[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Josy

Theres 2 main fb pages ive been reading, one is run by someone from a neghbouring town and the excused jury member, they discuss allsorts on there.

The other is run by the family with some help, Brendans mum and Stevens niece, they don't allow anyone to discuss the fact that Scott, Bobby have been suspicious throughout.

I wonder why not? especially when Steve is claiming it's his brothers

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I wonder why not? especially when Steve is claiming it's his brothers

Yeah I know.

The papers over there must be having a field day though because the other day Brendans mum came on and posted that her husband, son Bobby and her other 2 brothers are not murderers regardless of what the media says

[Niamh.]

But yeah, if I were to go with any other person doing it, it's him

[Drew.]

I never did trust Brendans brother in any of this as well. He was so shifty and quick to make it look like Stephen had been up to something.. he was far too suspicious looking.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Drew.

I never did trust Brendans brother in any of this as well. He was so shifty and quick to make it look like Stephen had been up to something.. he was far too suspicious looking.

yeah and Brendans step dad was even worse I think

[Drew.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

yeah and Brendans step dad was even worse I think

Yeah, i think thats the thing that gets me more than anything.. the fact Stephen was the only target in all of this, however suspicious other people were and even if there were the slightest signs anyone else could have murdered her or been involved there just wasn't any interest in them, It was just Avery they wanted from the start. But then maybe i've just answered my own questions.. all they wanted was Avery.

[MTVN]

Interesting reading about a book which has just come out here about Avery, I saw it in the shops the other day and presumed it was going to be defending Avery because it's called 'The Innocent Killer' but apparently the guy who wrote it actually argues that he is guilty and that the trial was fair, even defends Lenk and Colburn:

Contrary to the insinuations of Making a Murderer, Mr Griesbach calls Lenk and Colburn “two of the most ethical cops I’ve ever worked with”. He added: “I can see why people think evidence was planted, but I don’t believe they did it. Should they have been searching Steven Avery’s home? Absolutely not. But I don’t think it was malice on their part, I think it was just poor judgement.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a6856546.html

[Drew.]

I'm pretty uncertain on most things about this and have my own theories as to what happened but the one thing i'm almost certain on more than anything is that Lenk and Colburn planted evidence and set Avery up along the way.

[Josy]

I want to know how they managed to clean the garage then put the dust back because that is some real ninja ****.

[Josy]

Averys new lawyer was.in Manitowoc this week with a forensic team to redo some up to date luminol testing.

There's also some rumours of a new suspect and that they were actually Theresas last stop that day, and the guys grandson who is in jail atm has asked to speak to the lawyer about what really happened.

If you Google zipperers there's quite a few theories

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Josy

Averys new lawyer was.in Manitowoc this week with a forensic team to redo some up to date luminol testing.

There's also some rumours of a new suspect and that they were actually Theresas last stop that day, and the guys grandson who is in jail atm has asked to speak to the lawyer about what really happened.

If you Google zipperers there's quite a few theories

..I've started to read some of the George Zipperer stuff and it is interesting because it would be feasible that he killed her..(shot her/thinking she was a trespasser..)...and then drove her car though the entrance near where it was found/also explaining the lack of blood everywhere at Avery's etc...and then the rest is history/type thing...the police illegally find the car when they shouldn't have been there, believed it was Avery and had to ensure his conviction/planted some DNA/the key...and also interesting that one of the things being said at the moment is that he's just torn his garage down..(where any evidence would have been..?..)...but then 10 years has passed so his garage was probably just past it's sell by date and needed replacing....I don't know, all of the potential suspects just all seem like dodgy characters/shifty to me, which is the problem...

[Ammi]

..also with one of the Zipperer theories, is that the blooming dog did it, he had threatened to have his dog eat any trespasser on his land...so the dog killed her and he had to cover that up...

[Ammi]

[Ammi]

..Josy/Niamh..(I can't find the autopsy report online..)..have we seen that..?..


..I'm probably being dumb here but with only charred bones/teeth etc and no confession from Steven Avery, how was it known about hand and ankle cuffed/rape/torture/her throat slit ..?..which would mean no blood/dna evidence if those never happened but wouldn't mean he hadn't killed her/burned her body though...and the 'confession' from Brendon told them nothing that they weren't manipulating him to confess, so they already seemed to know these things had happened anyway but how..?..

[Drew.]

I live for the day Brendan gets released after being found innocent and collects his $10 million dollars because of it.

[DemolitionRed]

I've just watched the first two and need to do some catching up before I can properly comment. So far its a police set up but I need to watch the rest.

[Cal.]

OMG @ the end of the episode 5. Colburn (?) clearly knew what car it was 2 days before the car was found.

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by Who Is She?

OMG @ the end of the episode 5. Colburn (?) clearly knew what car it was 2 days before the car was found.

That always bother me and it was never explained why he called it in.

[MTVN]

Seen some people mention that Colburn specified whether it was a 1999 Toyota which is something that you wouldn't know just by looking at the car so he could have been making the call just to verify some information he had seen or been told about

[Cal.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Seen some people mention that Colburn specified whether it was a 1999 Toyota which is something that you wouldn't know just by looking at the car so he could have been making the call just to verify some information he had seen or been told about

This would be believable if he didn't look utter terrified after it was brought up. He knew he'd ****ed up.

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Who Is She?

This would be believable if he didn't look utter terrified after it was brought up. He knew he'd ****ed up.

True but then just the fact that he knows how it would look could make him terrified especially in that situation where its clear that the defence is implying you've been framing someone

[Cal.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

True but then just the fact that he knows how it would look could make him terrified especially in that situation where its clear that the defence is implying you've been framing someone

Yeah that's true.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Seen some people mention that Colburn specified whether it was a 1999 Toyota which is something that you wouldn't know just by looking at the car so he could have been making the call just to verify some information he had seen or been told about

Why wouldn't he just say that, though?

Also, I don't know how regarding plates work in the US, but is there really nothing that identifies the year? You'd know in the UK straight away, unless it had a private plate.

[MTVN]

Well I think he did say he was checking information he'd been told didn't he, and also I think he just generally seized up on the stand. I wondered that about the license plates as well but was just relaying something I'd read elsewhere so not sure how US plates work. There is also the fact that the car had its plates removed when it was found so the theory that he was looking at it relies on him ditching the plates himself and I don't see why he would do that?

[GiRTh]

Another thing, he called in the license plate instead of radioing in. This implies he wasn't in a squad car and thus could have been off duty when it happened. Given the sensitive nature of the case and the involvement of the Manitowoc police, why was he checking plates off duty?

His lack of explanation for any of this is astonishing.