Steven Avery: Making of a Murderer

[marplots]

Did the police who questioned Brendan Dassey realize that he could go away for life? Did they realize that they were putting words into his mouth? Did they know about Mr. Dassey's mental limitations? The answer to the first question is obviously "yes," and my answer to the second and third questions is "probably." If the police are willing to do that, then upon what basis can we exclude the possibility of framing Mr. Avery? I can't.

You think Dassey framed him? Could be.

 

[Dr. Keith]

It occurred to me there was someone else at the crime scene who was carrying around Steven Avery's blood.

Steven Avery.

It occurred to me some time ago that TH must have incredibly fastidious blood. Despite being raped, killed shot, dismembered and burned at the Avery compound, outside of her car her dna was only found on a single key, a single bullet and in the fire pit. Two of those items being found by an officer who was told not to be on the scene and only after through searching by other officers turned up nothing.

Very courteous of her to avoid messy bleeding. Either that or Avery is the second coming of Dexter.

 

[marplots]

It occurred to me some time ago that TH must have incredibly fastidious blood. Despite being raped, killed shot, dismembered and burned at the Avery compound, outside of her car her dna was only found on a single key, a single bullet and in the fire pit. Two of those items being found by an officer who was told not to be on the scene and only after through searching by other officers turned up nothing.

Very courteous of her to avoid messy bleeding. Either that or Avery is the second coming of Dexter.

I don't think anyone disputes that she went to Avery's that day, so not finding DNA in the way you expect is already a mismatch. Either they aren't so hot at finding DNA or they simply didn't check the right places.

The prosecution is not actually required to lay out, point for point, how the murder happened.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I don't think anyone disputes that she went to Avery's that day, so not finding DNA in the way you expect is already a mismatch. Either they aren't so hot at finding DNA or they simply didn't check the right places.

The prosecution is not actually required to lay out, point for point, how the murder happened.

No, but when they do lay it out and yet can't find the evidence to back up their claims there should be some red flags. If you say she was gang raped and stabbed in a certain room of the house but find no DNA in the entire house, save her own key, then you do bounce up against some credibility issues. Or at least you should.

 

[marplots]

No, but when they do lay it out and yet can't find the evidence to back up their claims there should be some red flags. If you say she was gang raped and stabbed in a certain room of the house but find no DNA in the entire house, save her own key, then you do bounce up against some credibility issues. Or at least you should.

Agreed. Especially when you develop your theory of the crime after knowing what evidence is available. They probably over-relied on Dassey's fable. Or maybe the cops really are that bad at forensics.

 

[McHrozni]

It occurred to me some time ago that TH must have incredibly fastidious blood. Despite being raped, killed shot, dismembered and burned at the Avery compound, outside of her car her dna was only found on a single key, a single bullet and in the fire pit. Two of those items being found by an officer who was told not to be on the scene and only after through searching by other officers turned up nothing.

Very courteous of her to avoid messy bleeding. Either that or Avery is the second coming of Dexter.

If he wrapped her up in blankets, paper and maybe some gauze before shooting the amounts of free blood could be minimal, small enough to be cleaned with ease. He could dispose of all the blood-soaked material in the barrel and the bonfire.

McHrozni

 

[DragonLady]

If he wrapped her up in blankets, paper and maybe some gauze

Did anyone mention missing any of those things?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I'd guess that family couldn't afford to lose a bunch of blankets, towels, or even old clothes without someone noticing.

 

[McHrozni]

Did anyone mention missing any of those things?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I'd guess that family couldn't afford to lose a bunch of blankets, towels, or even old clothes without someone noticing.

Did they have an inventory of his stuff?

A bunch of old newspapers would also work, anything that will adsorb the blood really.

You don't need much if you only wrap the head, two T-shirts or a towel and three old newspapers to go along either of those plus a plastic bag should be more than enough to capture pretty much all the blood.

McHrozni

 

[Samson]

Did anyone mention missing any of those things?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but I'd guess that family couldn't afford to lose a bunch of blankets, towels, or even old clothes without someone noticing.

Did they have an inventory of his stuff?

A bunch of old newspapers would also work, anything that will adsorb the blood really.

