme care and transparency because of the prior false conviction. Avery and Dassey got the justice they deserve.

Making a Murderer tells a story, but not a complete story. I know that this area is safer with Avery in Waupun Correctional.

Special Prosecutor Ken Kratz' reaction to the Documentary

[6556]

Originally Posted by law573

I don't know that I'd be shedding too many big tears for Steven Avery. The netflix documentary was interesting in that it didn't really touch on anything with Teresa Halbach, the evidence against Avery, the testimony of his nephew who helped Avery rape, murder and dispose of Teresa's remains. It also doesn't cover the trial itself. I live near where this happened and had a front row seat during the whole affair. This was not some case of Steve Avery being railroaded. Steve Avery and Brendan Dassey raped Teresa Halbach, cut her throat, shot her and burned her remains. Brendan Dassey walked us through the crime, step by bloody step. Ample evidence was presented to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Avery and Dassey were sent to prison where they belong.

The documentary relies heavily on innuendo, where it concerns Avery raping and murdering Halbach, and is heavily edited to favor Avery's defense. Theresa Halbach's fate gave the The Innocence Project quite the black eye. DNA exonerated Avery from the rape conviction and set him free which was the right thing to do. The Halbach murder investigation was handled with extreme care and transparency because of the prior false conviction. Avery and Dassey got the justice they deserve.

Making a Murderer tells a story, but not a complete story. I know that this area is safer with Avery in Waupun Correctional.

Special Prosecutor Ken Kratz' reaction to the Documentary

I'm fairly sure that you haven't actually watched this documentary, and even if you live near by and had front row seats you have kept your eyes and ears closed.

Don't have a whole lot of time to list the many many items I'll just point out one quick fact.

This "Special prosecutor" Ken Kratz was later accused of sending "sex text" to a battered woman with legal problems. Kratz had his lawyer's license suspended and he moved out of the area in disgrace.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-da-ke...xting-scandal/

[law573]

Originally Posted by 6556

I'm fairly sure that you haven't actually watched this documentary, and even if you live near by and had front row seats you have kept your eyes and ears closed.

Don't have a whole lot of time to list the many many items I'll just point out one quick fact.

This "Special prosecutor" Ken Kratz was later accused of sending "sex text" to a battered woman with legal problems. Kratz had his lawyer's license suspended and he moved out of the area in disgrace.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-da-ke...xting-scandal/

You'd be dead wrong on the item you're pretty sure about. I just know more about this than the new york grad students chose to put in their film. As for documentaries, it's not uncommon for them to only tell part of a story since they are kind of like opinion pieces. Watch anything by Michael Moore to understand what I'm talking about.

As for the Kratz thing, yeah he did get involved with a victim from an entirely unrelated case in an entirely different timeframe. So what? If only Kratz received the same consideration you give a brutal killer. This is the sort of innuendo and assumption of relevance that the film makers use of in this documentary. Hollywood Joe Paulus was sentenced to federal prison for accepting bribes for reduced sentencing in Winnebago County OWI cases, but to suggest that invalidates everything he ever did throughout his life isn't exactly reasonable nor would it be true.

Avery didn't commit the sexual assault he was originally sent to prison for. The Manitowoc County Sheriff's Office was too focused on Avery in the original case and ignored other information. That happened and Avery was eventually released. Avery sued and settled for $400,000.

If anyone has their eyes and ears closed, it's not me when it comes to Steven Avery. If you have some evidence to refute his conviction for murdering Teresa Halbach, I encourage you to come forward. Maybe you know something that will overturn his conviction for throwing his family cat into a fire too, or the burglaries or running his relative off the road and pointing a shotgun at her. Those were some years earlier and he admitted to them, but he would appreciate any help you can give him.

[6556]

Well, it's certain that you haven't watched this Netflix show.

Originally Posted by law573

You'd be dead wrong on the item you're pretty sure about. I just know more about this than the new york grad students chose to put in their film.___Really? you've had access to all the files of both the defense and of the DA? You've had copies of all the videos of Brenden Dassy's interviews and Interrogations? You had interviews all the people involved?___ As for documentaries, it's not uncommon for them to only tell part of a story since they are kind of like opinion pieces. Watch anything by Michael Moore to understand what I'm talking about.

Why do you feel the need to invoke the name of Micheal Moore? He and his antics have nothing to do with this show

As for the Kratz thing, yeah he did get involved with a victim from an entirely unrelated case in an entirely different timeframe. So what?Just shows this guy's character If only Kratz received the same consideration you give a brutal killer. This is the sort of innuendo and assumption of relevance that the film makers use of in this documentary. Hollywood Joe Paulus was sentenced to federal prison for accepting bribes for reduced sentencing in Winnebago County OWI cases, but to suggest that invalidates everything he ever did throughout his life isn't exactly reasonable nor would it be true.

