• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Steven Avery: Making of a Murderer

Status
Not open for further replies.
moralhora said:
^ It's funny because I tend to think that Zellner has nothing.

She's tweeted and tweeted and... tweeted and everything turns out zero, so why would now be any different? I can bet you that this new "proof" will prove nothing, especially as she didn't get the blood evidence until two days after her tweet....
Click to expand...

What "turns out zero"?

You keep making all these assertions with nothing to back them up (an irony I'm sure is lost on you).

Again, can you point to claims Zellner has made that turned out to be false or without merit?
 
Well, I'd just point to Zellner's Twitter history to prove my point, but this is something you seem not to understand. When Zellner first took the case I thought "maybe there is more to this", but by her own actions I think - "nah, ********". And that's where I am right now. I believe Zellner as much as I believe a 9/11 truther claiming that a laserbeam took down the towers.
 
moralhora said:
Well, I'd just point to Zellner's Twitter history to prove my point, but this is something you seem not to understand. When Zellner first took the case I thought "maybe there is more to this", but by her own actions I think - "nah, ********". And that's where I am right now. I believe Zellner as much as I believe a 9/11 truther claiming that a laserbeam took down the towers.
Click to expand...


You're skipping a question, I see.

Does Zellner have 18 exonerations to her credit or not?

You claimed that was "very contentious".

What truth do you have to support your claim?
 
I don't know if it's significant, but the Wikipedia reference for the exonerations is Zellner's website.
 
moralhora said:
No Zellner does not have "18 exonerations" to her name.

Do prove each case for your claim.
Click to expand...


It's already been done for 17 of them.

That's close enough for me.

I won't quibble about the other one. You can have that if it means that much to you. Not worth it to me. Seventeen will do.

So, seventeen that you can go ahead and show us are "very contentious".

Or is that one what you meant by "very contentious"?
 
Just as important: how many cases has she failed to win an exoneration?

Basic critical thinking.
 
moralhora said:
That's a very contentious claim and self-promoting claim on Zellners side.

I'd expect more from a site that says they are "skeptic" to just accept Zellners self-serving "facts"...
Click to expand...

This coming from someone who seems to think that it would be too difficult for the LE to plant evidence, when we know that planting evidence occurs when LE have nothing to lose - whereas in this case they had a whole to lose with SA's lawsuit.

I don't think you are a skeptic. I think you are a cynic. We have looked at the evidence here. Most of us are not convinced one way or another (I am 50/50 on SA being guilty), but you are.
 
moralhora said:
Why would they choose to murder Teresa Halbach to frame him? Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Throughout this entire thread only one person thinks that it is possible that LE murdered TH. I would think that seeing as you said that you have read it, you would know that.
 
moralhora said:
How many "cases" does she abandon before she realises that she can't win them?

"Basic critical thinking".
Click to expand...

I don't know. Feel free to provide the evidence.

(Personally, I think that if she was going to abandon cases it would be after she realizes she can't win them, not before she realizes that she can't win them)
 
quadraginta said:
It's already been done for 17 of them.

That's close enough for me.

I won't quibble about the other one. You can have that if it means that much to you. Not worth it to me. Seventeen will do.

So, seventeen that you can go ahead and show us are "very contentious".

Or is that one what you meant by "very contentious"?
Click to expand...

The 18th one is Bernard Mims - exonerated after the Reddit compilation. I don't see anything contentious about it at all.

Decent chance that Melissa Calusinski and SA will bring her up to 20.
 
Wayward son said:
Throughout this entire thread only one person thinks that it is possible that LE murdered TH. I would think that seeing as you said that you have read it, you would know that.
Click to expand...

Yes.

And I walked away with Steven Avery is guilty. He is. Let's rephrase that... nope Steven Avery is just guilty.
 
moralhora said:
She's tweeted and tweeted and... tweeted and everything turns out zero, so why would now be any different? I can bet you that this new "proof" will prove nothing, especially as she didn't get the blood evidence until two days after her tweet....
Click to expand...

You have no way of knowing if what she has tweeted has turned out zero. We have no way of knowing if what she has tweeted will turn out to be significant. Based on her track record, I am partial to the latter being the case.

She can run a whole lot of experiments about how blood could be planted vs how blood would appear from a cut in the location of SA's without the blood evidence.

"Experts experiments confirm SA's trial attorneys correct about blood being planted but incorrect about how it was done."
 
moralhora said:
Yes.

And I walked away with Steven Avery is guilty. He is. Let's rephrase that... nope Steven Avery is just guilty.
Click to expand...

Good for you. As your mind is completely made up, I would suggest that you return to this thread in several months after Zellner has failed to tell us that you told us so. Why you would waste your time with open-minded people right now is beyond me.
 
Wayward son said:
Good for you. As your mind is completely made up, I would suggest that you return to this thread in several months after Zellner has failed to tell us that you told us so. Why you would waste your time with open-minded people right now is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Well.

Call me shameless, but if Zellner provides new proof and guess what? I'll change my position and be glad to do so,

However - you can't ask me to change my position based on evidence that does not exist. Bring evidence to the table and I might.
 
This has long since descended into petty bickering. Has there been anything solid that could show Avery was guilty or innocent recently?

The way I see it we're still mulling over essentially the same questions we did when the documentary came out, some two years ago. Has there been anything at all recently?

McHrozni
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom