Support NeoGAF

[maquiladora]

I think he almost certainly did it, but the cops also planted evidence try to make it easier to prove.

Not sure about Brendan's involvement. He deserved a new trial at the very least.

 

[KingBroly]

I think he almost certainly did it, but the cops also planted evidence try to make it easier to prove.

Not sure about Brendan's involvement. He deserved a new trial at the very least.

Brendan is not a reliable witness and I can't trust anything he says. While he was definitely coerced into saying certain things, he lied about others.

The deleted cellphone messages probably would link to the culprit in some way, hence why they were expunged. I don't believe these aren't on a server somewhere, somewhere, either; but admitting to such would cause such an uproar over privacy concerns that it'd be very bad for whoever admitted it.

EDIT - I guess what sucks the most about this documentary, aside from it being one-sided, is that, you'd have a hard time giving Avery a new trial, since this is a pretty big story right now, and the potential jury pool would be pretty tainted because of this.

 

[STILLethal]

Makes also no sense on how Teresa's ex was able to so easily figure out her password and was able to retrive the call records online, plus him and the lady that found the RAV4 looking sketchy in court. And her brother knowing her passcode for the voicemail, listening to it, and presumably deleting it...why? Or was it the ex that deleted it
I have doubts about:
-her brother
-her ex
-Bobby
-Brenda's husband
-Steven's brother?

Also not saying Steven is not guilty just would love to know the truth as Im sure everyone would

 

[maniac-kun]

So my conclusion is this:
Steven could have murdered her.
The car was found by that officer and then placed at Stevens scrapeyard.
The blood + key was placed by Officer Lenk.
Brendan is a difficult case. His statements are totaly inconsistant. The crying at the birthday party was odd too and that his cousin said his behaviour changed. Sure those detectives made him say things that where not true but it all was inconsitant. Did he see toes in the fire or was it him guessing again what they want to hear? Also his family made huge mistakes during the trial. How did they not advise him how to handle the situation? Basic rules like dont tell them anything without an attourney.

 

[Mathezar]

Finished watching this yesterday. Unsettling, depressing and "fucked up" are the things that come to mind. As an outsider looking in, the whole trail of both Steven and Brendan makes no sense whatsoever. The sheer amount of incompetence, conspiring and willful negligence on display is mind-boggeling.

What I also don't understand is how the family of the victim can be so steadfast in saying that Steven and Brendan have done it, without conclusive evidence. They have been present at every court sitting (even post-verdict and appeals), surely with everything that has been presented, shouldn't one at the very least have some doubts? I get the impression that together with the State they just want someone convicted.

I understand that the documentary also wants to make a broader point in that the US justice system just doesn't work at all, but still, if everything in the documentary is truthful then I can't help but feel sad for Steven and Brendan and their family.

 

[neurosisxeno]

What I also don't understand is how the family of the victim can be so steadfast in saying that Steven and Brendan have done it, without conclusive evidence.

In a lot of instances grieving families will vehemently believe the courts decision or what the police tell them to help cope. It's like the case of Michael Morton. His wife's family was convinced he was the killer even after DNA evidence exonerated him. When it comes to the deaths of loved ones people believe what they want to believe, or what makes them feel safest.

 

[Mathezar]

In a lot of instances grieving families will vehemently believe the courts decision or what the police tell them to help cope. It's like the case of Michael Morton. His wife's family was convinced he was the killer even after DNA evidence exonerated him. When it comes to the deaths of loved ones people believe what they want to believe, or what makes them feel safest.

I get that, but to me it seems like tunnel vision. They want someone convicted without regard for what did or what didn't actually happen.

Also, what was that whole blue ribbon thing about? Here I was thinking this guy is crying and having a total breakdown in the stand because he knew he fucked up with Brendan, they caught him and he couldn't take it any more (and with that possible admittance the whole trial collapsing), yet nothing is done with that (from what was shown at least).

 

[TVexperto]

So my conclusion is this:
Steven could have murdered her.
The car was found by that officer and then placed at Stevens scrapeyard.
The blood + key was placed by Officer Lenk.
Brendan is a difficult case. His statements are totaly inconsistant. The crying at the birthday party was odd too and that his cousin said his behaviour changed. Sure those detectives made him say things that where not true but it all was inconsitant. Did he see toes in the fire or was it him guessing again what they want to hear? Also his family made huge mistakes during the trial. How did they not advise him how to handle the situation? Basic rules like dont tell them anything without an attourney.

