Lanx
<Prior Amod>
- 60,958
- 134,345
idk why ppl don't think that owl theory is the correct one, fucking 7 deep scratches in her head, and micro feathers and shit on her hands
plus we've all seen the swiftness of their attacks
Making a Murderer (Netflix) - New info
- Thread starter Adebisi
- Start date
plus we've all seen the swiftness of their attacks
OU Ariakas
Diet Dr. Pepper Enjoyer
- 7,015
- 19,334
idk why ppl don't think that owl theory is the correct one, fucking 7 deep scratches in her head, and micro feathers and shit on her hands
plus we've all seen the swiftness of their attacks
None of that matters in the Peterson case. The prosecution manufactured evidence and withheld evidence from the defense. Those two facts alone mean that his trial was unfair. Shit, the last interview in the series was with the judge and he basically stated that the trial was prejudicial against Peterson.
- 1
Lanx
<Prior Amod>
- 60,958
- 134,345
- 6,338
- 7,144
The tests Zellner did on the sink were not with unmodified blood. That blood came right out of a test tube, where it had been for a period of time, and had not clotted. There is a difference between blood clotting and drying. They are not the same thing. Blood clots because it is stopping a wound from bleeding. It actually has mechanisms in it that make it coagulate to stop bleeding. That was not legit, normal blood. Period. Go back and watch it right now.
So your theory is that Steven bled, the Tadych's knew IMMEDIATELY that Steven was bleeding from a minor wound into his sink, and then got lucky in that Steven IMMEDIATELY left his house, and then they went over and found his blood, had a pipette, sucked his blood up, then went full speed to the car and planted it on several different parts, and then rubbed his sweat (or whatever) on the hoodlatch? All within a matter of minutes before his blood coagulated? (Also how amazing Steven get a linear wound on his finger (new or "opened up" - is there proof the wound was there previously? I'm not sure) at the same time he is suspected of slicing a woman.)
I'm not saying you're wrong I just want to ask what is more plausible: a stupid man named Steven Avery got caught committing a murder, or there was an extremely elaborate frame job and the Tadych's were crime lab geniuses that got incredibly/impossibly lucky with finding blood and having the lab equipment with them to suck up blood and transport it to the crime vehicle that was many acres away. Also, why would the Tadych's do this to Steven when they would have benefitted too from Steven getting 36,000,000. Steven was all of their meal tickets.
I'm honestly shocked by the people who take this drama-documentary at face value. There are many things that are just 100% wrong in it.
Last edited by a moderator:
- 1
popsicledeath
Potato del Grande
- 7,498
- 11,753
LiquidDeath
Magnus Deadlift the Fucktiger
- 4,929
- 11,422
I don't think any of us are taking all of the things at face value. There are certainly weaker and stronger parts to the case built both for and against Avery. There is no case against Dassey.
If you read through this whole thread, though, what most everyone has agreed on is that regardless of whether he actually killed her or not, there is no way this conviction should stand. It should be vacated and a new trial should commence. Same with Dassey, except his confession should absolutely be thrown out.
Also, you seem to think that everyone believes Tadych did it or was some kind of mastermind. In my opinion, most people think that the totality of the evidence doesn't add up or even make sense given the story the state convicted him on. For example, if he was bleeding everywhere, why is there no mixing of the blood? How was there DNA on the hood latch, but not on the prop or on the hood? How is Teresa's DNA on the bullet fragment, but none of her DNA anywhere else in the garage and why is there no bone on the bullet? It is those types of questions that have not been sufficiently answered that lead us to believe something funky occurred. And that doesn't even get into the absolute travesty of an investigation and that insane phone call where officer Andy reads off the Rav4 plate number and then tells us he was just asking for confirmation or some contrived bullshit.
- 1
OU Ariakas
Diet Dr. Pepper Enjoyer
- 7,015
- 19,334
I ask again. Do you think that Avery was given a fair trial?
Do you believe that law enforcement followed proper procedure in the search and evidence gathering before the trial?
James
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 2,804
- 7,056
The Tadychs most likely murdered Halbach (and yes, there's eye witness testimony of a truck driving up to Avery's trailer very soon after he left), obviously if they frame someone else for the murder they won't go to jail. They didn't need to be crime lab geniuses, they just needed to cooperate with the local police who had THIRTY SIX MILLION incentives to lock him up. So they point the police in the direction of Avery with very little evidence and the police further the frame job to secure a conviction.