Avery didn't commit the sexual assault he was originally sent to prison for. The Manitowoc County Sheriff's Office was too focused on Avery in the original case and ignored other information.This is another indication that you either don't know the whole story, and that you did not watch this documentary. What you failed to mention was that there were a number of people who came forward and said that the description matched Gregory Allen. The victim described her attacker as having Blue eyes and long hair (like Allen) Avery had short hair and brown eyes. The victim said her attacker had white underwear, Avery didn't OWN underwear! The victim was NEVER SHOWN a picture of Gregory Allen. That happened and Avery was eventually released. Avery sued and settled for $400,000.

Avery settled for that 400k because at that time he had been arrested (by the same interested parties named in the Avery lawsuit ) and he needed cash to pay for his defense.

If anyone has their eyes and ears closed, it's not me when it comes to Steven Avery. If you have some evidence to refute his conviction for murdering Teresa Halbach, I encourage you to come forward.Where/when did I suggest that I knew something more than what is brought out into the open by this documentary? Maybe you know something that will overturn his conviction for throwing his family cat into a fire too, or the burglaries or running his relative off the road and pointing a shotgun at her. Those were some years earlier and he admitted to them, but he would appreciate any help you can give him.

Again, you haven't watched this documentary, because there has been more than enough to raise all sorts of red flags


How about the fact that Brenden's court appointed attorney Len Kachinsky allowed his client (a young boy who's IQ is in the low 70s) to be interviewed by police WITH OUT HIS LAWYER present?

What do you have to say about Brendan being interviewed with out his mother present?

What do you have to say about the video taped interviews of Brendan?

What do you have to say about the interview of Kachinsky's PI (working FOR Brendan's defense) with Brendan?

What do you have to say about the keys found in Avery's home. Found after police having already searched his home seven times before, and not found... But, the day after the place was searched by the sheriff's dept, the same department being sued by Avery the keys suddenly are found, laying on the floor OUT IN THE OPEN.. found BY that same sheriffs dept?

[law573]

Here's what I have to say. When you present the theories put out there by the defense attorneys, you are working off the information the defense wants you to have. A defense attorney has one job in a criminal case and that is to present a theory that raises reasonable doubt. They are not required to look at the totality of the circumstances nor are they required to present evidence of their clients guilt. It's good to maintain some objectivity when you are given one source of information and that source has a vested interest in a certain outcome.

Brendan Dassey was interviewed initially and later on. Interviewing suspects tends to be a multi-layer process. You to start out with a minimal amount of truth (if any) and that slowly slides over to a greater amount when they start to contradict themselves. That is when confessions occur and Brendan Dassey did confess. Confessions are then vetted against the known physical evidence to check their veracity and Dassey's confession passed that test. All this smoke and mirrors about keys and interview techniques reminds me of someone throwing a handful of fecal matter at a wall in hopes that something will stick.

I do find it rather funny that you now put Len Kachinsky in on this conspiracy.... if anything shows a lack of knowledge about this case, and the people involved, it's that. I'm going to assume that you've been spending some time on stevenavery.org. That's not exactly what anyone could argue as a terribly credible source.

As for my netflix watching activity, my account claims that I watched 64:21 minutes out 64:58 minutes of Making A Murderer S:01 Ep:01 Eighteen Years Lost on 12/22/2015. Maybe there were some startling revelations during the final 47 seconds of credits to prove Avery's innocence or you got some sort of director's cut. Maybe Ken Kratz, Judge Patrick Willis, the Wisconsin State Crime Lab, the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Office, Wisconsin DoJ DCI, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals and the State Supreme Court planted this information on my account as a paid shill to dispute your opinion and maintain the conspiracy..... or maybe, just maybe, we disagree.

Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey got the justice they deserve.

[6556]

Originally Posted by law573

Here's what I have to say. When you present the theories put out there by the defense attorneys, you are working off the information the defense wants you to have. A defense attorney has one job in a criminal case and that is to present a theory that raises reasonable doubt. They are not required to look at the totality of the circumstances nor are they required to present evidence of their clients guilt. You use the term "defense attorneys" and fail to address the part where the court appointed "attorney" for Brendan Dassy (borderline special needs) was negligent in his duties and was removed from Dassy's defense. Brendan's defense attorneys never had a chance protecting Dassy's rights. It's good to maintain some objectivity when you are given one source of information and that source has a vested interest in a certain outcome. A VESTED INTEREST? really? These people that put these cases together (both Steven and Brendan) are the same people that are being sued for $36,000,00.?