Didnt his sister or cousin say that she made all that up?

 

[Deaf Spacker]

Didnt his sister or cousin say that she made all that up?

Pretty much, it was the cousin Kayla I believe.

 

[KingBroly]

While I haven't done any external research at this point, my gut feeling is to point to the ex-boyfriend. Nothing was really made of it as a possibility, and it only focused on Avery.

Also the Judge thinly implying that he was guilty of the sexual assault case from 1985 during the sentencing was disgusting.

 

[Wind's Howling]

I am just glad a tiny bit of redemption was shown in regards to the world seeing how terribly inhumane Kratz is.

Sending text messages to the girl who's ex-boyfriend you are prosecuting because of domestic abuse.

Such a vile person.

 

[arts&crafts]

While I haven't done any external research at this point, my gut feeling is to point to the ex-boyfriend. Nothing was really made of it as a possibility, and it only focused on Avery.

Also the Judge thinly implying that he was guilty of the sexual assault case from 1985 during the sentencing was disgusting.

The exboyfriend is definitely sketchy with the "deleting messages" and essentially finding the car right away, but I am leaning towards Brendans brother and Step Dad. The day after steven avery's conviction he went to the press and said something really odd saying he is glad steven is going away for ever and stuff, I forget what, but it came out extremely over the top and odd given the situation.

 

[poppabk]

What I also don't understand is how the family of the victim can be so steadfast in saying that Steven and Brendan have done it, without conclusive evidence. They have been present at every court sitting (even post-verdict and appeals), surely with everything that has been presented, shouldn't one at the very least have some doubts? I get the impression that together with the State they just want someone convicted.

There is an interview with the victim in his original case where she says that in her head effectively Steve Avery is still her attacker and that she could be in the same room with Allen and not feel anything. It's hard to understand how your mind operates in circumstances like this unless you have been through it.

 

[Gorger]

I think he almost certainly did it, but the cops also planted evidence try to make it easier to prove.

Muddling up the crime scene is not going to make anything easier to prove, but rather a hundred times more complicated as proven with this case. The police cannot have been so stupid thinking sabotaging and planting evidence while risking their careers and freedom just to frame a guilty man would be effective. The risk they're putting on themselves to secure Avery's guilt is extraordinary, and nothing but an act of desperation.

And where did Lenk obtain the key and bullet from in the first place?

 

[KingBroly]

I've been told that the guilty don't continue to fight for a cause they know isn't true. Why? Because they know it to be the truth.

I'm baffled that Brendan doesn't get a re-trial, because his attorney was and is a complete shitbag that sold him up the river for a conviction.

I feel like this documentary will grease some wheels a bit, because it's damning and very public. It's not the kind of thing that you want influencing you. Will Steven get a new trial? Probably, because there's clearly some evidence missing, obvious evidence that was not accounted for and the realization that the system did it wrong, whether or not it was him. Especially at a time in our country when the criminal justice system is under an intense microscope. It's clear that the system in Manatowoc was out to get this family, and because of the reprehensible things said from them are not of sound mind when it comes to passing judgment on them, and that poisonous well taints the rest of the system.

One thing that I question is the dismissed juror, and how he was the only juror focused in on. Like, who were the ones that persuaded the other jurors? What were their backgrounds? As a documentary, I feel like I'm missing a whole lot here and there. It's a pretty good starting off point for those questioning the justice system, but I hope people don't take it as blind fact.

 

[spyder_ur]

Watched all 10 episodes over the weekend. So obviously I found it really compelling, although I thought it did drag (as entertainment) through the middle a bit.

Personally, outside of the question of whether he should've been convicted, I think Steven Avery probably killed her. The biggest thing is I found the prosecution's whole supposition of planting evidence completely unconvincing in almost every way. This is a big of a problem given how much time the series (and presumably the defense) spent on it.

The most impactful part of the story for me was definitely Brendan's story which was absolutely heart-wrenching. That's who was really let down in the wheels of justice here. 16 year old struggling, learning-disabled kid with no one to help him or support him. Almost cried a couple times like when he said he made it up 'like I do on homework' or watching him sit in that interrogation room being manipulated.

My position on Avery probably having committed the crime doesn't preclude me from saying some of the people in this show are complete shitbags. Like the guy who says "innocent people don't confess". Yes they do, all the time.

