re: New Netflix docu-series "Making a Murderer" (Spoilers)

quote:

---

I also know the bones could have been planted but I don't think the police did that. Just my opinion. The cops did come off shady but not cold blooded kill random people to pin it on some one shady

---

They could have enlisted someone to "take care of it".

Think about how small that town is , with 33k people, and Steve Avert was likely to win a HUGE suit against their justice system?


They would have NO problem disposing of a small handful of people to save the strains on the police, sheriff's office, and system as a whole.

Think about if families are effected by the loss of funds at the police department, they could lose health care, may have to move homes.

They could have honestly convinced themselves easily that it was justified. Especially considering the socioeconomic status of the people they were trying to sacrifice.

As long as they're far removed from the act itself by enlisting questionable other parties, then they aren't going to fully digest the consequences of their decisions, and they can still convince themselves that it was better that the small handful of people went down for the sake of maybe thousands being effected.

Its VERY easy to place motive on the side of the prosecution.

quote:

---

the prick was a fresh prick into the seal

---

How would you know that? There had to be a hole from when the blood entered the first time. I only saw one hole. If they wanted blood, they could just remove the top.

quote:

---

The entire series never mentioned and the State never put forth a viable motive

---

The state put forth rape.

quote:

---

If the police or whoever was that sinister and wanted to take care of Avery, why wouldn't they just kill him?

---

The Sheriff was even dumb enough to say as much. I don't think that Sheriff's department is smart enough to do anything other than plant a key in the guy's room.

quote:

---

That's not correct. The top is put on after the blood is drawn.

---

Must be hard to create suction with no top on the vial.

I'll cut to the chase: the top is not put on after the blood is drawn. The top creates suction and prevents contamination of the specimen. Once the blood is in the vial, then there is no reason to poke a hole in the top. You can simply remove the top to access the blood.

quote:

---

If the police or whoever was that sinister and wanted to take care of Avery, why wouldn't they just kill him?

---

Avery was pretty famous at that time for being innocent and had the backing of prominent political groups. If he turned up dead/murdered, on the eve of him winning his civil suit, Manitowoc County would be under the microscope.

Maybe the police realized this and decided to frame him for murder so the press turns on him.

quote:

---

Maybe the police realized this and decided to frame him for murder so the press turns on him.

---

I get that you are thinking that, but there isn't a shred of evidence that shows that. The fact you can disregard the huge amount of evidence connecting him and his violent, criminal history that would show a pattern of behavior. But you can freely accept a vast conspiracy, where law abiding people murder, maim and destroy an innocent bystander to get out of a lawsuit (that none of them are personally responsible for) is just disturbing. It goes beyond just a theory. It is fantasy with no backing, other than the hope that the sadistic rapist might be innocent if we can just make somebody else look guilty. That is why the judge wouldn't allow alternative theories or suspects. There was no evidence to prove it and you can't just loosely accuse people of murder.

quote:

---

Avery was pretty famous at that time for being innocent and had the backing of prominent political groups. If he turned up dead/murdered, on the eve of him winning his civil suit, Manitowoc County would be under the microscope

---

He was notorious. At the time, the county had two other criminal investigations pending against him. Both were rape investigations, with one girl being his 16 year old niece. There is even a recording that was left out of the documentary where Brenden said that Avery had touched him. Avery was already considered a monster around that area. Killing him would have been easy. Avery had been back in jail after he got into it with his g/f. The jailers could have took him out easy while he was there. Or, even better, set up a car wreck with him and his g/f. She was habitually drinking and driving. That would have been simple.

quote:

---

Really? Maybe, but there's a reason why this was included into evidence. (Cite: Towards the end of episode 4) The tube had a hole the size of a "hypodermic needle" on the top. The lawyer spoke to LabCorp and they said "We don't do that". The evidence tape had clearly been compromised. I can't put the blood from the tube in the Rav4, but I do know someone opened the stuff and it was compromised, period.

---

The evidence seal was broken and there was no chain of custody. But the vial is supposed to have a hole, it's how the vial is filled. You don't remove the contents with a needle though. You remove the top to take out the blood. I'm sure the lawyers didn't know that either, which is why they got excited when they saw the hole. But I posted a link that shows that is how the vial work. One needle goes into the donor, another needle into the vial. I didn't know that either, until I looked it up.

Another thing about the blood, is how is there so much left. We know that at least two samples were removed for testing. But if the defense believes it was used to plant evidence, how much did they remove? Blood was visible and in 6 different locations in the car. How could they plant so much, removing so little from the vial (it was pretty full)?

quote:

---

But how did they get his sweat? The only DNA on the key was Avery's sweat. How did that get on there?

---

My position is that he did it and some evidence was probably planted. The sweat would be on the keys still in that case.

I honestly can't believe the same Sheriffs department who was in the lawsuit was so involved in this case and found so much evidence. I mean, what a frick up in the first place. I think they very easily could have been worried about where the case was going and planted stuff. They COULD NOT lose this case, no matter what.

quote:

---

We know that at least two samples were removed for testing

---

We know that it was taken from that sample and not a new sample directly from the defendant?

quote:

---

My only point is that there are major questions still without answers in this case. Main ones being the lack of forensic evidence in the trailer where the murder supposedly took place. So Avery is a Dexter-level criminal mastermind, but then leaves the Rav4 (with blood suspiciously smeared in random places, but no fingerprints) on his property covered in branches? Ok.

---

The DA and police were quick to jump on a narrative and then they were stuck with it. I'm skeptical that anyone involved actually believes that Avery committed the murder in his trailer. He still could have committed the murder elsewhere on the property. That would explain the lack of evidence in the trailer and the sloppiness of evidence in the vehicle.