Steven Avery: Making of a Murderer

[Chris_Halkides]

345 items removed

marplots,

When I said that a "selective cleanup was not possible," that's exactly what I meant and nothing more. I specifically tried to avoid saying that the lack of DNA from Halbach allowed only a single explanation. I agree in principle with the notion that the DNA found does not equal the DNA deposited (I made that point many times with respect to a different case). However, Mr. Buting noted on p. 214 that a total of 345 items were taken from Mr. Avery's trailer and garage, and he goes on to say that 180 items were identified as being suitable for DNA testing (both were records for the state of Wisconsin). That's a large number, but of course it is not an infinite number.

 

[marplots]

marplots,

When I said that a "selective cleanup was not possible," that's exactly what I meant and nothing more. I specifically tried to avoid saying that the lack of DNA from Halbach allowed only a single explanation. I agree in principle with the notion that the DNA found does not equal the DNA deposited (I made that point many times with respect to a different case). However, Mr. Buting noted on p. 214 that a total of 345 items were taken from Mr. Avery's trailer and garage, and he goes on to say that 180 items were identified as being suitable for DNA testing (both were records for the state of Wisconsin). That's a large number, but of course it is not an infinite number.

Assuming TH went to the junkyard (is that in dispute?), then her DNA ought to be there somewhere, whether or not Avery did it.

With Dassey's yarn thrown out, there's no particular reason to think whatever happened happened in the trailer, is there?

Just curious - was TH's DNA found on the extra key from the trailer?

 

[Samson]

Assuming TH went to the junkyard (is that in dispute?), then her DNA ought to be there somewhere, whether or not Avery did it.

With Dassey's yarn thrown out, there's no particular reason to think whatever happened happened in the trailer, is there?

Just curious - was TH's DNA found on the extra key from the trailer?

No.
It was not, without wishing to suggest you must read all the material, this is a singularity in the case.
The anomaly is described by

No Halbach dna

Only Steve dna.

Any crime theory should include this and workings must be shown.

 

[marplots]

No Halback DNA found.
That's a distinctly different statement than "No Halback DNA."

 

[Ampulla of Vater]

Assuming TH went to the junkyard (is that in dispute?), then her DNA ought to be there somewhere, whether or not Avery did it.
<snip>

This is not really true. If she got out of her car, took pictures of a vehicle, walked up to the front porch as SA walked out to hand her money, there would really be no DNA anywhere, except on her camera and on the money. DNA is not really pouring off of you, unless you are a sweaty mess.

 

[marplots]

This is not really true. If she got out of her car, took pictures of a vehicle, walked up to the front porch as SA walked out to hand her money, there would really be no DNA anywhere, except on her camera and on the money. DNA is not really pouring off of you, unless you are a sweaty mess.

Or, she could have touched a bunch of stuff that wasn't tested.

The point is that the DNA found shapes the story we tell - the theory of the crime - and that's all it can ever do. DNA that isn't found, for whatever reason, gives us plenty of room to maneuver when making up the narrative.

If Avery's DNA hadn't been on the hood latch, the defense wouldn't need to explain it away. The hood latch only comes up because DNA was found. When it isn't, there isn't anything to "explain away." No DNA is like no shell casings, or no fingerprints, or no CCTV - the prosecution is limited to using the evidence they find. Having those things only helps them. Not having them doesn't cripple their case.

Was there an explanation for why Halback's DNA wasn't found on the spare key?

 

[Samson]

Or, she could have touched a bunch of stuff that wasn't tested.

The point is that the DNA found shapes the story we tell - the theory of the crime - and that's all it can ever do. DNA that isn't found, for whatever reason, gives us plenty of room to maneuver when making up the narrative.

If Avery's DNA hadn't been on the hood latch, the defense wouldn't need to explain it away. The hood latch only comes up because DNA was found. When it isn't, there isn't anything to "explain away." No DNA is like no shell casings, or no fingerprints, or no CCTV - the prosecution is limited to using the evidence they find. Having those things only helps them. Not having them doesn't cripple their case.

Was there an explanation for why Halback's DNA wasn't found on the spare key?

It was a valet key that Mike Halbach gave the police.
Shaun Attwood furnishes this as an explanation in "unmaking a murderer".

