Making a Murderer (w/ Spoilers)

#151
#151
hog88 said:
Avery may have killed her but not where and how the police/prosecution claimed. Not a ****ing chance in hell he's so thorough and smart enough to clean all of her blood and DNA from his house and garage. He may have killed her elsewhere but not in his house or garage.
Click to expand...

If the prosecution had been competent, they would never have brought the location into it. He could have killed her in the woods, or around the quarry, or in one of the seemingly endless number of cars in the salvage yard. Trying to place it in the garage and/or trailer was incredibly stupid.
 
#152
#152
bamawriter said:
If the prosecution had been competent, they would never have brought the location into it. He could have killed her in the woods, or around the quarry, or in one of the seemingly endless number of cars in the salvage yard. Trying to place it in the garage and/or trailer was incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...

But then Brendan's confession would be useless.
 
#153
#153
SamRebel35 said:
But then Brendan's confession would be useless.
Click to expand...

They didn't use Dassey's confession against Avery in court. The prosecution either dropped every charge for which they had to have Dassey's testimony, or the judge dismissed them because the prosecution chose not to present a two-killer theory.

That's one of the the issues that infuriates me about the Dassey trial. The prosecution presented two separate theories of the crime in each trial. In Avery's trial, he acted alone; in Dassey's, the two worked together. It's disgusting, and borders on prosecutorial misconduct.
 
#154
#154
bamawriter said:
They didn't use Dassey's confession against Avery in court. The prosecution either dropped every charge for which they had to have Dassey's testimony, or the judge dismissed them because the prosecution chose not to present a two-killer theory.

That's one of the the issues that infuriates me about the Dassey trial. The prosecution presented two separate theories of the crime in each trial. In Avery's trial, he acted alone; in Dassey's, the two worked together. It's disgusting, and borders on prosecutorial misconduct.
Click to expand...

They didn't use Dassey's confession to implicate Dassey in Avery's case, but it seems they still used details in his confession to piece together their theory of what happened. Did they not? They at least used parts of the timeline and locations (bedroom and garage). If they threw out the confession, shouldn't those theories have gone away too?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#155
#155
Not sure if the guy did it or not but that's not the deal when going to trial. The prosecution has to prove that without a doubt he did it and they didn't. Of course the jury felt otherwise but there was way to much evidence showing possible tampering with the crime scene and evidence. This case should have been thrown out and this guy should be free. There was nothing in that trial that showed 100% without a doubt that he did it
 
#156
#156
hog88 said:
Avery may have killed her but not where and how the police/prosecution claimed. Not a ****ing chance in hell he's so thorough and smart enough to clean all of her blood and DNA from his house and garage. He may have killed her elsewhere but not in his house or garage.

I do not believe the police killed her, I believe they used her murder as an opportunity to imprison him and planted evidence to ensure his conviction.
Click to expand...

Hog, just go through the actual facts of the case. It will become crystal clear who killed her. I don't know if he killed her in the house or garage or elsewhere but they had enough evidence to convict him regardless. And, he had plenty of time to clean up. Did you read Dassey's confession? It is 150 pages but it will clarify the case for you.
 
#158
#158
SamRebel35 said:
They didn't use Dassey's confession to implicate Dassey in Avery's case, but it seems they still used details in his confession to piece together their theory of what happened. Did they not? They at least used parts of the timeline and locations (bedroom and garage). If they threw out the confession, shouldn't those theories have gone away too?
Click to expand...

No, you don't have to have any confession or theories or anything. They already had a case against Avery. Just look at the actual facts of the case. There are no facts which point to anyone else and there are many pieces of evidence along with the facts which tie Avery to the crime.
 
#159
#159
Sandvol said:
Hog, just go through the actual facts of the case. It will become crystal clear who killed her. I don't know if he killed her in the house or garage or elsewhere but they had enough evidence to convict him regardless. And, he had plenty of time to clean up. Did you read Dassey's confession? It is 150 pages but it will clarify the case for you.
Click to expand...