 

[Newline]

Just finished episode 9.

Spoiler

How can the US justice system be 'just' if a young, vulnerable and 17 year accomplice goes away with more charges than the main suspect? Charges including mutilation.

There have been so many moments in this show that have made my jaws drop, I don't necesarrily believe Steven Avery is innocent, but holy crap modern society has a long way to go.

 

[arts&crafts]

I've been told that the guilty don't continue to fight for a cause they know isn't true. Why? Because they know it to be the truth.

I'm baffled that Brendan doesn't get a re-trial, because his attorney was and is a complete shitbag that sold him up the river for a conviction.

I feel like this documentary will grease some wheels a bit, because it's damning and very public. It's not the kind of thing that you want influencing you. Will Steven get a new trial? Probably, because there's clearly some evidence missing, obvious evidence that was not accounted for and the realization that the system did it wrong, whether or not it was him. Especially at a time in our country when the criminal justice system is under an intense microscope. It's clear that the system in Manatowoc was out to get this family, and because of the reprehensible things said from them are not of sound mind when it comes to passing judgment on them, and that poisonous well taints the rest of the system.

One thing that I question is the dismissed juror, and how he was the only juror focused in on. Like, who were the ones that persuaded the other jurors? What were their backgrounds? As a documentary, I feel like I'm missing a whole lot here and there. It's a pretty good starting off point for those questioning the justice system, but I hope people don't take it as blind fact.

I am guessing there is some law that jurors are not allowed to disclose information about what happens behind closed doors. So they only interviewed the one that was dismissed. Although if as people said 2-3 of the jurors had connections to the police department that is a HUGE fact that should have been mentioned in the documentary.

Just finished episode 9.

Spoiler

How can the US justice system be 'just' if a young, vulnerable and 17 year accomplice goes away with more charges than the main suspect? Charges including mutilation.

There have been so many moments in this show that have made my jaws drop, I don't necesarrily believe Steven Avery is innocent, but holy crap modern society has a long way to go.

That was definitely the biggest WTF moment for me. there is zero evidence Brendan was involved and his statment contradicts what the "evidence" proves avery did, yet Brendan goes away with FIRST degree murder and mutilating a corpse LOL

 

[plagiarize]

Guilty or not, if one person deserved a fair investigation and a fair trial, it was Steven Avery, and he sure as shit didn't get one.

 

[Homeboyd]

EthanC is right. MaM IS biased:

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMur...defense_information_that_was_left_out_of_mam/

 

[onadesertedisland]

I am just glad a tiny bit of redemption was shown in regards to the world seeing how terribly inhumane Kratz is.

Sending text messages to the girl who's ex-boyfriend you are prosecuting because of domestic abuse.

Such a vile person.

Kratz continues today as if he is an upstanding character. He has been diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder, admitted to drug abuse and addiction, and sexually harassed women with whom he was in a position of power and authority. If he is an example of the moral character of the justice system in that county, wow.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

Damn this documentary is crazy.

 

[onadesertedisland]

I am guessing there is some law that jurors are not allowed to disclose information about what happens behind closed doors. So they only interviewed the one that was dismissed. Although if as people said 2-3 of the jurors had connections to the police department that is a HUGE fact that should have been mentioned in the documentary.



That was definitely the biggest WTF moment for me. there is zero evidence Brendan was involved and his statment contradicts what the "evidence" proves avery did, yet Brendan goes away with FIRST degree murder and mutilating a corpse LOL

Brendan's case is evidence that the public defender safety net does not work.

 

[shortsFortallPeople]

i dont know how people marathon this show. I thought the Staircase was infuriating but even then there was always a doubt regarding how Kathleen died.

Here? I'm 4 episodes in and i can only watch one episode a day because of how fucked up this shit is.

Brendan's case is evidence that the public defender safety net does not work.

im only 4 episodes in but either the public defender doesn't give a shit, is incompetent and looking for the easiest way to be done with the case, or he thinks brendan is guilty and doesnt care to even bother defending him. No attorney worth his shit lets his client be interrogated without his being there.

 

[KingBroly]

I am guessing there is some law that jurors are not allowed to disclose information about what happens behind closed doors. So they only interviewed the one that was dismissed. Although if as people said 2-3 of the jurors had connections to the police department that is a HUGE fact that should have been mentioned in the documentary.

