- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: New Netflix docu-series "Making a Murderer" (Spoilers)
Posted on 1/21/16 at 12:55 pm to Vols&Shaft83
Posted on 1/21/16 at 12:55 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
His sweat/skin DNA was also found on the hood latch of the RAV4 .
Hasn't it been proven that a person that was handling the hood had come in contact with Steven's DNA without changing his gloves.
1
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:00 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
I'm more or less back to thinking he said whatever they wanted him to say. On the other hand, Avery is clearly a manipulator and coerces family members into doing/saying whatever he wants - despite a subaverage general intelligence, he is clever and cunning to a degree that belies this cognitive deficit.
Interesting. I didn't have this takeaway at all (and still don't). I do think his intelligence is way higher than whatever IQ they represented, though.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:02 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:You know what else is highly unlikely? That a person is a murderer (base-rate).
Is it highly unlikely? Yes
That's what makes the polygraph--that you argued for-- so unreliable. Even if it's 75% accurate and even if we set the prior probabilty quite high (but still reasonable) at 20% (there are probably AT LEAST 5 potential suspects to most murders), the probability that a person is guilty, provided that the polygraph indicated guilty is less than <43%.
That's giving fairly optimistic probabilities, yet you're OK advocating for such an unreliable test.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:05 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
he was obsessed with her.
Talk about open-ended speculation.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:06 pm to JohnnyKilroy
There is alot of circumstancial evidence that really can not be explained away or blamed on somebody else. Victim last known whereabouts in place where both accused are definitely present. And they just so happened to have a barnfire and clean the garage after this friendly visit????? Hey its Halloween lets bust our arse cleaning the garage then have a fire.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:11 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
That's what makes the polygraph--that you argued for-- so unreliable. Even if it's 75% accurate and even if we set the prior probabilty quite high (but still reasonable) at 20% (there are probably AT LEAST 5 potential suspects to most murders), the probability that a person is guilty, provided that the polygraph indicated guilty is less than <43%.
That's giving fairly optimistic probabilities, yet you're OK advocating for such an unreliable test.
As the sole evidence of crime? I absolutely do not, and never said such a thing.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:15 pm to Rou Leed
quote:
There is alot of circumstancial evidence that really can not be explained away or blamed on somebody else. Victim last known whereabouts in place where both accused are definitely present. And they just so happened to have a barnfire and clean the garage after this friendly visit????? Hey its Halloween lets bust our arse cleaning the garage then have a fire.
I think cleaning the garage is a stretch. Garage didn't look too clean to me. Maybe they straightened some shite up, or swept the floor. It's undisputable that they didn't scrub the place.
Also I'd wager to bet that bonfires were a regular occurrence at the avery property.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:21 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
Or Avery wiped the key and inadvertently touched it with his sweating finger.
Yeah, he managed to go through this elaborate clean up of nearly an entire crime scene, but a sweaty finger is where he tripped up. Then, not only did he touch it after painstakingly removing all DNA from the key, he also "hid" it in plain view.
quote:
Are you suggesting that the sheriff's department has a vial of Avery's sweat that they used to plant on the key and RAV4?
That would be a silly suggestion, as there is no such thing as "sweat DNA".
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:22 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
(after initially denying he had even seen her that day),
Is that true? Where does that show up?
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:23 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
Or Avery wiped the key and inadvertently touched it with his sweating finger.
Wiped the key and removed all dna from every nook, crack, and cranny? Then, after the expert action needed to do that, he goes full retard and gets his DNA on it before leaving it out in the open in his bedroom?
This dude is Dexter one minute and Slingblade the next if that's the case.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:23 pm to JohnnyKilroy
They cleaned something. I think the mom testified kid came home after fire smelling like bleach. Really good time line on reddit laying down call times, visits, cleaning garage, fire. Sorry you guys have a problem with the "man" in this thread, but so much evidence points directly at Avery, dude is guilty.
This post was edited on 1/21/16 at 1:25 pm
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:24 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
No one seriously believes she could have been butchered, with blood everywhere, in either the trailer bedroom or the garage and not left some blood evidence.
So would you at least concede that it was ridiculously unethical for Kratz to have that lurid "15 and over" press conference in order to intentionally poison the jury pool?
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:24 pm to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
Hasn't it been proven that a person that was handling the hood had come in contact with Steven's DNA without changing his gloves.
No
not that I'm aware of, anyway. Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:25 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
So would you at least concede that it was ridiculously unethical for Kratz to have that lurid "15 and over" press conference in order to intentionally poison the jury pool?
I absolutely agree with this. Kratz is a confirmed scumbag.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:26 pm to Rou Leed
quote:
Sorry you guys have a problem with the "man" in this thread, but so muxh evidence points directly at Avery, dude is guilty.
Maybe he is. Doesn't change the fact that a lot of bullshite went down with this trial and investigation.
He can be guilty as sin, but that doesn't mean the investigators and prosecutors can be absolved of liability. Ends don't justify means.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:26 pm to htownjeep
quote:
I see him as someone with an IQ slightly above a turnip and don't think he could have been so clever.
While that's clearly true of Brendan, particularly, and the Avery's generally do not boast lots of Nobel laureates in their number, Steven Avery possesses a capacity for self-preservation, and this includes the ability to manipulate and coerce - at least family members - others to comply with his wishes. He certainly got a post-graduate education in prison. There was also time for him to reflect on DNA evidence, as it was such evidence that exonerated him for the rape.
So, while I have reasonable doubts that he actually committed the crime (under whatever theory), I do not doubt his capacity to have committed the crime and cleanup. (This would not be true if someone suggested Brendan committed the crime and cleanup without assistance. I would have serious doubts about even his capacity to plan such an operation, much less carry it out competently.)
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:27 pm to Big Scrub TX
quote:
that lurid "15 and over" press conference
Refresh my memory on this, please.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:28 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
No not that I'm aware of, anyway.
Maybe I misread, but I thought either here or Reddit it was shown that it was at least possible that that DNA got there some other way. Not that it was planted, but that it is POSSIBLE that his DNA got there by some other means.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:28 pm to Vols&Shaft83
quote:
I absolutely agree with this. Kratz is a confirmed scumbag.
Is it fair to say the judge should have issued a gag order from Day 1 given the delicate history of the state vs this particular defendant...or is that too much hindsight is 20/20? Certainly seems that after the press conference, the judge should have been reining them in.
From my perspective, Kratz got a coerced confession that was obviously false in its lurid detail, then held a press conference to spray that stupidity far and wide, then selectively used which parts of the confession to apply to each case separately...and in ways that should have been mutually exclusive.
Posted on 1/21/16 at 1:29 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
"We were there because we wanted to ask bigger questions about the system," Ricciardi told "Nightline."
"What the question is, is he guilty beyond reasonable doubt? And is the process fair? Can we trust the verdict?" Demos said.
The filmmakers don't deny that they left certain things out of the documentary.
"It would be impossible for us to include all the evidence that was presented in the trial," Ricciardi said. "That's called a trial. What we made was a documentary."
"What the question is, is he guilty beyond reasonable doubt? And is the process fair? Can we trust the verdict?" Demos said.
The filmmakers don't deny that they left certain things out of the documentary.
"It would be impossible for us to include all the evidence that was presented in the trial," Ricciardi said. "That's called a trial. What we made was a documentary."
Page 61 of 84
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News