"NOT THIS TIME" dear Mike confidently offers to the media when discussing the possibility of Steve walking.

It fits like a glove.

 

[marplots]

It was a valet key that Mike Halbach gave the police.
Shaun Attwood furnishes this as an explanation in "unmaking a murderer".

But that doesn't explain it. Unless you mean TH/MH never touched it, ever - or it was cleaned somehow?

 

[Dr. Keith]

But that doesn't explain it. Unless you mean TH/MH never touched it, ever - or it was cleaned somehow?

Wouldn't someone who wanted to plant it clean it before planting to make sure that the dan they planted didn't get cross contaminated in some way? Wouldn't want the delivery guy's DNA on there, or Lenk's.

 

[marplots]

Wouldn't someone who wanted to plant it clean it before planting to make sure that the dan they planted didn't get cross contaminated in some way? Wouldn't want the delivery guy's DNA on there, or Lenk's.

I don't know. It's a puzzler.

When they check for DNA, do they get all that's on there from everyone, or is there some signal/noise deal?

Here's a story about it: http://www.inquisitr.com/3238362/st...es-new-scientific-testing-on-victims-car-key/

I don't know if it went anywhere. The article talks about an appeal in August 2016, but that apparently never happened. The case seems stalled at this point.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I don't know. It's a puzzler.

Doesn't seem that puzzling to me. If I hand you a key and you are going to add suspects DNA and plant the key I would feel much better if you cleaned that key off first. I'd rather not be connected to the key in any way, thank you very much.

 

[marplots]

Doesn't seem that puzzling to me. If I hand you a key and you are going to add suspects DNA and plant the key I would feel much better if you cleaned that key off first. I'd rather not be connected to the key in any way, thank you very much.

Clean it yourself, I got stuff to do.

That blood isn't going to steal itself.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Clean it yourself, I got stuff to do.

I think that is exactly what I would do. Even if I used gloves while getting it. A quick wipe with an alcohol swipe just to make sure nothing of me is on there.

 

[marplots]

I think that is exactly what I would do. Even if I used gloves while getting it. A quick wipe with an alcohol swipe just to make sure nothing of me is on there.

I would like to hear the prosecution's explanation for this item having only SA DNA on it. Or if the defense raised the issue with their experts.

 

[Kaosium]

I cam across a recent article laying out some of Zelner's announcement's on the case, including an update. Here's an excerpt:

Here's a sampling:

Jan. 2, 2016: "Whoever deleted Teresa Halbach cellphone calls is either the murderer or part of cover up. Either way the killer is free."

May 9, 2016: Zellner posted a photo of exonerated former inmates hugging their mothers on Mother's Day. "Steven Avery needs to be in next year's photo - plan to make that happen."

July 5, 2016: "If you think we are just tweeting ... think again. A tsunami of new evidence is on the way."

Jan. 17, 2017: "Not 1 but 8 plants: bullets, bones, blood, camera, cellphone, PDA, key, car + false confession. World's best experts on it."

But the court of public opinion and a court of law are two different universes.

Zellner has yet to file a post-conviction petition on behalf of Avery, who turns 55 in July. He remains in prison, insisting he is innocent.

"The prediction that he'd be out by Mother's Day is slim to none," said Rob Bellin, a Neenah attorney who has closely followed the Halbach murder case over the years.

USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin reached out to Zellner late last week for comment regarding her predictions about the case and the criticism she has received from Avery supporters for not filing her long-awaited post-conviction motion in Manitowoc County court.

"Next time you hear from me will be when I file Steven Avery's motion," Zellner wrote in her email response. "I could care less what Steven Avery's supporters think. They have absolutely no comprehension of the procedural and forensic complexity of this case."

Zellner did not specify when she plans to file the motion.

The last significant legal filing on Avery's case was last Nov. 23. That's when she and the Wisconsin Attorney General's Office reached an agreement for independent scientific testing on nine items of evidence from the Halbach murder investigation.

"Mr. Avery will present his third party theory in his post-conviction petition that he will file once he obtains the new test results," Zellner wrote in her legal briefs last August.

Johnny Koremenos, director of communications for the state justice department, said "we have been informed that testing on the agreed upon evidentiary items is nearly complete."

Koremenos added that the state has "reason to believe that the defense will file a new motion within the next 45 to 60 days."