Books by jurors are written about this stuff all the time, especially in high profile cases.

 

[y2dvd]

There are only so much you can show with a 10-hr documentary on a 6-weeks trial along with Avery's and Dassey's history. Things will have to be omitted. People are definitely filling in the "gaps" on both sides after the show aired.

With the née trial possibly taking place, hopefully that means new evidence will be introduced.

 

[gamz]

Kratz continues today as if he is an upstanding character. He has been diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder, admitted to drug abuse and addiction, and sexually harassed women with whom he was in a position of power and authority. If he is an example of the moral character of the justice system in that county, wow.

No wonder he tried to get a injunction to stop the release of the doc.

 

[bebop242]

My theory:

Spoiler

Ex-Boyfriend called Teresa upset that she was cheating on him with her roommate, leaving her two angry voicemails, telling her he was on the way to her apartment. Ex-Boyfriend killed Teresa in her apartment, in a moment of passion, with a gunshot to the head. There would be evidence, but the apartment was never searched. He put her in the back of the car and drove her to the quarry to burn the body, and ditched the car somewhere.

Colburn found it and reported it, and called Lenk. The police did normal investigative work, then learned that Steven was the last person to see her. Time to kill two bird with one stone. He then had Colburn move the car, in the middle of the night (Averys claimed to see headlights). Meanwhile, the ex-boyfriend then erased the voicemails. He was questioned by the police where they dropped hints that they thought Steven Avery did it and he wasn't a suspect. Maybe they even dropped hints that the car might be in the junkyard. He then sent a search team member to the Avery junkyard, a specific section, with a camera, where magically the car was.

Lenk wanted to plant he key right away but there wasn't a moment to do it and he needed Steven's DNA and to clean the key. He cleaned the key and planted Steven's DNA on it , then planted it on the fourth day. He also planted the blood the first day, at 6PM, like his first report said, which he later tried to coverup.

Rest is history.

Only 5 episodes in and I have a very similar theory.

 

[KingBroly]

Was the Ex-Boyfriend even a suspect? It didn't seem like it.

 

[bishopcruz]

One thing that I question is the dismissed juror, and how he was the only juror focused in on. Like, who were the ones that persuaded the other jurors? What were their backgrounds? As a documentary, I feel like I'm missing a whole lot here and there. It's a pretty good starting off point for those questioning the justice system, but I hope people don't take it as blind fact.

I am guessing there is some law that jurors are not allowed to disclose information about what happens behind closed doors. So they only interviewed the one that was dismissed. Although if as people said 2-3 of the jurors had connections to the police department that is a HUGE fact that should have been mentioned in the documentary.



That was definitely the biggest WTF moment for me. there is zero evidence Brendan was involved and his statment contradicts what the "evidence" proves avery did, yet Brendan goes away with FIRST degree murder and mutilating a corpse LOL

As far the the Jury stuff goes. I remember reading somewhere that the Jury decided among themselves to never discuss what happened in the deliberation. They have kept to that except for the anonymous one that contacted the filmmakers and the guy who was dismissed from the Jury.

AFAIK, there is no state in the Union that outlaws Jurors in a public case from talking about their deliberations. In fact the defense and prosecution talk to them after cases ALL THE TIME to find out what arguments were the most effective, what their thought process was, etc. Hell I was an alternate Juror in my early twenties, it was a criminal case, though it was a lot less serious (restraining order violation), six person Jury.

After the closing arguments, when I was dismissed, I was swarmed upon by both the prosecution, and the defense, asking me how I would have voted. Once the other Jurors got out, the same thing happened to them.

Basically, it seems pretty clear that the reason the Avery Jurors aren't talking, is because they don't want to. And in a case this big, that is totally fair.

 

[arts&crafts]

Exboyfriend - "Here is a camera, start looking for the car over there"

Random lady that found car 5 minutes later - "I found the car at the start of my search of the 40 acre car lot, I had a camera so I took a picture!"

 

[Homeboyd]

Was the Ex-Boyfriend even a suspect? It didn't seem like it.

Literally only Steven Avery was ever considered a suspect (and Brendan when he "confessed" of course). No one else was ever considered.

 

[KingBroly]

Literally only Steven Avery was ever considered a suspect (and Brendan when he "confessed" of course). No one else was ever considered.

Figured.

'We have other suspects'

'Who are they?'