You don't need much if you only wrap the head, two T-shirts or a towel and three old newspapers to go along either of those plus a plastic bag should be more than enough to capture pretty much all the blood.

McHrozni

Did it cross your minds to read the Jerry Buting book?
I have read scores of these books, and it is a huge effort to get to print. Why pontificate when the case is settled by the activists? I can assure you, Steven Avery did not do this crime.
Please invest a tiny amount of cash in Buting's book.

https://www.amazon.com/Illusion-Jus...91300430&sr=1-1&keywords=illusions+of+justice

16.39 $US

Read the whole tome then pontificate about how Steve did the crime.
What is the point in coming to a critical thinking debate without knowledge?

The key issue is this fails as a skeptical forum because there is insufficient attention paid to the research of people very very close to the subjects under discussion.

 

[McHrozni]

Did it cross your minds to read the Jerry Buting book?

Does it address the point(s) I raised?

McHrozni

 

[Samson]

Does it address the point(s) I raised?

McHrozni

It addresses all the evidence.
But I have read 2 books and do not plan to go searching for references.
Here are some key issues.
1. The key they found with Steve's dna but none of Teresa's was a valet key, and it could not unlock the rear door. This strongly suggests it was planted, as the key in Steve's possession should have been the one Teresa was using when last seen. Normally the valet key would be in the glove box or in Teresa's room. If in the glove box it was easy to recover and plant. If in her room that would require someone like her brother.
2. Jerry Buting had a puzzle on his hands, he had pretty well worked out his client was innocent, but had to explain the blood in the car, so he tracked down all sources of SA blood, and voila, there was the vial Lenk had access to.
3. The bullet in the garage was introduced after the initial searches. These were conducted before the pathologist could establish the skull bullet wounds. So there was the planted statement by Brendan followed by the bullet discovery with her dna.

I have no idea why you would focus on hypothetical constructions involving Steve when he had such excellent alibis and there was so much planted evidence. This really is a walking quacking looking duck.
There is nothing unusual about this. We saw it in Arthur Thomas, Raffaele Sollecito and Mark Lundy, the latter being slightly more elaborate.

There are many more cases, where the initial appearance of guilt is helped along by planted evidence. The trick is to tell whether the cops are really dumb, or really crooked.

 

[JREF2010]

some post on reddit insinuating end of April.... the Tsunami. its been a long wait.
Brandons release maybe in June for appeal response also posted.
According to earlier comments this has gone on a little past the initial estimate of time, but maybe in next 15 days the test results. will it be enough?

the SUV, bullet, key.....hmmm?

 

[McHrozni]

It addresses all the evidence.
But I have read 2 books and do not plan to go searching for references.
Here are some key issues.
1. The key they found with Steve's dna but none of Teresa's was a valet key, and it could not unlock the rear door. This strongly suggests it was planted, as the key in Steve's possession should have been the one Teresa was using when last seen. Normally the valet key would be in the glove box or in Teresa's room. If in the glove box it was easy to recover and plant. If in her room that would require someone like her brother.

The conclusion is baseless. Steven Avery would've had access to the valet key just as much as anyone finding the car would. If the detectives moved the car to Steven Averies property they would have access to the main key as well and wouldn't need the valet key from her brother. Involving her brother makes the conspiracy larger and thus less believable.

2. Jerry Buting had a puzzle on his hands, he had pretty well worked out his client was innocent, but had to explain the blood in the car, so he tracked down all sources of SA blood, and voila, there was the vial Lenk had access to.

Sure. What kind of a vial was it and when it was drawn? You have the book, do you not? Check it please

3. The bullet in the garage was introduced after the initial searches. These were conducted before the pathologist could establish the skull bullet wounds. So there was the planted statement by Brendan followed by the bullet discovery with her dna.

Is there any evidence for this assertion or is it mere speculation?

There are many more cases, where the initial appearance of guilt is helped along by planted evidence. The trick is to tell whether the cops are really dumb, or really crooked.

Is there any firm evidence the said evidence was planted in this case, or are these all speculations?

