[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

Wait and see and if Im proved right I will remind you why did Scott only give Theresa's Aunty a camera ? why did the Aunty go after all the other searchers had gone ? why did Ryan give her the direct line to police ?

None of those questions have any physical proof of anything, and there's mountains of physical and circumstantial evidence supporting Steve Avery doing it. You really need to open your mind up more on this one Chuff and look into the possibility that he did actually do it and him having been wrongly jailed (only part of sentence though might I add) before seems to be mudding the waters on this case.....alot.

Chuff I've been following this case for the last few years and read oceans of stuff on it, I was 100% sure that he was innocent after the original documentary until I found out all the sneaky things they did in that to make him sound innocent

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

The general packaging also

The hole on the top (which netflix decided not to tell us) is on all those viles, it's how they put the blood into them. One of the sneaky things they did in the original documentary, drop that bomb but never explain that it meant nothing after all....... I couldn't understand why it never came up in the trial because surely that was damning evidence but of course it didn't come up because there was a proper explanation for it

[Glenn.]

there's no way to know if someone else extracted blood from the tube through the same hole plus the packaging wasn’t sealed as it should have been. Them dirty framing bastards set him up!

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

there's no way to know if someone else extracted blood from the tube through the same hole plus the packaging wasn’t sealed as it should have been. Them dirty framing bastards set him up!

No the documentary set us up more like!

[Glenn.]

OPEN your eyes Nimah!!!!

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I watched the first series then did a load of reading up afterwards and I think he definitely did it. I started watching the second but I found it so biased It annoyed me. Peter Hyatt did a good statement analysis on him. Also, I wouldn't say "poor" him anything he's done some horrible **** besides that (that were very glossed over in the documentary. Brendan dassey also told his mother in a recorded phone conversation that Steve sexually abused him

http://statement-analysis.blogspot.c...entencing.html

Eh we know he has a below average IQ, how he speaks or what he says isn’t necessarily going to be what he means; or it’s easily taken out of context/deconstructed like this. I don’t think stuff like this is really reliable as apposed to the scientific evidence which has been produced by the defense

[Smithy]

That being said I WILL read the other article you posted niamh!

[Crimson Dynamo]

The TL is convinced this man is innocent

I sent her the link and she said it was Amazing News

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Smithy

That being said I WILL read the other article you posted niamh!

Do

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

The TL is convinced this man is innocent

I sent her the link and she said it was Amazing News

Also send her my link

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Smithy

Eh we know he has a below average IQ, how he speaks or what he says isn’t necessarily going to be what he means; or it’s easily taken out of context/deconstructed like this. I don’t think stuff like this is really reliable as apposed to the scientific evidence which has been produced by the defense

And even more so by the prosecution

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

there's no way to know if someone else extracted blood from the tube through the same hole plus the packaging wasn’t sealed as it should have been. Them dirty framing bastards set him up!

[Ramsay]

Thank you Niamh, I was afraid this thread was going to be full of people saying he's innocent. Guilty AF

[Marsh.]

Niamh educated Chuff, Glenn and Smithy.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well, while watching it I was still kind of smarting from feeling duped in the Avery case, so I kind of went in with a bit of a biased view thinking they're going to try to convince me he didn't do it and he probably did, so I decided to watch it, then look up what they left out etc and I really don't think he did do it. There's a bizarre theory involving an owl that weirdly sounds like it could be an answer to what happened

Yeah, when watching it I couldn't get my head around that theory.

But it's certainly more plausible than the scenario they kept throwing out, that she fell down the stairs and then kept trying to get up and repeatedly slipped in a pool of her own blood, banging her head against the wall several times. That made him look guilty as sin. But his general demeanour was very cold to me, I definitely don't think his relationship was as open and pleasant as he tried to portray. But obviously, being a prick who shagged around and treated his wife like dirt doesn't mean he killed her. But then there's the whole contrivance/convenience with the poker being found. A baffling case.

Though I did find it quite sad when he was finally released, just how frail and beaten he seemed after all those years.

I pitied the kids. (And Margaret was the SPITTING IMAGE of his son!! ).

[user104658]

The true facts:

- Avery probably killed her

- however, the police blatantly DID plant and fabricate evidence in order to "get him", and their version of the specifics of the murder are clearly bull**** and constructed to fit around Brendan Dassey's botched statement.

- Whether Brendan was present at the murder or not (and I don't believe he even was) he has been treated abysmally by the police, and the entire system. Shameful.



Basically I think Avery did it and the police knew it was him, but were struggling for physical evidence so they extensively tampered with the evidence that was available. I think they moved bones, I think it's all but certain that they planted blood, I think they probably moved the car, and I know they forcefully extracted an at least partially false confession out of Brendan because you can watch them doing it.

[Alf]

Unless that Brenda Dassey interview with the police was heavily edited, then I find it hard to find him guilty.

From that interview we saw, he knew nothing and was guessing what the police wanted to hear. But we do know Dassey was with Avery on the night in question. having a bonfire.

Either it didn't happen as they say it did or Dassey is a genius.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

Unless that Brenda Dassey interview with the police was heavily edited, then I find it hard to find him guilty.

From that interview we saw, he knew nothing and was guessing what the police wanted to hear. But we do know Dassey was with Avery on the night in question. having a bonfire.

Either it didn't happen as they say it did or Dassey is a genius.

My take on it is that Brendan is innocent and that the police timeline of events isn't accurate, so it is possible for Brendan to be innocent and Avery to be guilty.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Niamh educated Chuff, Glenn and Smithy.

No she didn’t? I think she’s a fool to think he’s guilty

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Glenn.

No she didn’t? I think she’s a fool to think he’s guilty

That's not very nice

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

My take on it is that Brendan is innocent and that the police timeline of events isn't accurate, so it is possible for Brendan to be innocent and Avery to be guilty.

I haven't read the full transcripts of the interview but apparently he did give some accurate details without prompting. I do think he was treated very badly though and probably a victim of steve aswell which he admitted to his mother on a recorded phone call from prison

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

My take on it is that Brendan is innocent and that the police timeline of events isn't accurate, so it is possible for Brendan to be innocent and Avery to be guilty.

I'm not gonna argue too much with Niamh on this, she's obviously done her research on this and I've only seen the documentaries. But from the documenteries, it's fair to say it's a very fishy case, and the law enforcement don't look good and could have done with some better cross examining of them. The officer I think called Link or lenk or something like that and the patrol officer with the glasses (I forget his name) were both very dodgy and didn't seem honest to me.

[Niamh.]

Also something thats not mentioned much but Steve actually initially lied to the police and said Teresa never showed up

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I haven't read the full transcripts of the interview but apparently he did give some accurate details without prompting. I do think he was treated very badly though and probably a victim of steve aswell which he admitted to his mother on a recorded phone call from prison

He gave so many details that some were bound to be right just by probability.

"What happened to her?"

"She was stabbed or shot or strangled or someone hit her on the head or maybe drowned her"

"AHA so you knew she was shot."


That said, even if the interview had been conducted ethically (which it straight up was not), the worst that can be said for a clearly non-neurotypical 16 year old is that he was a victim. Even if Steven never directly laid a hand on him, even if the police narrative is 100% accurate, Brendan to me should clearly be classed as a victim of Avery who was confused, easily manipulated, and felt he had to do as he was told.

[Glenn.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

That's not very nice

Neither is being wrongfully imprisoned