'We're not going to tell you that'

'But you told us about Steven Avery'

'...'

 

[MisterR]

Muddling up the crime scene is not going to make anything easier to prove, but rather a hundred times more complicated as proven with this case. The police cannot have been so stupid thinking sabotaging and planting evidence while risking their careers and freedom just to frame a guilty man would be effective. The risk they're putting on themselves to secure Avery's guilt is extraordinary, and nothing but an act of desperation.

And where did Lenk obtain the key and bullet from in the first place?

The key likely was in the car. There were bullits all over the property. These people go out and shoot there guns frequently. Police have frequently been caught planting evidence.

 

[bishopcruz]

Just reread my favorite quote from the series:

“All due respect to counsel, the state is supposed to start every criminal trial swimming upstream. And the strong current against which the state is supposed to be swimming is the presumption of innocence”
-Dean Strang, badass

I cheered when I heard that line.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

Good comprehensive post on reddit detailing all the pro-defense arguments left out of the series. Nearly all the supposed smoking gun prosecution evidence that Kratz proposed was left out has been debunked anyway. But this and a lot of other research being done makes a case that the documentary is a lot less biased than some are suggesting.

 

[Ayt]

Any sympathy evaporated when I learned he poured petrol on his cat and threw it into a fire.

So you are fine with a man getting crushed by the system because you don't like him?

 

[shortsFortallPeople]

So you are fine with a man getting crushed by the system because you don't like him?

it's okay, surely he/she never did anything incredibly dumb that he/she really regrets from his youth.

I'm not excusing that shit, but killing a cat shouldn't mean that someone is okay with a man spending his whole life in prison for crimes he didn't commit

 

[Ophelion]

Just reread my favorite quote from the series:

“All due respect to counsel, the state is supposed to start every criminal trial swimming upstream. And the strong current against which the state is supposed to be swimming is the presumption of innocence”
-Dean Strang, badass

I cheered when I heard that line.

Dean Strang comes off like a goddamn hero throughout this whole series. As distressing as the whole series is regarding the state of the justice system, it's kind of heartening to know that at least someone involved with the system actually gives a shit.

 

[Amory]

Binge watched the whole series with my girlfriend yesterday.

I don't really know what to think. Ultimately it could've been Avery who killed that girl, but from the evidence shown I think there was more than reasonable doubt.

Avery isn't exactly a smart man. I find it pretty hard to believe that he could kill a woman by shooting her in the head and for there to be no blood anywhere on his clothes, or in his trailer, or on his property.

The most suspicious person, I thought, was the ex boyfriend. He readily admitted that he knew her phone password, and he didn't know at the time that the lawyers knew about the deleted voicemails which would've required someone knowing her password. He also was very jumpy early on in the series when a reporter had asked him about searching on the Avery property (he said something like "I was never there. We searched there but I personally was never there").

He also gave the one camera he had to the people who were going to check out the Avery property.

 

[GoutPatrol]

Binge watched the whole series with my girlfriend yesterday.

I don't really know what to think. Ultimately it could've been Avery who killed that girl, but from the evidence shown I think there was more than reasonable doubt.
.

Yeah, I have the same feeling. I'm not exactly sure Avery is innocent, but they did not prove he was guilty.

 

[FlashbladeGAF]

To the people who think Steven did it..

What do you think were the series of events that happened after Theresa left the salvage yard for Steven to kill her?

What do you think his motive was?


Binge watched last night.

We can all agree they didn't prove he was guilty.
I think he was innocent and either someone close to her did it or the Steven and Dassey brother did it.

 

[ReadingRambo]

To the people who think Steven did it..

What do you think were the series of events that happened after Theresa left the salvage yard for Steven to kill her?

What do you think his motive was?

There's no evidence that she left.

Also, Theresa had told her boss that she was uncomfortable taking photos for the Avery's as Steven made her uncomfortable. On one occasion she showed up and he was only in a towel. There's evidence that Steven may have had a thing for Theresa. This was not presented in the doc.

 

[Amory]

To the people who think Steven did it..

What do you think were the series of events that happened after Theresa left the salvage yard for Steven to kill her?

What do you think his motive was?


Binge watched last night.

We can all agree they didn't prove he was guilty.
I think he was innocent and either someone close to her did it or the Steven and Dassey brother did it.