Zellner previously told USA TODAY NETWORK that the independent scientific testing should be finished in March.

On March 18, she tweeted, "To all the skeptics, doubters & haters just be patient because we are really going to make you mad." Zellner did not again tweet about Avery's case until last Friday, when she posted this: "Would not still be rep. SA if the test results proved his guilt. Winning takes a little longer than losing."

In her email last week to USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin, Zellner said "this is not a simple DNA case where I submit samples and await the results."

"My only obligation is to Mr. Avery," Zellner wrote. "My predecessors all failed because they did not do a thorough and comprehensive job. I will not be making the same mistake."

As of two months ago she seemed pretty positive the testing results would really irritate "skeptics, doubters and haters" and it seems there's been little progress since then, though I don't doubt that it would take time to prepare for a legal undertaking of this nature.

 

[Kaosium]

I would like to hear the prosecution's explanation for this item having only SA DNA on it. Or if the defense raised the issue with their experts.

I don't know what the prosecution said, but I can think of a possibility:

Avery cleaned the key but in doing so managed to deposit his DNA there. We're not talking about the brightest tool in the shed and he might well have an incomplete if not entirely outdated understanding of the possibility of transfer and perhaps used a rag with his DNA on it to wipe it off.

I can also think of an explanation of his DNA being on her hood latch. He ran a junkyard, those places have to drain the fluids when they salvage cars, that often means they have containers with washer fluid handy and that's something that you can pop the hood and fill up in thirty seconds cheaply. It's not disputed that she'd been up there to take pictures and had she come in with a dirty windshield he could have just had her pop the hood and filled it up.

 

[McHrozni]

Avery cleaned the key but in doing so managed to deposit his DNA there. We're not talking about the brightest tool in the shed and he might well have an incomplete if not entirely outdated understanding of the possibility of transfer and perhaps used a rag with his DNA on it to wipe it off.

This is possible, but I have a simpler scenario: Steven Avery had sweaty palms and handled the key for a few minutes, maybe even playing with it. His hands wiped off Haselbachs' DNA to a significant degree - rule of thumb is you wipe off 70% of the sample almost immediately - and deposited disproportionately more of his DNA than would be common. Whatever victims' DNA was left on the key was too little to be visible next to Steven Averys'.

McHrozni

 

[Kaosium]

This is possible, but I have a simpler scenario: Steven Avery had sweaty palms and handled the key for a few minutes, maybe even playing with it. His hands wiped off Haselbachs' DNA to a significant degree - rule of thumb is you wipe off 70% of the sample almost immediately - and deposited disproportionately more of his DNA than would be common. Whatever victims' DNA was left on the key was too little to be visible next to Steven Averys'.

McHrozni

Are the electropherograms available in this case or is there any expectation they might be in the future?

 

[Samson]

Are the electropherograms available in this case or is there any expectation they might be in the future?

It's good to see you back Kaosium.
I suspect they are, after reading Jerome Buting's book Illusion of Justice.

It seems that nothing explains this key that involves Steve Avery. If he cleaned it he is showing he knows it is a problem for him. It is not a difficult object to eliminate from the crime scene in that case, so obviously he did not clean it and keep it.

 

[Kaosium]

It's good to see you back Kaosium.
I suspect they are, after reading Jerome Buting's book Illusion of Justice.

It seems that nothing explains this key that involves Steve Avery. If he cleaned it he is showing he knows it is a problem for him. It is not a difficult object to eliminate from the crime scene in that case, so obviously he did not clean it and keep it.

Good point, and thanks for the answer and welcome back.

I read about the first fifteen pages in this thread and then skipped to the end to see how it was going. Although Avery comes from my part of the world I suffer from 'Avery-fatigue' being as it seems he's been a regular feature of the WSJ (Wisconsin State Journal our local newspaper) since I was in high-school. Reading about it again brings to mind the Casey Stengel quote 'Can't anybody here play this game?' He was innocent, proved guilty, then innocent again, then guilty of something worse and now might not be guilty of that either. Ugh.

I've no real idea what happened, though it appeared reading through what I did you have strong views on the subject. I recall you making an argument I didn't quite understand upthread about the body possibly being burned beforehand due to the condition of the body, could you expand upon that or correct me if I misunderstood?