Making a Murderer (Netflix) - New info

Jive Turkey_sl said:

And theyapparently

Click to expand...

Apparently?!

Jive Turkey_sl said:

This is the most insane theory of all. So the police just happened to pick a girl that they somehow knew Avery was obsessed with and that they somehow knew would be visiting him that day? And they were able to kill her right after leaving Avery's property before anyone else had a chance to see her? Seems unlikely. Avery killing her is more plausible or someone else killed her and they framed him for it

Click to expand...

You don't think they'd have surveillance on the guy that just got out of prison, make your county sheriff's department not only looked bad, but now the subjects of a 36 million dollar civil lawsuit that was pretty much going to be a slam dunk case?

If one is to believe the police killed her, they wouldn't need to randomly pick a girl. They'd pick the girl who, you know, had been to Avery's 7 fucking times. And they'd do their deed after they knew she was there that day. How would they possibly know, because it wasn't exactly a secret since they had a fucking appointment and were just as likely watching him pretty closely.

You sir, are a fucking retard. Please don't piss off any law enforcement if you live in a small town or we'll be discussing your false confessions next.

Jive Turkey_sl said:

This isn't some good natured, do-gooder like the documentary makes him out to be. By all accounts, he's probably a shady fuck at best and more likely a pretty big sack of shit. I don't doubt it wasn't out of character for him to have committed the murder

Click to expand...

I didn't think the documentary made him out to be a good natured do-gooder at all, so stop using bullshit hyperbole and shit like saying the documentary painted a 'rosy' picture of him. Are you fucking serious? You're the one that seems emotionally invested to the point of bias.

Good thing being a sack of shit isn't a crime or these forums would be far less interesting!

I'll second the notion that Jive is fucking scary and not the type of 'peer' I want on any jury anywhere for anyone.

Jive Turkey_sl said:

I got the point of the documentary. And it wasn't until I started looking into it moreafterwatching it that my opinion changed. They paint the picture of Avery as being just simple man going about his life when the truth seems to be much different. You don't need to google too hard to find a shit load of people who think he's innocent and are petitioning to have him released. Of course the investigators fucked up. There were no less than 3 episodes that ended with me saying "holy shit" because of how obvious it was (the blood vial in particular. That was movie quality shit). I just have a hard time feeling sorry for the guy. He's clearly a piece of garbage and I think they probably put the right guy in jail, but through the worst methods possible. Was the trial problematic (*shudder* thanks for tainting that word, SWJs)? Absolutely. And the police should be investigated for it. But that doesn't mean I have to feel bad for Avery on top of that. I think theres some circumstantial evidence that points to Avery regardless of the obvious plants

Click to expand...

You need to rewatch the first episode. The hatred for Avery because "he's probably a bad guy" is what landed him in prison the first time. And that caused a serial rapist to be free for the next decade and attack innocents. Did SA do it? You better be damn sure; and planting evidence because "well, he's probably a piece of shit" is great and all, but it leaves a lot of doubt about the possibility of someone who's really fucked up being on the loose still.

Worse is if that fucked up person is actually a Sheriff and got away with murder and framing a guy pretty blatantly.

popsicledeath_sl said:

So, how far away are you saying he drove the car to ditch it. And then, what, walked back? With a body he had to burn and/or a garage that needed professionally cleaned? And managed to wipe the car of all his finger prints, but didn't think to wipe up his own blood? The blood from the cut that looked as if it had been healed for weeks. The cut on his left hand, that would have reasonably left blood near the ignition how? And why?

Click to expand...

Jesus christ, dude. I'VE SAID 100 TIMES THE BLOOD WAS PLANTED. Do you get that now that it's in caps? Holy fuck.
I don't know how far away he ditched it or even if he did ditch it rather than drive it to the back of his yard. Walked back with a body he needed to burn? What?? How am I supposed to have a discussion when you can't even follow what I've clarified 100 times?
And you're acting like a car has never been ditched before after a murder.
Maybe they did shoot her in the garage. Maybe she was only semi-conscious after the strangulation. Maybe they used the sheets to shield the blood splatter. Maybe they threw her in the back of the RAV4 to drive her to the burn pit, then continued up to where they left it in the yard (or maybe continued on and ditched it in a forest). Maybe there wasn't that much blood in the garage afterall and they used bleach to clean it, which would line up with what Dassey's mother said when she made the statement that he had bleach on his jeans after helping clean the garage. Which would line up with his cousin asking the counselor if blood can come up from under concrete. Which she then claimed she just "made up"

