[Paula D]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So for the people who think Steve is innocent, who do you think actually did it?

I actually think it was Dassey's stepdad, he was such a creep. I can't remember all the evidence now but I know he gave evidence that the young lad contradicted.

Poor Brendan Dassey is the biggest victim in all of this IMO. How on earth could they have slit her throat and not left blood and DNA evidence. The fact that he made that up just goes to show that he was willing to say anything to get away from the police.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Paula D

I actually think it was Dassey's stepdad, he was such a creep. I can't remember all the evidence now but I know he gave evidence that the young lad contradicted.

Poor Brendan Dassey is the biggest victim in all of this IMO. How on earth could they have slit her throat and not left blood and DNA evidence. The fact that he made that up just goes to show that he was willing to say anything to get away from the police.

mmm I think if Steve is innocent then Dasseys brother and step dad are the next most likely candidates. I'm not so sure that Steve and Brendan didn't do it it though, it is possible that Brendan made up some stuff under pressure from the Police but still was telling some truths also. I just don't know why all the properties on the Avery land weren't searched when her car and remains were found there, would have answered those questions. Don't forget that Teresas DNA was actually found on the bullet they recovered from Steves garage

[Smithy]

The brother or the ex, they both looked really shifty the first time you see them

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Smithy

The brother or the ex, they both looked really shifty the first time you see them

Teresas brother?

I think it might have been Scott Tadych but the ex hacking into her phone was strange especially when they could tell some messages had been deleted

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Smithy

The brother or the ex, they both looked really shifty the first time you see them

Yeah I agree with this. Right from the episode where they were interviewing during the search and the brother comes out with something about the grieving process and they hadn't found a body or nothing yet

Plus the scratches all over the exs hands and them 'guessing' the voucemail passwords

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Josy

Yeah I agree with this. Right from the episode where they were interviewing during the search and the brother comes out with something about the grieving process and they hadn't found a body or nothing yet

Plus the scratches all over the exs hands and them 'guessing' the voucemail passwords

That could be because of, if that theory about them having found the car earlier is true, that they were hiding something but not that they'd killed her?

[ChristmasNeeve]

Yeah I really think this is it :

Theory #1: Scott Tadych (Avery’s brother-in-law) and Bobby Dassey (Avery’s nephew and Brendan Dassey’s brother) killed Halbach (purposefully or accidentally) and framed Avery for the crime … and then sat back and watched as the Manitowoc County Sheriff’s Department separately did the same.

Evidence: The amount of evidence found on the Avery property — including Halbach’s remains and her car – has led many to surmise that if Steven Avery and Brendan Dassey are innocent, the real killer would still likely be someone who had similar access and opportunity, both to Halbach herself and the Avery property. A number of other Avery family members also lived on the property at the time, including Tadych, Janda and all four of the Dassey boys. It was Janda’s car that Halbach came to photograph for Auto Trader magazine, and Tadych more than likely was privy to her visit. Bobby Dassey testified to seeing Halbach taking pictures of his mother’s car, and both men had access to the various locations where evidence was found. Neither was fingerprinted or submitted DNA, and the trailer where they lived was not searched, so there’s no way of knowing if there was evidence linking them to Halbach’s murder, because they were not investigated.

Other Evidence: Bobby is believed to be Tadych’s accomplice in this theory, based on the fact that the pair conveniently alibi each other for the time of the murder. Both claimed to have gone hunting that afternoon/evening, but not together, and said they passed each other on the highway during the window of time Halbach is believed to have been killed – but there are no other witnesses to offer further corroboration.

Tadych, meanwhile, has a long history of being violent towards women, and showed a strange level of enthusiasm for his brother-in-law’s conviction (he called it “the best thing in the world ever”) despite knowing his step son, Brendan, was facing similar charges. Meanwhile, Bobby Dassey’s testimony at trial had notable inconsistencies and misleading statements, and an unrelated examination the same week as the murder reportedly revealed that Bobby had scratches on his back. Additionally, shortly after Halbach’s death, a coworker of Tadych’s claimed that he was trying to sell a .22 rifle, the same as the gun believed to be the murder weapon, which he said belonged “to one of the Dassey boys.”