McHrozni

 

[marplots]

(on the bullet)
Is there any evidence for this assertion or is it mere speculation?

Speculation. Two scenarios. In the first, the garage is searched and no bullet is found. Later, after it appears a bullet would be excellent evidence to convict, a bullet is found in the garage.

Scenario two: The garage is searched. It's messy and a bullet is small. So the search is for "obvious" stuff, not specifically a bullet. Later, when it appears the victim may have been shot, the police return and look closer and a bullet is found.

My diagnosis? Someone in this thread watches too many television police dramas.

 

[McHrozni]

Speculation. Two scenarios. In the first, the garage is searched and no bullet is found. Later, after it appears a bullet would be excellent evidence to convict, a bullet is found in the garage.

Scenario two: The garage is searched. It's messy and a bullet is small. So the search is for "obvious" stuff, not specifically a bullet. Later, when it appears the victim may have been shot, the police return and look closer and a bullet is found.

My diagnosis? Someone in this thread watches too many television police dramas.

Yeah. The first scenario is hugely problematic, since finding the bullet with the victims' DNA in your garage isn't something you can explain away easily ... or at all, without a claim it was planted there to be honest.

If there was a conspiracy to frame Steven Avery, it would have to include fewer than three people. Lenk and one other deputy perhaps, but no more. It's difficult to make a case for that, it's all conjecture and speculation. This fact doesn't prove framing didn't happen of course and I welcome a fresh investigation of the innocence project. Either an innocent man will be set free (again) or else the faith in the US justice system will be (somewhat) improved. It's a win-win situation, really.

McHrozni

 

[Samson]

Speculation. Two scenarios. In the first, the garage is searched and no bullet is found. Later, after it appears a bullet would be excellent evidence to convict, a bullet is found in the garage.

Scenario two: The garage is searched. It's messy and a bullet is small. So the search is for "obvious" stuff, not specifically a bullet. Later, when it appears the victim may have been shot, the police return and look closer and a bullet is found.

My diagnosis? Someone in this thread watches too many television police dramas.

Yeah. The first scenario is hugely problematic, since finding the bullet with the victims' DNA in your garage isn't something you can explain away easily ... or at all, without a claim it was planted there to be honest.

If there was a conspiracy to frame Steven Avery, it would have to include fewer than three people. Lenk and one other deputy perhaps, but no more. It's difficult to make a case for that, it's all conjecture and speculation. This fact doesn't prove framing didn't happen of course and I welcome a fresh investigation of the innocence project. Either an innocent man will be set free (again) or else the faith in the US justice system will be (somewhat) improved. It's a win-win situation, really.

McHrozni

I do doff my hat to you artful dodgers and weavers who engage at a fey critical thunkin level with a pile of satire to boot.
Cool.

 

[marplots]

I do doff my hat to you artful dodgers and weavers who engage at a fey critical thunkin level with a pile of satire to boot.
Cool.

I'm still waiting on Zellner to inject a round of fresh speculation and drama. Any news? I checked her website and all I could find on Avery was a donation page.

Avery's been in jail on this beef for ten years or so. Can't be getting any younger.

 

[JREF2010]

there are boneheads like the severely obese cartoonist cop who framed steve in his picture the first time who still denys Steve was innocent. He explained his own conspiracy the DNA that freed Avery the first time was planted/corruption and was not accepted by him.

so with that, both parties have the conspiracy theorys they hold onto like a religion.

This means the beliefs of both partys wont change even if BD is released in June and Steve ends up owning Manitowoc County...imo.

the Guilters will still believe in their Guilty Religion and the InnocenceTeam's will cry wrongful conviction if the jail cell doors arent opened for them, denying the Judges decision as the truth.

Zellner has a mountain to climb called Mt. DNA. The Carbon 14 will be interesting.
Her recent twitter does actually offer new evidence that some of the results are in and shes ramping it up. ...so is Ken Kratz.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

fingernail DNA in the Beernsten case

"There were two separate DNA samples that could have led to Avery's release. The first one proved inconclusive. As the Innocence Project, which took on Avery's case, reported, a fingernail scraping sample showed that there was unknown DNA underneath Beerntsen's nails. But as the Neflix series explained, DNA in that situation can only be broken down into groups called "alleles." And though there were alleles that matched Avery, there were also alleles that could not have belonged to him. However, because he was a match for some of the DNA, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals found that 'the DNA evidence does not make it any more or less probable that Avery assaulted P.B.'" Link.