There are elements to the story that don't seem to be planted by the police. The burn pit, for example. That there were bone fragments found in a burn barrel in a different part of the property. So the cops were like "let's put bone in the fire pit, but lets also put little bits of bone in this barrel over here too, because that seems logical". It's such a specific act that it would be unusual for someone to plant evidence that way. Or again, the dna on the hood latch and the battery being disconnected. It's not like they just look at the hood latch and say "yep, some DNA on there. Let's disconnect the battery and say he did it". It takes time to get dna analysis back. That too is completely random. And it wasn't DNA from blood. Could he have looked under the hood on a different occasion? Sure, although it seems weird she would have someone she felt creeped out by check out her engine for her when she was only there to take pictures. Combined with the battery being disconnected, it seems like an awful coincidence

Who is they?

Click to expand...

The police, maybe? And ya, lets get more people involved and have a third party come and haul the crushed car away. That wouldn't raise any suspicion

I'm glad you're willing to put someone away for life because you don't believe in coincidences. The rest of us aren't that arrogant.

Elurin_sl said:

You need to rewatch the first episode. The hatred for Avery because "he's probably a bad guy" is what landed him in prison the first time. And that caused a serial rapist to be free for the next decade and attack innocents. Did SA do it? You better be damn sure; and planting evidence because "well, he's probably a piece of shit" is great and all, but it leaves a lot of doubt about the possibility of someone who's really fucked up being on the loose still.

Worse is if that fucked up person is actually a Sheriff and got away with murder and framing a guy pretty blatantly.

Click to expand...

No, he got put away the first time based largely on the testimony of the lady who was raped. Yes, there was some shady business going on with the drawings and stuff before the trial, but it's not unusual to put a lot of faith in the first hand account of the victim (despite what we know about memory and eye witness accounts)

LiquidDeath_sl said:

I'm glad you're willing to put someone away for life because you don't believe in coincidences. The rest of us aren't that arrogant.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you're able to be swayed so easily by a netflix documentary. Some of us aren't so easily convinced. Maybe you should watch Loose Change next? A Michael Moore doc?

Steven Avery is not a smart man and the fact that he never slipped up when talking to anyone and also never even once changed his story is pretty crazy if he really did do it. Robert Durst is far smarter than Avery and he slipped up and changed his story quite a few times.

Jive is connecting the dots he wants to see and ignoring the ones he doesn't. He is also is aware of how unintelligent Avery really is, and has said so himself, yet somehow he seems to think this guy was able to do such a good job of cleaning up all the DNA evidence around his property that the police had to plant evidence and the DA had to hold a public press conference to ensure public opinion had already damned him just to get a guilty verdict.

popsicledeath_sl said:

Apparently?!

Click to expand...

Yes, apparently. What, they would throw her clothes in the fire but not the sheets? It's not rocket science, man

You don't think they'd have surveillance on the guy that just got out of prison, make your county sheriff's department not only looked bad, but now the subjects of a 36 million dollar civil lawsuit that was pretty much going to be a slam dunk case?

If one is to believe the police killed her, they wouldn't need to randomly pick a girl. They'd pick the girl who, you know, had been to Avery's 7 fucking times. And they'd do their deed after they knew she was there that day. How would they possibly know, because it wasn't exactly a secret since they had a fucking appointment and were just as likely watching him pretty closely.

You sir, are a fucking retard. Please don't piss off any law enforcement if you live in a small town or we'll be discussing your false confessions next.

Click to expand...

You've claiming the police killed an innocent women to throw a man in jail and I'm the fucking retard? Ok. Aren't there some chemtrails you should be investigating?

Jive Turkey_sl said:

There are elements to the story that don't seem to be planted by the police. The burn pit, for example. That there were bone fragments found in a burn barrel in a different part of the property. So the cops were like "let's put bone in the fire pit, but lets also put little bits of bone in this barrel over here too, because that seems logical".