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Josy

Thought we could have a thread in here discussing the case at the centre of the Making a Murderer documentary and all the theories surrounding it.

So if you've watched do you think Steven and Brendan are guilty?

Having watched the series and read lots of information that's freely available online I am pretty certain that they are both innocent and were framed (rather obviously IMO) by the Manitowoc County Police Department.

Originally Posted by iceman

It's so ****ed up. He was to be paid a huge amount and then he goes and murders someone. No way would anyone do that. All the evidence is too tampered with or non existent for my liking too. Not to mention the juror saying he feared for his life.

..I watched the first 2 episodes of this a few weeks ago..(I think it was you Josy who mentioned it somewhere else so I thought that I'd take a look, but as usual, got distracted, so didn't get back to it...I did find it absorbing though, so will start watching again..)...

..but I only got to Teresa's remains being found so am in the vein of thought as you iceman/he's innocent, the whole timeline of these things happening within days, when it looked like he would get a huge payout/and the 'coincidence', I mean why would he do it, so suspicious...it wasn't just the payout/money though for those in the police force involved and those in the justice system, it was also the corruption involved and things that could have been potentially revealed, how much deeper it may have run and his case being just one example but an example of further investigations into other stuff, perhaps..?...so yeah, all too convenient and suspicious, so innocent is my first thought..but then, on the flipside...?...was he really fooling everyone into thinking it was about the compensation and people being held accountable but other than that, he was getting his life together etc...or did it all run much deeper than that and he also knew the 'timeline' was perfect for him to do this because of being able to say, oh this is all happening again and you all know these people are corrupt ...so assuming he would not be found guilty..that, that would be the 'influence'...that he had been planning the 'timeline' and right time for 12 months for more of an 'ultimate revenge'/a much deeper 'revenge'....or maybe not planning even but more seeing that he could do this and this time, be guilty but proven innocent....anyways, so I'm nowhere near really having any fixed thoughts yet....and Duncan/that's his brother then..?..I have a way to catch up with you guys and haven't read any online stuff yet either but I will try to make an effort to get back to this as there is obviously so much more....


..on a side-line thing, I do love how American documentaries can put a case and make you absolutely and totally believe something..and then do a flip of that and make you absolutely and totally believe the opposite, I think the USA documentaries are particularly excellent at that...

[ChristmasNeeve]

Sorry about all the posts, I'm a bit obsessed with it now too I was reading an article about it and this point is apt I think

the real story is about our messed up legal system and how it deprives the socioeconomically disadvantaged and the uneducated of the presumption of innocence.

So true, the state didn't have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he was guilty, it was down to his Lawyers to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he was innocent

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies...nt-present.php

[ChristmasNeeve]

Ohhh now I'm reading that article more closely and this guy thinks he's guilty (although some of the things he's saying aren't correct) Like he said that certain things were left out of the docuseries when they actually hadn't been (not all of them anyway)

[ChristmasNeeve]

Now this guy nearly has me convinced Steven Avery is guilty

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies...nt-present.php

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Now this guy nearly has me convinced Steven Avery is guilty

http://www.pajiba.com/netflix_movies...nt-present.php

..see, this is what I mean...I haven't clicked on the link or read it but I find USA documentaries so brilliant because 'absolutely convinced now' with one and then 'absolutely convinced now with another'...intriguing and confusing/conflicting and presented either to be just as plausible...I'll read the online stuff and links after I have finished the series....

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..see, this is what I mean...I haven't clicked on the link or read it but I find USA documentaries so brilliant because 'absolutely convinced now' with one and then 'absolutely convinced now with another'...intriguing and confusing/conflicting and presented either to be just as plausible...I'll read the online stuff and links after I have finished the series....