What do you make of planted evidence? How do you explain that away? How does that not send up a red flag that makes you doubt the reliability of all other evidence found by the manitowoc investigators (who were not allowed to be there in the first place)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#160
#160
Sandvol said:
No, you don't have to have any confession or theories or anything. They already had a case against Avery. Just look at the actual facts of the case. There are no facts which point to anyone else and there are many pieces of evidence along with the facts which tie Avery to the crime.
Click to expand...

Timeline. Did it come from Brendan Dassey's confession? Yes or no?
 
#161
#161
Sandvol said:
Hog, just go through the actual facts of the case. It will become crystal clear who killed her. I don't know if he killed her in the house or garage or elsewhere but they had enough evidence to convict him regardless. And, he had plenty of time to clean up. Did you read Dassey's confession? It is 150 pages but it will clarify the case for you.
Click to expand...

No I didn't read his entire confession, I have read parts of it and other evidence not shown in the series. If he didn't kill her in the house or garage the prosecutions case makes zero sense. The physical evidence the prosecution did present raises more questions than answers. How do you leave your blood in the car from a cut on a finger but no fingerprints? How do you kill someone in your garage (with a big crack in the concrete) and remove all traces of DNA but leave the bullet? ext.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#162
#162
bamawriter said:
If the prosecution had been competent, they would never have brought the location into it. He could have killed her in the woods, or around the quarry, or in one of the seemingly endless number of cars in the salvage yard. Trying to place it in the garage and/or trailer was incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...

They brought up the garage in the trial but if you read Dassey's confession Avery killed her in the house. He stabbed her and strangled her. I think Dassey said he only stabbed her once and then he straddled her and strangled her so there wouldn't necessarily be a lot of blood. When he stabbed her he might not have gotten a major blood vessel and it was the strangling that killed her. He then put her into the back of the Toyota in the garage according to Dassey. How would Dassey have known all of her blood evidence would be in the back of the Toyota?
 
#163
#163
hog88 said:
No I didn't read his entire confession, I have read parts of it and other evidence not shown in the series. If he didn't kill her in the house or garage the prosecutions case makes zero sense. The physical evidence the prosecution did present raises more questions than answers. How do you leave your blood in the car from a cut on a finger but no fingerprints? How do you kill someone in your garage (with a big crack in the concrete) and remove all traces of DNA but leave the bullet? ext.
Click to expand...

Dassey talked about bleach stains on his jeans they used to clean the garage floor. Bleach will completely oxidize blood. I think he did kill her in the house. Also, fingerprints are not always that easy to find. Ask any investigator. You have to have the right kind of surface. But, I do think he cleaned up quite a bit. He learned a lot about cleaning up crimes spending 18 years in prison.
 
#164
#164
SamRebel35 said:
They didn't use Dassey's confession to implicate Dassey in Avery's case, but it seems they still used details in his confession to piece together their theory of what happened. Did they not? They at least used parts of the timeline and locations (bedroom and garage). If they threw out the confession, shouldn't those theories have gone away too?
Click to expand...

They used details from the confession, but not the confession itself. They could and should have removed those details since they were bunk.
 
#165
#165
SamRebel35 said:
Timeline. Did it come from Brendan Dassey's confession? Yes or no?
Click to expand...

No, the case against Avery helped the police understand aspects of the case but they didn't use Dassey's confession nor did they need it. There were copious amounts of evidence and actual facts that would lead anyone to conclude beyond any reasonable doubt Avery did it.
 
#166
#166
Sandvol said:
Dassey talked about bleach stains on his jeans they used to clean the garage floor. Bleach will completely oxidize blood. I think he did kill her in the house. Also, fingerprints are not always that easy to find. Ask any investigator. You have to have the right kind of surface. But, I do think he cleaned up quite a bit. He learned a lot about cleaning up crimes spending 18 years in prison.
Click to expand...

LOL. You are really reaching. You think they give classes in prison to borderline retards about how to clean crime scenes better than any professional forensic investigator ever could? You really think that's what he learned in prison?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#167
#167
hog88 said:
Avery may have killed her but not where and how the police/prosecution claimed. Not a ****ing chance in hell he's so thorough and smart enough to clean all of her blood and DNA from his house and garage. He may have killed her elsewhere but not in his house or garage.