Click to expand...

Or the police use the barrel to burn her body, then transport the remains and dump them on the burn pit. You know, the burn pit that wasn't treated properly as evidence and instead dug out hastily with shovels instead of letting experts excavate the site in a way that could tell them whether the body was burned on site or if it looked like remains were dumped.

It's such a specific act that it would be unusual for someone to plant evidence that way.

Click to expand...

You're saying it's less unusual for Avery to have killed her in the garage or bedroom where the DA claims and other evidence is found and instead of just carrying her to the burn pit as Brendon's confession claims they for some reason burned her in a barrel too, and transported the body in the back of her car?

The easy thing to presume is that the evidence is such a mess nobody can concretely come up with any tangible theory that is foolproof. The only difference is most people call that reasonable doubt. You seem to see that same lack of concrete evidence as irrelevant because you claim the documentary was heavily bias and he's a piece of shit so probably did it.

And ya, lets get more people involved and have a third party come and haul the crushed car away. That wouldn't raise any suspicion

Click to expand...

So, he's so dumb he'll get his retarded nephew involved, but he's not so dumb he'd call one of many business connections to come haul away some cars. Because a salvage yard that probably crushes and hauls away cars all the time would raise suspicions when a car is crushed and hauled away. One of the only things Avery knows is cars and the salvage business. I'd have believed all of this more if they found the car in parts completely dismantled than simply parked on the back lot. Because Avery may not have been a deep thinker, but auto salvage is the family business after all.

You keep flip flopping between Avery being a retard incapable of reason and smart enough to get away with the murder you know he committed because he's not a saint. You can't just say he's a retard when it supports your preconceived notions, and then counter that he's smart enough not to do other things when that version better supports your preconceptions. That sort of self-serving bias is exactly why people pray you aren't ever allowed on a jury trial and why I think you're a clown.

Khane_sl said:

Steven Avery is not a smart man and the fact that he never slipped up when talking to anyone and also never even once changed his story is pretty crazy if he really did do it. Robert Durst is far smarter than Avery and he slipped up and changed his story quite a few times.

Jive is connecting the dots he wants to see and ignoring the ones he doesn't. He is also is aware of how unintelligent Avery really is, and has said so himself, yet somehow he seems to think this guy was able to do such a good job of cleaning up all the DNA evidence around his property that the police had to plant evidence and the DA had to hold a public press conference to ensure public opinion had already damned him just to get a guilty verdict.

Click to expand...

"I didn't do nothing".... not to hard to stick to that.
And it's not like he held her hostage for a week. She was in the trailer and in the garage. There's no reason to believe there should be blood splattered all over the place.

popsicledeath_sl said:

Or the police use the barrel to burn her body, then transport the remains and dump them on the burn pit. You know, the burn pit that wasn't treated properly as evidence and instead dug out hastily with shovels instead of letting experts excavate the site in a way that could tell them whether the body was burned on site or if it looked like remains were dumped.




You're saying it's less unusual for Avery to have killed her in the garage or bedroom where the DA claims and other evidence is found and instead of just carrying her to the burn pit as Brendon's confession claims they for some reason burned her in a barrel too, and transported the body in the back of her car?

The easy thing to presume is that the evidence is such a mess nobody can concretely come up with any tangible theory that is foolproof. The only difference is most people call that reasonable doubt. You seem to see that same lack of concrete evidence as irrelevant because you claim the documentary was heavily bias and he's a piece of shit so probably did it.



So, he's so dumb he'll get his retarded nephew involved, but he's not so dumb he'd call one of many business connections to come haul away some cars. Because a salvage yard that probably crushes and hauls away cars all the time would raise suspicions when a car is crushed and hauled away. One of the only things Avery knows is cars and the salvage business. I'd have believed all of this more if they found the car in parts completely dismantled than simply parked on the back lot. Because Avery may not have been a deep thinker, but auto salvage is the family business after all.