Brendan Dassey was interviewed initially and later on. Interviewing suspects tends to be a multi-layer process. Those where Brenden wasn't able to give any details until AFTER the officer first fed those details TOO HIM? You to start out with a minimal amount of truth (if any) and that slowly slides over to a greater amount when they start to contradict themselves. That is when confessions occur and Brendan Dassey did confess. The fact is that these same two officers could have gotten Brendan to confess that HE killed Jimmy Hoffa. Wasn't after this same confession Brenden asked "you think I could go home, soon?Confessions are then vetted against the known physical evidence to check their veracity and Dassey's confession passed that test. All this smoke and mirrors about keys and interview techniques reminds me of someone throwing a handful of fecal matter at a wall in hopes that something will stick.Exactly which smoke and mirrors with the keys are you talking about? On the stand an officer was asked.. "did you search this room. answer yes ------ Did you see those keys? answer no. -----But later during a search they were found, in the middle of the room? response They weren't there when I searched the room".... something sure stinks! and right now it's the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Dept.

I do find it rather funny that you now put Len KachinskyYou mean the guy that the court determined he had failed to properly represent his court appointed client? The same guy fired? in on this conspiracy.... if anything shows a lack of knowledge about this case, and the people involved, it's that. I'm going to assume that you've been spending some time on stevenavery.org.Your right about that site, That guy is running a typical internet scam out of Florida (I don't think the Avery's own a condo down there) That's not exactly what anyone could argue as a terribly credible source.

As for my netflix watching activity, my account claims that I watched 64:21 minutes out 64:58 minutes of Making A Murderer S:01 Ep:01 Eighteen Years Lost on 12/22/2015.So what your telling us is that you watched the first one OUT OF TEN episodes? Maybe there were some startling revelations during the final 47 seconds of credits to prove Avery's innocence or you got some sort of director's cut.huh? maybe we did! after all, our version has 10 episodes!! Maybe Ken Kratz, Judge Patrick Willis, the Wisconsin State Crime Lab, the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Office, Wisconsin DoJ DCI, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals and the State Supreme Court planted this information on my account as a paid shill to dispute your opinion and maintain the conspiracy..... or maybe, just maybe, we disagree. And perhaps there's a reason why you're closing your mind

Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey got the justice they deserve.

Justice needs to be the same for everyone and work the same FOR everyone. Why not invest the time and watch the last 9 episodes? That's another 540 minutes on top of the 65 minutes you've already watched.

You have any idea how this show is being received by the general public?

[law573]

Originally Posted by 6556

Justice needs to be the same for everyone and work the same FOR everyone. Why not invest the time and watch the last 9 episodes? That's another 540 minutes on top of the 65 minutes you've already watched.

You have any idea how this show is being received by the general public?

I'm not sure that Avery and Dassey are worth any more of my time. Is it safe to assume that the next nine hours of this are the same "fair and balanced" view that's been presented so far? Do these shows present any new, highly compelling evidence that hasn't been presented in his appeal or to the supreme court? Because that's what it's going to take for Dassey's writ of habeus corpus to go anywhere.

[6556]

Originally Posted by law573

I'm not sure that Avery and Dassey are worth any more of my time. Is it safe to assume that the next nine hours of this are the same "fair and balanced" view that's been presented so far? Do these shows present any new, highly compelling evidence that hasn't been presented in his appeal or to the supreme court? Because that's what it's going to take for Dassey's writ of habeus corpus to go anywhere.

So in my original post was all about this new Netflex documentary and you admit that you watched ONE TENTH of the program, and yet your spouting off, not having a clue as to what it's about.

You ask about new evidence and then you don't want to view it?

I guess you'll (along with the rest of us) have to "watch and see" what happens as more and more of the public have a chance to watch this documentary.

After your post about that inter net site (troll) I did a bit of digging and found that there's now a face book group that has grown from 10 to 2500 members in 48 hours. I suspect that that number would been 100x higher if this show was on regular TV/Cable.

[law573]

Originally Posted by 6556

So in my original post was all about this new Netflex documentary and you admit that you watched ONE TENTH of the program, and yet your spouting off, not having a clue as to what it's about. It looked like a netflix series not the Avery/Dassey circus

You ask about new evidence and then you don't want to view it? 11+ hours of those two and their attorneys? No thanks.

I guess you'll (along with the rest of us) have to "watch and see" what happens as more and more of the public have a chance to watch this documentary. If what you believe is true, they'll be free in no time

After your post about that inter net site (troll) I did a bit of digging and found that there's now a face book group that has grown from 10 to 2500 members in 48 hours. I suspect that that number would been 100x higher if this show was on regular TV/Cable. You should call ABC and ask them to put it in a prime time slot

Goosfraba... goosfraba...