I do not believe the police killed her, I believe they used her murder as an opportunity to imprison him and planted evidence to ensure his conviction.
Click to expand...

the bones near the quarry are baffling to me, along with the absolute lack of blood/DNA in the supposed sexual assault/kill location. was there evidence produced that showed any trace of blood by use of luminol? doesn't blood still show up with that stuff even if bleach was used to clean it up?

I don't know which is more likely though...

did he knock her out at his house, stick her in the back of her vehicle, drive her to the quarry, kill her and burn her there and then bring her bones back to his own burn pit and burn barrel

or;

chain her up to a bed, leaving no evidence of that, sexually assault her, slit her throat, leaving no DNA evidence of that, take her out to the garage and shoot her, leaving no DNA evidence of that, throw her on his bonfire and then take some, but not all bones out to the quarry to throw off the cops?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#168
#168
bamawriter said:
They used details from the confession, but not the confession itself. They could and should have removed those details since they were bunk.
Click to expand...

No, I don't agree with you there. Many of the confession's details were spot on and corroborated much of the evidence and facts
 
#169
#169
Sandvol said:
They brought up the garage in the trial but if you read Dassey's confession Avery killed her in the house. He stabbed her and strangled her. I think Dassey said he only stabbed her once and then he straddled her and strangled her so there wouldn't necessarily be a lot of blood. When he stabbed her he might not have gotten a major blood vessel and it was the strangling that killed her. He then put her into the back of the Toyota in the garage according to Dassey. How would Dassey have known all of her blood evidence would be in the back of the Toyota?
Click to expand...

There is no way to slit someone's throat without a ton of blood. Dassey's confession is complete junk.

I believe that Steven Avery killed her, but Brendan Dassey got completely railroaded.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#170
#170
Sandvol said:
No, the case against Avery helped the police understand aspects of the case but they didn't use Dassey's confession nor did they need it. There were copious amounts of evidence and actual facts that would lead anyone to conclude beyond any reasonable doubt Avery did it.
Click to expand...

You are answering a question I'm not asking. Did the prosecution establish a timeline? Answer, yes. Next, Were parts of that timeline only substantiated via Dassey's confession? I believe so. I can't recall hearing any other timeline of events that was used in which Brendan Dassey's confession was not referenced. Therefore, the prosecution used Brendan Dassey's confession to nail down a timeline (which is important to this case) even though the confession was supposed to have been thrown out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#171
#171
SamRebel35 said:
LOL. You are really reaching. You think they give classes in prison to borderline retards about how to clean crime scenes better than any professional forensic investigator ever could? You really think that's what he learned in prison?
Click to expand...

Yes. He learned it somewhere. Is it preposterous to assume criminals sit around talking about how to get away with crimes?
 
#173
#173
SamRebel35 said:
You are answering a question I'm not asking. Did the prosecution establish a timeline? Answer, yes. Next, Were parts of that timeline only substantiated via Dassey's confession? I believe so. I can't recall hearing any other timeline of events that was used in which Brendan Dassey's confession was not referenced. Therefore, the prosecution used Brendan Dassey's confession to nail down a timeline (which is important to this case) even though the confession was supposed to have been thrown out.
Click to expand...

The confession wasn't thrown out, it was never entered into evidence. There was no way in hell the State was going to put Dassey on the stand. Without his testimony, they couldn't raise his confession in court.
 
#174
#174
SamRebel35 said:
You are answering a question I'm not asking. Did the prosecution establish a timeline? Answer, yes. Next, Were parts of that timeline only substantiated via Dassey's confession? I believe so. I can't recall hearing any other timeline of events that was used in which Brendan Dassey's confession was not referenced. Therefore, the prosecution used Brendan Dassey's confession to nail down a timeline (which is important to this case) even though the confession was supposed to have been thrown out.
Click to expand...

Again, yes I believe they used his confession to help with details of the case and piece together a timeline. His confession was not thrown out but they didn't use it against Avery. They weren't going to put Dassey on the witness stand against Avery because they wouldn't have known what they were going to get.
 
#175
#175
bamawriter said:
Since the vast majority of Dassey's confession was fed to him, it would be shocking if it didn't match the evidence.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with the assertion that a vast majority was fed to him. That is the way the documentary and lawyers presented it. But, he brought up details that he shouldn't have known which weren't fed to him.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top