You keep flip flopping between Avery being a retard incapable of reason and smart enough to get away with the murder you know he committed because he's not a saint. You can't just say he's a retard when it supports your preconceived notions, and then counter that he's smart enough not to do other things when that version better supports your preconceptions. That sort of self-serving bias is exactly why people pray you aren't ever allowed on a jury trial and why I think you're a clown.

Click to expand...

There's no inconsistency in what I've been saying about Avery being a retard and how there could be a lack of physical evidence. But ya, the police definitely killed an innocent girl

popsicledeath_sl said:

I'll second the notion that Jive is fucking scary and not the type of 'peer' I want on any jury anywhere for anyone.

Click to expand...

At least they know they wouldn't just have to show me some bias documentary and have me go "yep, that's all I need to hear"

Jive Turkey_sl said:

"I didn't do nothing".... not to hard to stick to that.
And it's not like he held her hostage for a week. She was in the trailer and in the garage. There's no reason to believe there should be blood splattered all over the place.

Click to expand...

You seem to think getting away with murder is really, really easy.

LiquidDeath_sl said:

I'm glad you're willing to put someone away for life because you don't believe in coincidences. The rest of us aren't that arrogant.

Click to expand...

Like the coincidence that a retarded man could've committed an heinous crime when he was about to come into a lot of money?

Khane_sl said:

You seem to think getting away with murder is really, really easy.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone got away with murder. I think there was probably enough evidence in the statements andsomeof the physical evidence, but that the police apparently thought it wise to plant excess evidence to ensure a conviction

Jive Turkey_sl said:

Yes, apparently. What, they would throw her clothes in the fire but not the sheets? It's not rocket science, man

Click to expand...

You're so dumb you don't even realize why I was quoted that. You were saying 'apparently' as if you were just reciting facts that are indisputable:

Jive Turkey_sl said:

You only think he removed every trace of dna because you're clinging to the prosecutions assertion that he shot her in the garage since that's where they found the bullet that was planted. He didn't need to do much cleaning if he killed her elsewhere. And they apparently threw the sheets in the fire along with her, so that takes care of most of that evidence.
Despite what Chanur insanely asserts above, you don't leave DNA around everything you touch. You guys seem to think you just turn on your Batman DNA vision and should see traces of her everywhere

Click to expand...

You've claiming the police killed an innocent women to throw a man in jail and I'm the fucking retard? Ok. Aren't there some chemtrails you should be investigating?[/QUOTE]

And they apparently threw the sheets in the fire along with her? What evidence do you have of that?

Writing 'and apparently' as if it's simply accepted as fact?

Bitch, please.

In the same paragraph you'll try to prove your point by first, claim I'm clinging to the prosecution theory she was killed in the garage before then pointing out they wouldn't need to do much cleaning if she were killed elsewhere before you finally say they apparently threw the sheets in the fire along with her as if it's a fucking indisputable fact.

I haven't claimed the police killed anyone. Most of us are smart enough to simply say the evidence is all so fucking tainted and illogical we don't know what to think. But, you see, most of us are also smart enough to manage discussing something without having to think we absolutely know the truth. And most of us are smart enough to understand the documentary was about a legal trial where the point is proving legal guilt that has little to do with innocence and whether or not he did it.

So, while some of us toss out a gut-reaction opinion on whether we think he did it or not before discussing the subject matter at hand, you can't seem to discuss something until you've made up your mind and know the 'truth' you're trying to defend. My guess is you have a very low IQ or are a tad aspie, because both types seem unable to keep an open mind and discuss 'what if's without trying to attribute them to something more tangible they can then claim they 'know' instead of just discussing the unknowable.

Jive Turkey_sl said:

I'm glad you're able to be swayed so easily by a netflix documentary. Some of us aren't so easily convinced. Maybe you should watch Loose Change next? A Michael Moore doc?

Click to expand...

That's a super flimsy strawman you just built to attack. I'll point you to the earlier statement I made which says I think SA did it and BD helped but that the state overwhelmingly failed to prove their case. You still haven't put forward any piece or pieces of evidence that prove the state's case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Jive Turkey_sl said:

At least they know they wouldn't just have to show me some bias documentary and have me go "yep, that's all I need to hear"

Click to expand...

You've jumped the shark, man. We need Ned Stark up in here to restore order.