[jrcrane]

One thing the film taught me is not to be so biased. I was in the court room for my mothers estate next to Averys during his trial. A

[jrcrane]

One thing the film taught me is not to be so biased. I was in the court room for my mothers estate next to Avery's during his trial. As his parents walked in I sized them up and I thought "Deliverance" the movie. He was wearing coveralls and I already had him guilty. What I found interesting about the documentary was not the evidence they found, but the evidence they didn't find. Blood in the car, but no finger prints, Aver's DNA on the car key, but not Halbachs. This outrageous, horrible story by Avery's nephew, but no physical evidence to back it up. No blood, no handcuffs no chains. I find it interesting that they believe he had the sophistication to clean every trace of blood up that was in the garage and trailer, but dumb enough to park the car in the salvage yard and hide the key in his room. I am very curious about Halbachs roomate and how he and her ex boy friend were able to get into the phone messages and if we believe the testimony, some messages were deleted. What was on those messages ? One thing is for sure : everyone in that area knew who Steven Avery was and he would be fairly easy to set up as he was not very well respected. I was especially moved by what the assistant to Brian Dassey's first attorney said about the Avery family and their Gene pool and if you watched the movie you know what I mean, and he says it on film. I do not know if Steve committed the crime, but I am sure the crime was not committed the way the prosecution said it happened. thanks for listening

Food for thought

[jrcrane]

you didn't watch it did You ?

[6556]

Originally Posted by jrcrane

One thing the film taught me is not to be so biased. I was in the court room for my mothers estate next to Avery's during his trial. As his parents walked in I sized them up and I thought "Deliverance" the movie. He was wearing coveralls and I already had him guilty. What I found interesting about the documentary was not the evidence they found, but the evidence they didn't find. Blood in the car, but no finger prints, Aver's DNA on the car key, but not Halbachs. This outrageous, horrible story by Avery's nephew, but no physical evidence to back it up. No blood, no handcuffs no chains. I find it interesting that they believe he had the sophistication to clean every trace of blood up that was in the garage and trailer, but dumb enough to park the car in the salvage yard and hide the key in his room. I am very curious about Halbachs roomate and how he and her ex boy friend were able to get into the phone messages and if we believe the testimony, some messages were deleted. What was on those messages ? One thing is for sure : everyone in that area knew who Steven Avery was and he would be fairly easy to set up as he was not very well respected. I was especially moved by what the assistant to Brian Dassey's first attorney said about the Avery family and their Gene pool and if you watched the movie you know what I mean, and he says it on film. I do not know if Steve committed the crime, but I am sure the crime was not committed the way the prosecution said it happened. thanks for listening

Food for thought

There's a long list of items that don't add up.

How about the one where a sheriffs deputy called in (before there was a reported murder) and asked "do we have a body? was told "no" then the deputy asked "do we have Seven Avery in custody?"

[6556]

Originally Posted by jrcrane

you didn't watch it did You ?

At first he told us that he did, then he told us that he watched 60+ minutes, and then he finally said that he watched JUST the first episode and wasn't interested in watching the other 9 episodes.

He also claimed to know more than just the 10 hours covered by "a New York grad student"

I'd like to hear where he got all this (behind the scene) information.

[cpick]

This was Sad

I am well aware that documentaries can be biased as showing just one side of the truth and the way that can "muddy" the waters.

I am embarrassed of the defense Brendan Dassy got initially in the trial and in case "good" "honest" "hard working" folk don't realize it there is NO SHORTAGE of lying sociopathic scumbags in the legal system loving the power they have.

I think the closer people are to this trial the more of a mental hurdle they have to seeing the amount of errors that the Same Sherriff and his boyz Lentz and Colburn had. I say this because it is basic psychology that if you repeat a lie often enough people take it as truth. If the Public was bombarded by news footage of Dassy being someone who confessed to a brutal murder and that was now obvious truth then people seeing the case through this lens have a acute (fairness disability) when it comes to any mental process regarding guilt in this case.

I don't know that Avery Did Not Murder her but I do Know that there was no bloody rape like the "forced" dassey confession alleged. It was sickening to see Dassey write his account of what happened prior to his and Avery's trial and the kid hear 'we can't help you based on what you wrote on this paper' you ARE leaving something out, it was just really despicable. As in life most people are skeptical of cover up's and "conspiracy's" the mere word has been molded to give a knee jerk reaction of little green men running around and people avoid having that stigma attatched to them but this story is a f'n outrage. It's beyond Sad what happened to the Dassy Boy.

