- 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: Brendan Dassey won't be released after all
Posted on 11/18/16 at 11:58 am to Barf
Posted on 11/18/16 at 11:58 am to Barf
quote:
there is physical evidence
Her remains were found all over the Avery property. Avery's DNA was found on the RAV4.
Surely you don't deny the woman was killed and dismembered on the Avery family property? So, that immediately narrows it down - now you want to come back with the tinfoil theories that another member of this cognitively challenged family killed her and framed Avery for it? Maybe I'll listen to that.
But, he had a specific connection to her. He was regularly calling Auto Trader and asking for her. He answered the door wearing only a towel (when he had called for her to come out). He was one of the last folks known to have seen her before she disappeared - AND INITIALLY DENIED THAT.
Sure, in a perfect world we would have perfect evidence. We don't have it in this case, but it doesn't make this guy - who is almost certainly the killer - not the killer.
1
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:00 pm to LasVegasTiger
quote:
Hopefully he will at least be out by late March in time for Wrestlemania.
That was pretty funny.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:04 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Avery's DNA was found on the RAV4.
Avery's DNA was also found on the keys to the rav 4, however her DNA was not found on the keys which makes zero sense. Are willing to ignore the obvious planting of the keys while at the same time believing the rav4 dna is legit?
quote:
Sure, in a perfect world we would have perfect evidence. We don't have it in this case, but it doesn't make this guy - who is almost certainly the killer - not the killer.
I don't disagree with you, but it is not enough to say he's guilty. If that is how we assign guilt in our country then why bother with trial by jury?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:07 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Can we agree that it is 99% likely that she was killed at the Avery salvage lot?
My feelings on Dassey's involvement notwithstanding, if a person doesn't believe Steve Avery killed her then that person is too stupid to participate in this conversation.
A lot went wrong with the handling of this case but none of that changes the overwhelming physical and circumstantial evidence against him.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:10 pm to Barf
quote:
I don't disagree with you, but it is not enough to say he's guilty. If that is how we assign guilt in our country then why bother with trial by jury?
Then how's this:
The Federalist
quote:
•Parts of Halbach’s body were found burned in Avery’s fire pit.
•Evidence of Avery’s involvement was found inside his home.
•There is DNA evidence tying the bullet found in the Avery garage to Halbach.
•Avery was the last known person to see Halbach alive.
•Police found her car, with blood on it and in it, left on the Avery family’s lot.
But beyond all that, here are just a few items that the producers of “Making a Murderer” decided to leave out that make the case less riveting and Avery more sympathetic:
— Not only was the bullet found in the garage linked to Halbach’s DNA, but it was forensically tied to Avery’s gun as well. Seems like a pertinent thing for viewers to know. To believe Avery was innocent, you now have to believe that forensics specialists were in on the frame-up and lied about both the DNA and gun, or messed up both tests.
— The criminal complaint claimed that authorities had found restraints — handcuffs and leg irons — at Avery’s residence. In 2006, Avery admitted to buying them so he could use them on his then-girlfriend. This alone doesn’t mean Avery is the killer of course, but it does lend credence to the description offered by Dassey and the police. We heard nothing about this during the show.
— The infamous car key that was found in Avery’s residence had DNA of his sweat on it. So not only are we asked to believe the Manitowoc police department planted the keys in his trailer (and that the neighboring police force was either incompetent or complicit in the deception), but also that somehow the cops had extracted Avery’s perspiration and put it on the key. Another explanation might be that Avery handled the keys when dealing with Halbach, although he denies having ever seen them.
Which bring up additional question: If Avery’s defenders are convinced that DNA from one pubic hair completely exonerates him in the rape case, why does DNA evidence in this case not prove his guilt?
This post was edited on 11/18/16 at 12:12 pm
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:11 pm to Barf
quote:
Are willing to ignore the obvious planting of the keys while at the same time believing the rav4 dna is legit?
Yes. You understand the difference between scrubbing a key and scrubbing a vehicle. Besides, I bet "sweat" DNA was something only a few baws even knew about.
Heck, she was probably killed in the RAV4 - he may have initially planned on crushing it with her in it. Too much press too soon, and he ended up going another way. But imperfect evidence still doesn't point to anyone else after all is said and done.
Does that mean he ought to get a new trial or even walk? Maybe. Do I have heartburn that the killer is in jail for the crime? Not really.
quote:
If that is how we assign guilt in our country then why bother with trial by jury?
Well, I've been consistent here and in other threads - people watch the documentary and get outraged. That's fair. The conduct of the authorities the whole first Avery conviction is outrageous. The Halmbach investigation, cops, prosecutors AND Dassey's attorney - outrageous at times, no question. What we can't question is that Avery got a world class defense - the best imaginable under the circumstances.
But then folks take the next leap - arguing that he didn't do it. The evidence just isn't there.
You want to say they didn't prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? Hell - I wasn't on the jury. You can always make that argument if you didn't see all the evidence they were presented. But to then say, "Therefore he didn't do it."
Nonsense. Avery committed this crime - I'm as confident of that as I need to be.
This post was edited on 11/18/16 at 12:14 pm
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:12 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Ace Midnight
Doing work
quote:
Does that mean he ought to get a new trial or even walk? Maybe. Do I have heartburn that the killer is in jail for the crime? Not really.