The documentary seemed to leave out some things that gave him a motive and glossed over things that we should have taken a bit more notice of imo, like they mention he threw a cat on a fire but they never said he poured petrol on it first, also before the rape case he was going to be charged with running a woman off the road, pulling a gun on her and (this part wasn't mentioned in The documentary) threatening to rape her, apparently he would have got around 6 years in prison for that. The documentary almost made you feel like that woman was to blame for him doing that to her because he said she said some things about him behind his back.


They also never showed the part of Brendan's phone call to his mom where he tells her that Steven had abused him numerous times.

It also never tells us that Teresa had asked her boss not to send her to Stevens place anymore cos he freaked her out or that he'd specifically asked for her that day or that he'd phoned her 3 times that day, twice hiding his number from her

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

The documentary seemed to leave out some things that gave him a motive and glossed over things that we should have taken a bit more notice of imo, like they mention he threw a cat on a fire but they never said he poured petrol on it first, also before the rape case he was going to be charged with running a woman off the road, pulling a gun on her and (this part wasn't mentioned in The documentary) threatening to rape her, apparently he would have got around 6 years in prison for that. The documentary almost made you feel like that woman was to blame for him doing that to her because he said she said some things about him behind his back.


They also never showed the part of Brendan's phone call to his mom where he tells her that Steven had abused him numerous times.

It also never tells us that Teresa had asked her boss not to send her to Stevens place anymore cos he freaked her out or that he'd specifically asked for her that day or that he'd phoned her 3 times that day, twice hiding his number from her

....her boss looked a little fidgety and uncomfortable to me and maybe that was just nerves of the court and situation but could also be 'body language' I guess...also, he still sent her out though, a female employee telling him that someone freaked her out and that he was phoning her and trying to hide his number and he still sent her out there...


..this court case is incredible, the 'tampering' of evidence, that threatening...'if you pursue this then peruse it at your peril'...Bobby's testimony which couldn't have been right because of the dates and that the judge refused a mistrial and refused the jury to disregard the testimony..and the missing texts..(..which her brother could access..)..it's all so suspicious

[user104658]

I'm not convinced either way about Avery (which by the rules of innocent until proven guilty, I guess means that I don't think he should be in jail) however the treatment of Brendan Dassey by the authorities as seen in the documentary, is downright ****ing criminal in itself. From the looks of it, Brendan is most probably on the autistic spectrum, and also has a very low IQ on top of that. On several occasions, they interrogate him for several HOURS, with a tonne of suggestion and leading questions, and they get him overwhelmed to the point that he's completely broken and will say anything. Probably even starts to believe it. As soon as they leave him alone for a while, he gets his clarity back and goes back to saying that it didn't happen (which it clearly didn't, the statement they got out of him was all over the place and made little sense, and was missing a tonne of key details that there's no way he would have forgotten).

The way they talk to him, belittle him, get frustrated with him and shout at him for not being able to explain himself clearly... It's all an absolutely gargantuan abuse of a clearly very vulnerable individual. He should never have been questioned AT ALL without mental health / educational support people present who would understand his vulnerable state and how easily lead into saying whatever they wanted he would be after hours of relentless questioning.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Re Brendan also TS, that lawyer he had behaved deplorably and the case should have been thrown out for that alone and he should have been disbarred.

[Josy]

Nimah that part about the woman having a gun pulled on her was right at the start of the documentary it was his cousin and she was married to the head of the sherrifs department that's what is believed to be the cause of the sherrifs officers disliking him before thwy accusedbhim of the rape the first time.

The stuff about Theresa asking not to be sent there again was proven to be false (his first lawyers have spoken about this online and said he got out of his swimming pool and wrapped a towel round him one if the times she visited) her co worker testified saying this and that was left out the documentary too.

[Josy]

Brendans mum also said the stuff about brendan being abused was rubbish. And if you think about it it doesn't add up, brendan was only just turned 16 when the murder happened and steven had served 18 years in prison so when would the abuse have taken place?