It's just unreal that you're hung up about blood coagulation as if that were the deciding factor. It's not even close. If your argument is that Avery had to be the one to do it because his blood would have coagulated otherwise, why isn't there blood on the steering wheel? The shifter? The door handle? Where did the blood flakes come from? Do you really think they swabbed a hood latch in a Rav 4 and came back with a fucking SPOTLESS q-tip, or do you think they just switched the label? Ken Kratz is a lying piece of shit, there's documented evidence of it, why would you continue to espouse his version of events when it's clearly contradictory and false?
- 2
popsicledeath
Potato del Grande
- 7,498
- 11,753
I thought the theory of the blood was that it was planted from a vial that police still had access to from evidence at the Clerk's office that was tampered with? Did something new come or up that discredited (even though it was only ever a theory so don't nobody start acting like I'm saying it was proven or anything).
LiquidDeath
Magnus Deadlift the Fucktiger
- 4,929
- 11,422
Since they didn't cover testing the crime scene blood for EDTA, I imagine it was a bust. That would have been huge for the defense. Regardless, there is still plenty of other weirdness and inconsistency to warrant further investigation.
- 1
James
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 2,804
- 7,056
Yeah, Zellner discredited it: ‘Making a Murderer: Part 2’: Inside the Theory That Could Free Steven Avery
- 1
- 6,338
- 7,144
That was a complete bullshit theory the defense put up in his trial that was almost immediately dropped because it was discredited. Like it was dropped even during his trial. This is just another reason why the documentary is complete shit, because it puts something that is knowingly false in there that makes the viewers say "OH MY GOD HES INNOCENT". It's dishonest. And yet people here are quoting it as if its fact??
LiquidDeath
Magnus Deadlift the Fucktiger
- 4,929
- 11,422
Either read the other posts in this thread or fuck off. I just said that it didn't pan out so they dropped it. You are only addressing the most egregiously bad arguments brought up by the documentary, of which there were plenty, but ignoring the ones with legs, of which there are plenty. Zellner's job is to throw every single fucking thing at the wall and see what sticks to get a new trial.
You also still haven't addressed the core question the documentary brings up: were the Avery and Dassey trials fairly prosecuted and fairly judged?
- 2
- 6,338
- 7,144
We'll agree to disagree. I definitely think Kratz got some parts of the events wrong, but I don't think he's wrong in that Avery is guilty and all the forensic evidence points to him (again, her key in his house, her blood on the bullet, gun in his house (how did they get his gun to shoot her?), his blood all over her car, the impossibility that someone else got his blood (can't ignore biology that blood clots), etc.)
It's interesting listening to Kratz talk outside of what the documentary showed about him. He gives multiple examples of how the documentary shows something that makes it look like the chain of custody for evidence was fucked up, but then points out the actual truth and how what they're showing is intentionally misleading.
Curious: What do you think about Bobby Dassey? Wasn't it his computer with all the murder child porn on it? I don't have much of an opinion on him.
- 6,338
- 7,144
Avery yes, Dassey no.
Now let's hear how I'm a "fucking idiot" because I don't agree with you, and don't take an intentionally misleading docu-drama at face value, and have actually read lots of data outside of the TV series.
OU Ariakas
Diet Dr. Pepper Enjoyer
- 7,015
- 19,334
You're an idiot because you don't understand due process, not because you don't agree with us.
- 4
- 1
LiquidDeath
Magnus Deadlift the Fucktiger
- 4,929
- 11,422
I didn't call you an idiot, I told you to actually read the thread before mischaracterizing the dominant position of the posters.
The majority of us have done quite a bit of research outside of just the documentary, so it isn't like we're coming into this blind. We've looked at the data and came to a different opinion than you and now we want to discuss it and see where we get. That is the whole point. Now is when you bring up specifics like you did above.
I take issue immediately with the key and the blood on the bullet as well. The key because it only had Avery's DNA even though that would be impossible in any real life circumstances an the blood on the bullet because it doesn't have any bone or other matter on it that would be necessary to make it fit the prosecution's narrative. Additionally, there wasn't any other evidence of Teresa's blood or DNA in the garage which is another mark against the narrative.
I even believe that it is more likely than not that Avery is the killer, but that doesn't mean that justice was served. If me or one of my family members was convicted in the same manner as Avery I would be just as furious as his family and I'm fairly sure you would be too if it was one of your family members. It should be insanely difficult to give someone what is essentially the death penalty on the evidence presented.
- 2