re: Poll, Making a Murderer Spoilers obviously.

Re-read your second quote you provided closely. I said "ask yourself the likelihood of all this happening" as in whats the probability of every event I listed taking place which is what would be required for him to be 100% innocent.

It's entirely plausible for the police to have planted the car, her palm pilot and camera in his burn barrel and the blood in her car but not planted the key, etc etc. But in that scenario Steve wouldn't be innocent. To dumb it down even more. If Steve is innocent, all those things listed have to have been done by someone else. If he is guilty, not all of them have to be completed by Steve, which is were the police come in.

I'll be clear as you are having a hard time following what I'm saying. I think Steve Avery is guilty as shite. I don't think he should have been convicted based on the trial. I believe Brendon Dassey was a victim of him uncle's doing and should be watching wrestemania in his trailer as opposed to being in prison. I think the Manitowoc police department, DA Kratz, Det. Lenk and Officer Colburn (sp?) to all be corrupt trash that should serve prison time. As to a re-trial, I don't see know how it could be fair or just being that the original investigation was so tainted

quote:

---

He literally did not know what "inconsistent" meant

---

Neither did his mother.

I believe Brendan's IQ was reported at 70, anything below 80 is considered mentally retarded.

It isn't about being slow solving math problems. It's about limitations involving many abilities.

Brendan in his police interview easily has no idea of the consequences of signing a murder confession. Brendan's confession to his lawyer's PI was downright criminal by his attorney and blue ribbon crying PI IMO.

Brendan's lack of credibility is easily witnessed as the DA doesn't use him as a witness or reference any of Dassey's statements in Avery's trial - even though it was initially their goal to have Dassey as the key witness.

quote:

---

Re-read your second quote you provided closely. I said "ask yourself the likelihood of all this happening" as in whats the probability of every event I listed taking place which is what would be required for him to be 100% innocent.

It's entirely plausible for the police to have planted the car, her palm pilot and camera in his burn barrel and the blood in her car but not planted the key, etc etc. But in that scenario Steve wouldn't be innocent. To dumb it down even more. If Steve is innocent, all those things listed have to have been done by someone else. If he is guilty, not all of them have to be completed by Steve, which is were the police come in.

---

So your entire position, as I already stated, is that they probably planted some of the evidence or maybe even most of it, but it's somehow impossible that they could have planted all of it. Do you have some idea of how stupid that sounds? Three other posters have already widely disputed this for you, and your response has been to read Reddit, or some similar nonsense.

quote:

---

I'll be clear as you are having a hard time following what I'm saying. I think Steve Avery is guilty as shite. I don't think he should have been convicted based on the trial. I believe Brendon Dassey was a victim of him uncle's doing and should be watching wrestemania in his trailer as opposed to being in prison. I think the Manitowoc police department, DA Kratz, Det. Lenk and Officer Colburn (sp?) to all be corrupt trash that should serve prison time.

---

I'm following you just fine, I'm just doing my best to help you follow what it is you're saying. I'm still not convinced you're able to do that. You can have whatever opinions you want, but those opinions don't represent our legal system.

quote:

---

As to a re-trial, I don't see know how it could be fair or just being that the original investigation was so tainted

---

"Fair" to who?

Jesus Christ man. My position is that if he is innocent someone else would have to be responsible for everything. If he is guilty, they could still be responsible for some things but not all. Where did I say it was impossible for them to have done everything? Where did I say to read Reddit? Please show me, I'll wait. WTF are you talking about? I linked an article listing facts about the case from a magazine that weren't included in the documentary. This happens on tigerdroppings constantly you people just spew nonsense about things "I said" which aren't true at all in hopes to further your own view point.

quote:

---

You can have whatever opinions you want, but those opinions don't represent our legal system.

---

Holy fricking shite. When did I become the law czar of TD? When did I say my opinion represents the laws of our legal system?

quote:

---

"Fair" to who?

---

To Steve Avery.

People need to SOURCE everything. Stop just reading and taking people's word at face value. All of these things have to be VERIFIED, or else its not worth saying at all.

quote:

---

I think it's likely that Brendan ran into Steve shortly after it happened and helped him clean up or something along those line

---

Helped him clean up? Do you see how filthy that place is? You honestly think things wouldn't look out of place? They are themselves filthy. Look at their fricking hands!! And even the police would always talk about Seven having to shower every time he came in. Whether the showering stuff was true or not, its obvious they were filthy compared to the average person. Are you telling me they cleaned up, and then made everything look like the shite pile it was before? Give me a break.

quote:

---

Ah, I didn't make that connection. I was really disappointed with the state's investigators - especially the taller guy. I could sense that he was intelligent enough and knew right from wrong enough to have stopped himself, but it seemed like he was caught by the inertia of the situation. By the end, I was just outright hoping he would be in a car crash.

---

It's like Avery's lawyers said, it's well-intentioned corruption. Look at someone who is less sympathetic in the doc: Sgt. Cobourn.

I think it's entirely likely that Cobourn did not plant any evidence. However, he was always the cop there to back up Lenk, no matter what the action. He night have suspected that Lenk's actions were not on the up and up, but he constantly backed up his higher ranked officer's actions. Which is pretty typical of police, they will close ranks and protect even the worst of them (which I think is their biggest issue: something like 90% of all police shootings are by cops involved in multiple shootings... yet cops always back their brothers instead of trying to drum out bad cops).

There's no way Cobourn is so dumb as to believe that Lenk didn't plant that key, given that it was missed on prior searches despite sitting out in the open, yet shows up as soon as Lenk goes into the house without signing in. But Cobourn is a company man, so he endorses Lenk's acts and doesn't air any of his suspicions because cops don't publicly question other cops, particularly their superior officer in a court of law. Cobourn spots the key and THEN starts doing things by the book.

Never attribute to malice what can be explained by incompetence.

quote:

---

yet leave such a scarce trail of DNA or other pieces of physical evidence.

---

Bones and all her shite in his barrel wasn't enough?

How did they even prove the stabbing and the head shot? Was all that verified?

I figured blunt force trauma or strangulation with gloves was much more likely..