"These kinds of samples can only be broken down into groups called alleles, with Beerntsen and Avery sharing the same alleles. But another grouping of alleles was discovered in the scrapings, which Avery’s lawyers contended belonged to the true attacker.

"Yet even with this, his appeal was denied, with the judge claiming there was no evidence to prove the alleles didn’t come from Beerntsen’s husband or another person who may not be the attacker. As Stephen Glynn, Avery’s civil-rights lawyer, notes in Making A Murderer, 'If you ever want to read an opinion that will show you how strongly this system is designed to perpetuate a conviction as opposed to examine whether or not someone could in fact be innocent, read the court of appeals decision in the Steven Avery case.'" link

It would be nice to see the DNA data for ourselves, but the court's reasoning looks...dubious. This is another instance when fingernail DNA might have implicated the true culprit, who was not Steven Avery.

 

[McHrozni]

"There were two separate DNA samples that could have led to Avery's release. The first one proved inconclusive. As the Innocence Project, which took on Avery's case, reported, a fingernail scraping sample showed that there was unknown DNA underneath Beerntsen's nails. But as the Neflix series explained, DNA in that situation can only be broken down into groups called "alleles." And though there were alleles that matched Avery, there were also alleles that could not have belonged to him. However, because he was a match for some of the DNA, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals found that 'the DNA evidence does not make it any more or less probable that Avery assaulted P.B.'" Link.

Oh for the love of Benji. This looks like the writing of someone who doesn't have the faintest clue about what DNA testing looks like.

DNA is not broken down into groups called alleles, alleles are variants of genes we all carry. DNA testing looks for which variants of certain genes you carry and determines what is the probability there is another person in the population with the exact same makeup. Forensic testing doesn't actually look at genes, it looks at tandem repeat sequences in front or behind a coding region. The numbers in the result are the number of repeats in that allele of your genome. We know, from testing, how common a certain number of repeats is and can infer what is the probability another person has the exact same combination as you do. The usual goal is to go to above 10^-13, i.e. you'd expect fewer one person in every 10,000 billion people to have that genetic make-up, so it is incredibly unlikely you have two people with that particular make-up. The only exception is identical twins, even inbreeding for several generations doesn't result in identical profiles with the kits we have - we test for a sufficient number of alleles, the population will be genetically unviable before you get people with identical profiles.

In theory one allele that shouldn't be there excludes your suspect as the culprit, although this is not strictly the case in rare cases of heteroplasmia or if you have a weak sample where non-specific binding became important. This is where those 300 RFU we talked about previously come in, this is the limit where the manufacturer guarantees the results had to come from specific binding. The other possibility is that you're dealing with a mixture of DNA from two or more people.

If the DNA profile is a match for Steven Avery but there are other alleles also present that he does not carry it is possible the sample is a mixture of DNA of Steven Avery and another person. Statistical tools exist to calculate the odds Steven Avery is indeed the donor of some of the DNA, you can get them above 10^-10 in many cases, which should be enough to go beyond reasonable doubt. If all of his alleles are present and there are other alleles also present which implicate a mixture of three people or less, the calculation will show he was a likely donor. If none of his alleles are missing the DNA can not exclude him as a donor.

If, however, a single allele Steven Avery has is missing from the DNA profile, he is all but excluded as the donor. Two missing alleles exclude him beyond any reasonable doubt. This is only true if other alleles in the portion of the sample are above the 300 RFU or whatever other limit the manufacturer specified.

In other words if you want to exclude Steven Avery you need to look for what is missing, not what is present.

It would be nice to see the DNA data for ourselves, but the court's reasoning looks...dubious.

I hate to break it to you, but my take is the court knows a whole lot more about DNA testing than whomever wrote that article. It could well be the courts' decision is scientifically sound and the fingernail scrapings incriminated him more than they exonerated him.

McHrozni