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Josy

Brendans mum also said the stuff about brendan being abused was rubbish. And if you think about it it doesn't add up, brendan was only just turned 16 when the murder happened and steven had served 18 years in prison so when would the abuse have taken place?

He'd been out of jail a couple of years before the murder happened

[ChristmasNeeve]

Yes I know who the woman was Josy but I'm quite annoyed with myself for not taking it more serious at the time, I mean what kind of a nut job runs a woman off the road and pulls a gun on her because he thinks she's saying stuff about him?

[ChristmasNeeve]

I don't know, I just feel a bit manipulated by the documentary

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I don't know, I just feel a bit manipulated by the documentary

I get what you mean, I was shocked reading some stuff that had been left out too, but then there's other stuff that was also left out and not shown during the case like brendan explaining to his mum that the officers had got to his head and then the investigator trying to convince him he had been using crack :/

[Josy]

True he was a bit of a nutter and the thing about the cat sickened me but the thing is he never denies most of those things happening (obviously that doesnt excuse any.of it) but it doesn't prove he is guilty of murder and that was a massive problem with the court case, he was judged on his past rather than the present when to be found guilty of killing Theresa the state should have proven without reasonable doubt that he was guilty of that crime, the most important thing to me is that both him and brendan recieve a fair trial and the real killer is found even if it is him.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Who Is She?

I would never willingly disagree with you Ammi (except for now) but if I'm completely honest he deserved the 18 years he 'wrongfully served' for the burning the family cat to death alone.

Yeah I did find myself unable to have much sympathy... he set a ****ing cat on fire. On fire! And he talks about it so passively like "Oh yeah derp I set the cat on fire dat was silly derp derp what a silly kid...". wut??

Howeverrrr...

Originally Posted by Josy

the most important thing to me is that both him and brendan recieve a fair trial and the real killer is found even if it is him.

This is why it's caught my interest anyway. I'm not really interested in what happens to Avery. Brendan I do have more sympathy for because I think he is clearly significantly disabled and has been treated abysmally. But the main points are:

- Regardless of what Avery does or doesn't "deserve", the actions of the people involved in the investigation and in pressing the charges are fascinating, and terrifying. There is such blatant corruption, lying and tampering. Such power-tripping. That needs to be explored... their involvement needs to be laid bare because whether or not Avery is guilty, that department is a shambles, and it probably reflects on the entire small-town system in the US.

and secondly,

- If Avery isn't guilty, even though I don't feel particularly bad for HIM being locked up... him going down for that crime means that a killer is still out there.

[Ammi]

...sorry Cal, somehow I've completely missed his burning of the family cat, Niamh did mention it but I thought it was something that was going to come later but it was obviously something though that he did before his first sentencing..?..hmmm, yes a horrendous and 'evil' thing to do so I do understand your feelings, I really do..and you might think that this is pretty harsh but even in knowing that I've missed that and it's something that happened before the 18yrs imprisonment, it's not what he was convicted for...so part of my thoughts are that maybe they're right/the justice system etc...in him being in prison for those 18yrs, they've prevented him from doing anything else because he seems like a disturbed and screwed up person...but the thing with that though is that for 18yrs, a brutal rapist has been free and out there...so a mindlessly cruel and awful thing to do but to me, maybe more needing help for mental illness issues, rather than prison..?...with how it was, with his 18yrs imprisonment for something he didn't do..?...it's caused his focus/everyone's focus to be on 'wrongful' and on what he didn't do, rather than the things he did do be addressed, like running his cousin off the road with a gun, exposing himself, and burning the family cat, not someone with a sound and healthy mind, I would say...he came out of prison being 'the wronged, innocent person' who had lost 18yrs of his life and the whole focus on that, but in that, never having to address those disturbing things he did do and his overall mental health and him needing help for that...going in with a mentally ill mind and coming out with a mentally ill mind, because serious things needed looking at there and they weren't...