There apparently was evidence presented that wasn't in the show that Steven was kind of obsessed with her. Requested her by name to the AutoTrader people and such.

 

[poppabk]

Dean Strang comes off like a goddamn hero throughout this whole series. As distressing as the whole series is regarding the state of the justice system, it's kind of heartening to know that at least someone involved with the system actually gives a shit.

To be fair, even if Avery had confessed to him that he did do it and explained a whole bunch of other horrendous stuff he did to her, he likely would have said the same thing with the same gravitas.
I recommend watching the staircase documentary for a case where there isn't the specter of corruption. You get to see the defence lawyers discussing different narratives they might use for the defense that are wildly different, they are just looking for the most believable story, the truth is irrelevant. It also makes clear just how costly a good defence is.

 

[bishopcruz]

I was thinking about something last night. Did Len Kachinsky violate attorney client privilege? I came to this when I watched an interview with him on TMZ when he said that the confession that O'douchebag got from Branden was for internal use only. That being the case, why did O'fuckyourself call the detectives and offer the new confession on a silver platter. The drawings were used against him in trial for fuck's sake. Did Brendan give the OK for their use? I mean, the whole discussion was with someone who was WORKING for the defense, and should be covered.

Any lawyers able to clear that up? Or anyone else?

There apparently was evidence presented that wasn't in the show that Steven was kind of obsessed with her. Requested her by name to the AutoTrader people and such.

That evidence is pretty flimsy, and is worded to sound as bad as possible. The fact that he *67 called her means nothing on its own, we have no record of him stalking, or harassing her in any way. I mean, *67 aside, calling someone twice before they arrived at your house for an appointment that they were late for doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot. Then he called her after she supposedly left. That doesn't speak to an obsession, but the fact that it is so easy to believe that it does speaks to just how high a bar defendants have to jump over to be presumed innocent.

 

[FlyinJ]

There's no evidence that she left.

Also, Theresa had told her boss that she was uncomfortable taking photos for the Avery's as Steven made her uncomfortable. On one occasion she showed up and he was only in a towel. There's evidence that Steven may have had a thing for Theresa. This was not presented in the doc.

This is all conjecture put forward by Kratz.

The facts are:

One time she joked with a coworker that Avery answered his door in a towel. She never complained to her boss. This was from the court transcripts.

The "Avery was obsessed" angle was that he called her 3 times the day she was coming. Kratz said this was obsession. In court, they played a recording of Halbech calling Auto Trader asking them to call Avery and give him her number because she was running late. He called her to find out how late she was going to be.

 

[Vampire On Titus]

There's no evidence that she left.

Also, Theresa had told her boss that she was uncomfortable taking photos for the Avery's as Steven made her uncomfortable. On one occasion she showed up and he was only in a towel. There's evidence that Steven may have had a thing for Theresa. This was not presented in the doc.

There is some:

In between 3:30 - 4PM, A propane delivery truck driver (John Leurquin) saw a green SUV leaving the Avery property at but couldn’t identify driver or if it was a male or female. He delivers propane for Valders Co-op. Usually fuels up near Avery property at 3:30 for about half an hour http://www.wsaw.com/news/headlines/6386482.html

The rest of your post is Ken Kratz misinformation. Almost entirely fabricated from his personally theories and spin. Liike the "sweat" DNA under Teresa's hood.

 

[Glorious Ownage]

Slight correction- both things had Avery's DNA on them. You can't tell where the DNA came from... There is no test to see if it's skin flakes etc. as a matter of fact, there is no DNA in your sweat. The sweat can have skin flakes in it some times.

The "sweat" line came from Kratz, because he's obsessed with painting Avery as this crazed sweating rape beast. Pretty disingenuous on his part, but as you've seen that's how he operates.

Yeah I actually laughed loudly when kratz was describing the story to the media that Brendan gave in one of his confessions and he kept referencing SA as sweaty

 

[Kill3r7]

Exboyfriend - "Here is a camera, start looking for the car over there"

Random lady that found car 5 minutes later - "I found the car at the start of my search of the 40 acre car lot, I had a camera so I took a picture!"

Except this doesn't make sense. If the ex-boyfriend planted the car there and instructed the lady where to look then how did the cops obtain the key? Or better yet how did Sergeant Colborn call in the license plate before the car was discovered? If the answer to this is that the cops found the car somewhere else and planted it then how would the ex-boyfriend know the cars location?