Steven Avery I believe is innocent as well and the only reason I believe that is because it is TOO Co-incidental that just as Officers Lentz were feeling the heat for being negligent (severely) on the rape case and having tunnel vision to go after Avery, as well as Steve's Vial of blood from the old rape kit, having a "syringe" hole in it that the lab says that it does not do, it is just too easy for me to see Lentz framing Avery to save his own butt (job) and that of a few other officers. The way the Expert poked holes in the FBI's miraculous ability to produce a test for the blood splatter in the car to determine whether it was from the tampered blood vial or not was eye opening and really sums up just how "screwed" Avery was. The test was a joke, the fact that another country's officer had to accompany and babysit Lentz and Colburn as they entered the house was another joke and the fact they found the key with ONLY Avery's DNA and not Halbach's (on their 8'th search of the property) when Lentz could easily plant it. listen, I would not have much confidence that the police went to such lengths to screw Avery if they did not already show their intentions do this 18 years ago, and the same crew was at it again this time with MORE OF a MOTIVE since they were on the hot seat for screwing up (perhaps criminally) the first time. Two things i'm left wondering is what about Halbach's roommate and EX and the "guessing" "breaking into her phone" and erasing messages sent. This could be legit to help lead the search party but again the police are so corrupt on this that I who really knows, Can nobody retrieve those text messages just because they were deleted. There is the somewhat Strange and inconsistent Alibi of two of Avery's relatives who only alibi is each other saying they passed each other to go bow hunting, I wonder if any of Their DNA / Finger prints is around the crime scene. I imagine the Halbach's are so emotionally hurt by the whole thing that they don't have the energy to imagine that the police force didn't try to find the real criminal AGAIN, and they just want peace of mind, or as much as they can for the horrible loss they suffered.

[6556]

I did find it odd that Steven would/was willing to be interviewed by the cops. With what had already happened to him I would have thought that he'd "lawyer up". Instead he said, sure lets talk. To me proving that Steven was innocent and not at all prepared to be "screwed" a second time.



Steven's first conviction was worse than a "miscarry of law". It's plain to see that they (the cops) went after him AND they KNEW he wasn't the guy initially described by the victim.

Rapist was described as being

Tall, over 6' Steven Avery 5'6"
Blue eyes Brown eyes
Long blond hair Short brown hair
wore white underwear Did not own underwear

They were aware that Gregory Allen had a history of assault, except for the time of the attack, was under constant Surveillance by the cops.

Steven was "set up" and the guilty party continued to attack/rape women for another 8 (think it was 8) years before he was convicted of another crime.

[law573]

Originally Posted by jrcrane

you didn't watch it did You ?

I watched the first episode. It looked like a new netflix series and I was curious about their take on Avery's false conviction. Once I realized this was a season of Avery/Dassey's defense team and family's version of events, I quickly lost interest. I guess the ongoing local news coverage I had throughout this entire saga, as it unfolded, had been enough. At least the local news coverage was balanced and I don't own enough tinfoil to create a hat large enough to suspend my disbelief of the enormity of the required conspiracy being alleged here.

Sorry fellas, but we're going to have to just disagree here.

[6556]

That's funny, I too live near by and we receive both Green Bay and Milwaukee news, and from the very first time Avery's name was mentioned "as a person of interest" we NEVER seen or heard (TV or radio) any news cast that suggested Avery was innocent, nor any coverage in support of Avery's defense.

Your argument might be a bit more credible if you'd disclose your "front row" evidence, and from where you got it.



Also, this documentary was never a "season" style show. The producer decided to make it into 10 episodes, and Netflix released all ten episodes at the same time.

[6556]

Originally Posted by law573

I watched the first episode. It looked like a new netflix series and I was curious about their take on Avery's false conviction. Once I realized this was a season of Avery/Dassey's defense team and family's version of events, I quickly lost interest. I guess the ongoing local news coverage I had throughout this entire saga, as it unfolded, had been enough. At least the local news coverage was balanced and I don't own enough tinfoil to create a hat large enough to suspend my disbelief of the enormity of the required conspiracy being alleged here.

Sorry fellas, but we're going to have to just disagree here.

After giving this a bit of thought, no you don't get to disagree. The issue is the information covered/revealed in this ten hour documentary (Making of a Murder on Netflix) , and since you refuse to watch it your not entitled to give an opinion.

You can give an opinion only on what you've read in the local papers, seen on local TV (Green Bay and Milwaukee), heard on local radio.. or gossip you heard. Or maybe you read it on the internet?