Isn't this illegal? I always hear lawyers say "We can't talk about that" because letting the media hear some piece of evidence could compromise the neutrality of the jury. Yet Kratz is out there fabricating some grotesque narration of a rape and murder, with no proof, and with a confession that wasn't even used at trial. Like, WTF?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Making A Murderer - Netflix 10-part documentary series - S1 now streaming on Netflix
- Thread starter Armadilo
- Start date
Isn't this illegal? I always hear lawyers say "We can't talk about that" because letting the media hear some piece of evidence could compromise the neutrality of the jury. Yet Kratz is out there fabricating some grotesque narration of a rape and murder, with no proof, and with a confession that wasn't even used at trial. Like, WTF?
It begins.
This is awesome, but from what Strang was saying in interviews, new evidence was the only thing that can really reopen this case. I know one of the jurors coming forward may be used as new evidence. Can Brendan's coerced video now be used in defense to Avery? I'm pretty sure Avery's defensive team did not have access to those videos. And what other new evidence can be used?
Well, Anonymous supposedly has some damning evidence up their sleeve.
Don't hold your breath. I think they're full of shit.
Since the beginning of his term, Walker has said he will not be granting any pardons.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
So without combing the hundreds of posts in this thread, what's the general consensus on Avery's sweat being found on those keys and on the RAV4's hood latch, as well as the fact he'd called her three times the day she came out (twice using *67 to block caller ID)?
Those are some fishy bits of evidence the show doesn't touch.
Evidence against who?
Those are some fishy bits of evidence the show doesn't touch.
Evidence against who?
Vincent Alexander
Member
The only fishy one to me is the *67, and I'm not sure what to make of it.
Hah. Nancy Grace joins the rush to piggyback on the documentary's success by rushing to do an hour special tomorrow presenting the evidence not seen in the documentary.
Strang also mentioned in interviews that there have been new leads since the series became such a hit, but didn't elaborate for obvious reasons. Perhaps some of those leads have turned out to be fruitful. I don't think someone like Zellner would take the case if they didn't already have some very solid ideas on how to proceed legally.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
From what I read, he'd been calling her a lot, and even requested she be the photographer to come out that day for those pics.
Which makes me think: In the documentary, there's a defense witness who worked with Halbach who talked about how she got a call and just looked at the number and said "not him again" or something like that. What if the "him" was Avery?
She's a vile, horrible human being who will drag anyone's name through the mud for ratings. Even if she's right about Avery, she's a fucking shithead.
figadapaura
Member
From what I've read there's actually no such thing as sweat DNA (or the science just isn't that precise), it's general DNA which could have come from anywhere; his pillow cases, a worn shirt, his shoes, etc. The police had access to everything he owned for 8 days straight, and then some. Could have been planted or could have rubbed off someone/something. Isn't as damning as Kratz likes to make it sound.
Killing_Joke
Member
I don't see why this matters. It was no secret she was going to the lot. Her job knew. He even admits she was there.
The only vibe i get from a blocked number is stalking. But since she willingly went there alone, i doubt any of those calls creeped her out.
I don't know. I don't even think they know.
The consensus on the keys is its planted evidence. C'mon, magically having them pop out of a little wood shelf on the 8th search? A single key (not a whole key ring), with none of the victim's DNA, etc. It's hard to take seriously.
Do we know anything about the timeline for her visit? As in, was there a window of time that she was supposed to be arriving for the photos? Could he have just been being annoying and trying to find out if she was going to be there soon? Were the calls answered? I don't know, I think it's really flimsy to try to read a lot of sinister stuff into someone calling another person ahead of a planned meeting.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
"Can we dox him out of his cell somehow?"
I agree the placement of the key seems suspicious. But the DNA, particularly the non-blood DNA in her truck has me wondering.
Consensus is that the key wasn't found the first several days of searching, was only later found by Sgt Colborn and Lenk, didn't even contain Teresas' DNA, Steven had no reason to leave it in his bedroom, and was probably planted.
The hood latch DNA is also suspicious. It wasn't found until much later after the car was found, because (so the prosecutors say) of what Brendan said about the Steven discoing the battery cables in this conversation-
It also makes no sense that the forensic investigators wouldn't have opened the hood during examination and upon noticing the disconnected battery swabbed the entire engine bay. That's like murder investigation 101.
And what's the relevance of the *67 calls? What could have possibly been said that would strengthen the prosecutions case?
Applesauce
Boom! Bitch-slapped!
Oh indeed. She's an awful human being, and even that's probably a generous characterization.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
As figadapaura mentioned, it wasn't sweat found on the hood latch. It was general DNA. The sweat theory is Katz spewing his expected nonsense.
The key is suspicious for a number of reasons. For one, it only had the DNA of Avery on it. Why would there not be DNA from Halbach or anyone else who may have touched it over time? Why would Avery have bothered to clean it to remove all traces of DNA -- and accidentally leave his own DNA -- but then keep it? Why was the key conveniently found after multiple searches?
As for *67, consider this. Halback had a conversation with people at her office that day which confirmed she was indeed going to the Avery property. According to Halback's coworker, Teresa stated during a phone call, “I'm on my way. I'm on my way to the Steven Avery property.” She had also been there previously so it isn't like Avery could have somehow tricked her into showing up at place she had never visited.
The phone call nonsense is some of the weakest I've seen from people who wonder why it wasn't in the documentary. What is the theory? Halbach wouldn't realize she was headed to the Avery property, a place she had been to previously, because Steven used *67 to call her? What is the angle even supposed to be here other than *67=ZOMG!