And this sums up my position. I want to feel outraged like some awful miscarriage of justice has been performed but I just don't.
This post was edited on 11/18/16 at 12:16 pm
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:14 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
overwhelming physical and circumstantial evidence against him.
Can you give us an example of a piece of physical evidence?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:15 pm to ClientNumber9
Why wasn't her DNA found on her keys?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:16 pm to Barf
quote:
Can you give us an example of a piece of physical evidence?
Why is this so overriding for you? Physical evidence is NOT required if the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming.
And there IS physical evidence - every bit of it you will dispute because of police misconduct. So, it is an academic tail chase with you.
You don't believe he did it and that's pretty much the end of any rational discussion we can have.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:17 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
Why wasn't her DNA found on her keys?
Because he probably wiped it. But the question you should be asking here is why was HIS DNA on her keys?
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:19 pm to Barf
quote:
Can you give us an example of a piece of physical evidence?
Hallach's body in her firepit.
Avery's DNA on her keys.
Avery *67 called her the day she was murdered.
Her car, with her blood on it, was found at Avery's car lot.
ETA: Do you work in the criminal world? Because I do. And I can tell you that most cases are convicted with far less physical evidence than this. Circumstantial evidence is responsible for most criminal convictions. We laugh at jurors like you and call it the "CSI effect" where you think you need video evidence and fingerprints everywhere for a conviction.
Yes, the case was mishandled by prosecutors but this is an overwhelming amount of evidence and if you really think Avery didn't commit the murder then
This post was edited on 11/18/16 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:20 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
I bet "sweat" DNA was something only a few baws even knew about.
Sweat DNA does not exist, at least not in a way we can be certain of.
No such test exits to determine if DNA came from droplets of sweat.
This is fact, and undeniable.
There is also a ton of frickery that went on with that car. I feel like you're cherry picking the parts you feel were not planted by police and you have absolute faith that the police succeeded in framing the right guy.
This post was edited on 11/18/16 at 12:21 pm
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:21 pm to ClientNumber9
Why has this thread turned into a Steven Avery thread?
Free Brendan Dassey.
Free Brendan Dassey.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:26 pm to Barf
quote:
There is also a ton of frickery that went on with that car. I feel like you're cherry picking the parts you feel were not planted by police and you have absolute faith that the police succeeded in framing the right guy.
And you cherry pick/dismiss the most damning of the evidence. For your scenario to be plausible, 30-40 people from two different prosecutor's offices, multiple police forces, ballistics experts, forensic examiners and detectives would have all been in a scripted frame effort to set Avery up. Possible, yes. Likely, no.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:28 pm to lsuwontonwrap
I'm just confused at where was all that blood if he stabbed and shot her in the room or the garage.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:28 pm to Barf
quote:
Sweat DNA does not exist, at least not in a way we can be certain of.
I think this is an inarticulate use of the phrase, probably deliberate by the defense in this case - hell the documentary is where I picked up the term and why I use it in quotes.
Non-blood DNA evidence certainly exists - likely skin cells or other slough - but that is what was found on the hood latch and other places on the RAV4.
quote:
There is also a ton of frickery that went on with that car.
Like what? You accept that she drove that car there and it was last seen near Avery's property, correct? So, it isn't a huge leap to accept that the killer, in all likelihood moved it before, during or after the crime, correct (regardless of what you believe the police did or did not do vis-à-vis the vehicle)?
And it is a salvage lot - there are shite tons of vehicles being moved around there.
quote:
I feel like you're cherry picking the parts you feel were not planted by police
No, I'm reverse cherry picking and looking at all of the inculpatory evidence left out by the documentary.
quote:
you have absolute faith that the police succeeded in framing the right guy.
I don't have absolute faith in any human endeavor. But they did frame the right guy. If you believe someone other than a member of the Avery family did the crime, you're a tinfoil hat wearer. If you really believe that Stephen didn't do it, you're naïve and were taken in by the excellent work of his defense team, period. It is somewhat excusable as they are fantastic attorneys and did a fantastic job with it (as did OJ's team, another guilty man who was partially framed by the cops).
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:31 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
Why has this thread turned into a Steven Avery thread? Free Brendan Dassey.
In all fairness, it always does. Because that's the big question for most people who watched the documentary.
Brendan is a simpleton. This does not mean he is innocent. He was definitely fricked over by his attorney. I don't believe anyone disputes that. Maybe he gets a new trial out of that, but he is not an innocent babe in all of this. Probably another victim of Avery, but you have the folks taken in by that piece of work defending him so we can't even get there.
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:35 pm to lsuwontonwrap
quote:
federal judge, William E. Duffin
Dindu Duffin
Posted on 11/18/16 at 12:37 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
Non-blood DNA evidence certainly exists - likely skin cells or other slough
Correct, but it is impossible to tell where those skin cells came from. To say someone collected DNA from a droplet of sweat is impossible, at least with current technology.
quote:
You accept that she drove that car there and it was last seen near Avery's property, correct?
Yes but I also accept that it's plausible she left the property alive.
There are too many questions left unanswered to say with any certainty that she never left the property alive and that someone in the Avery family killed her.
Do I think he did it? Probably but there isn't enough to say for certain. Especially not after the police planted, which they almost certainly did.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News