Nice.It begins.
I might be alone on this, but I didn't like Steve's chances of exonerating himself. Cute, though.
Nancy Grace was one of the people who looked ridiculous in the documentary. She'll do what she can in her thirst for
And_Gignac
Member
I thought the series was about how jail transformed an innocent man into a murderer. Stopped after chapter 2 since I knew I was going to get upset by the outcome of the case. Fuck the police.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
BronsonLee
Member
I thought that was what the title was referring to as well, but holy shit this is even worse than what I thought.
LaserBuddha
Member
He used *67 often. She knew in advance that she was going to his place and even called her employer to ask them to ask him to call her (for directions iirc). She was unshook about going to Avery's.
There was DNA on the hood and the (valet?) key, but they could not verify if it was sweat on the hood and I believe the substance wasn't identified on the key. Interestingly there is no other DNA on the key and no Avery DNA anywhere on the vehicle except that spot.
I wanna say they didn't find DNA on he hood until they got Brendan to say he opened the hood, but I'm not sure of the sequence of events.
From court transcripts, Halbech left a message with Avery saying she would be late and to call her back. That is why he was calling her. They even presented a recording of her doing this.
Why he blocked his number when calling her back, who knows. Strang said in an interview that Avery was a "private person" and often blocked his number when calling people.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
Yeah, after I heard he was left with no alternative but to represent himself, I thought he was totally fucked.
So this new news is definitely welcome.
stufte
Member
yes. nancy grace is a horrible human being.
Applesauce
Boom! Bitch-slapped!
I don't know much about her past. I catch a few minutes of her show after Forensic Files while I'm in the kitchen and then I change that shit.
You got a link?
RustyNails
Member
It begins.
holy shit, i work right across that building. I can even see it from the window.
*67 can be used to call back the number that just called you. So he could have just used it for that purpose too.
ReignofSparrows
Member
I just want to reiterate that the *67 information is the least probative evidence in this case. Like, pick any other piece of evidence to rely on because this is the worst of the lot. It couldn't be any less significant given that Teresa had spoken with Steven several times, Teresa had been to his property, and Steven never gave statements that she did not arrive on the day of her disappearance. The questions it could have raised are all nonsensical given what we already know.
It begins.
I just finished the show minutes ago, so this is a fucking great way to cap it off. I've seen bits on the news on tv at the gym the last few days talking about MaM, random posts by people I know on Twitter and Facebook, and even my mom had heard about it when I told her to watch it today, so I'm really glad the exposure has done some good for Steven and Brendan. We'll see what comes of it, but the way the show ends by basically saying that
both of them are fucked is depressing as fuck
I agree. The phone calls are meaningless other than to show how easily people can be manipulated into thinking something is suspicious. In episode 2, there is an interview with a local news station where he openly talked about here being there that day.
BronsonLee
Member
I could see Netflix commissioning them for a 2nd season if all the hubub gets something out of it.
if he's exonerated a second time, i wonder if it would just be easier to give ownership of the city to steven avery.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
That's *69 (AFAIK)
See, I'd agree if not for the fact that Steven had supposedly been harassing her a lot at her job by calling, and had once answered the door wearing just a towel.
Now yes, obviously none of those things alone necessarily mean anything, but added together with everything else just makes me wonder. I'm not saying he's guilty. I hope to fuck he's not, because those local cops are obviously shitbirds, and I'd love to see him set free again to stick it in their eyes.
But it all still makes me wonder.
RomanticHeroX
Member
I don't understand your post. What does Steven's previous lawsuit have to do with anything at this point?
BronsonLee
Member
'I hereby rename this County, AVERY COUNTY!' *explosions and fireworks*
Look at the settlements his new defense lawyer got. They're less than half of what he was asking for in his lawsuit. It was an astronomical amount of money that he was asking for, and could legitimately have gotten. That would've probably bankrupted the county.
Based on what? Think about how you worded that sentence. What does, "if not for the fact that Steven had supposedly" done anything even mean? How can something done "supposedly" be a fact?
eeeeehhnn I dunno Kathleen. I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. We already know the brother and ex-boyfriend had access. Could have easily been a mispress to cycle through the messages.
LaserBuddha
Member
Really paints a picture of motive, doesn't it?
In all seriousness, you don't start a negotiation with a fair realistic settlement amount and then negotiate down from there. Even in his new lawyer's case history you can see huge judgements that got cut in half afterward.
Applesauce
Boom! Bitch-slapped!
Wow, what a fucking cunt.
Michael F. Assbender
Banned
Based on evidence not presented at the trial. I understand your passion, but let's not get pedantic on how I worded a sentence, please.
There's supposed evidence everywhere. Just from a quick search, here's a decent list: http://www.avclub.com/article/read-damning-evidence-against-steven-avery-making--230224
Again, I'm not saying this stuff makes him guilty. And the cops in that area definitely have a lot to answer for. But there's definitely some semi-shady shit on Avery's part that I think needs further explanation.
Mackenzie 92
Member
The *67 angle is relevant because he was trying to set up an alibi of sorts, he called her twice with his number blocked at 2:24 and 2:35, he then called her one final time without blocking and there was no answer, that was at 4:35pm. This is important because his original story was that she never showed up and he called to find out why. But at least 3 different witnesses saw her on the property, so that went out the window.
My only passion is clarity of thought.
As for what you linked. Wonderful. A rehashing of the garbage Pajiba article.
Similar threads
- Locked