Posted on 12/31/2015 1:45:31 PM PST by 5150 FREEPER
1. Prosecution never established motive for Avery/Dassey.
2. Prosecution never placed Teresa inside Avery's trailer. An autotrader magazine and a receipt are not enough.
3. Teresa's DNA was not found on Avery or Dassey despite a physical altercation, rape, etc.
4. Evidence not secured in Avery's home or property
5. No blood spatter. Anywhere.
6. Cell phone records repeatedly tampered with
7. Rav4 key "magically" appears.
8. No other suspect was considered.
9. In a phone call detective identified make/model/year of car before it was known and he could not explain why.
10. Neighbor was inconsistent in time of arrival
There is more to the story, but I strongly believe the victim was not attacked inside Avery's place (no DNA).
There is enough inconsistencies based on what I have seen to issue not-guilty. The jury started off with 7 not guilty. They changed quickly. I think they may have filled in gaps in the prosecution's story.
If there is just one “fact” that makes no sense, it is this:
If Avery killed the woman in the garage or in the trailer, and then burned her body in the fire pit, the thought that he would have put her body in the Rav 4 at all makes absolutely no sense.
I just finished binge watching this documentary on Netflix and it’s of course biased toward one side, the defendant’s, but how any jury could decide the case beyond a reasonable doubt is a mystery.
The DA himself stated on video at Steven’s trial that Teresa was killed in the garage, then at Branden’s trial on video he used the rape/throat cutting confession as proof of the murder to convict Branden despite NO DNA evidence being found in the house OR garage.
Watch the documentary. The video evidence of wrongdoing is incredible.
That was addressed in the documentary (or I read it somewhere ) when it was mentioned that Branden and Steven had supposedly put Teresa in the back of the car to take her and the car to submerge in a nearby body of water then decided to burn her body instead and hide the car.
Apparently word is getting out.
Twitter @KenKratz appears to be taken over.
Ken's private law practice page on yelp is lit up, too.
But of course there was no evidence to support that claim. Just a made-up story by the prosecution.
Exactly .
So you watch a biased, lefty program and end up thinking just as they wanted you to.
According to our local talk host Dan ODonnell who is a lawyer and covered the entire trial in person the evidence of Averys guilt was ironclad.
The bullet with Halbachs DNA on it came from Avery’’’s gun, which always hung above his bed.
He said the defense didn’t present any of the evidence of wrong doing that the movie did. This is supported by this article...
after his attorney announced that the defense was resting its case after calling seven witnesses, a fraction of the more than 50 whom the prosecution brought in.
Maybe they were saving it all to make a movie.
Yeah, the doc is biased. Everything is biased.
How does that make it lefty??
How do you explain away the key fob being found only after several searches, was found by the detective who was not supposed to be part of the investigation, had only one key on what looked to be a brand new fob, and had no DNA from the victim. That is impossible to explain away.
I went to the first link you posted and in the 6th paragraph the author states, “There was unquestionable unreasonable doubt in Avery’s case..”.
York;
LOCAL talk show hosts - so you must be from Wisconsin? Manitowoc area perhaps?
Was avery guilty in the Beernsten case? 18 Years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit - exonerated by undeniable DNA evidence. I suppose that’s just a whacked out liberal conspiracy.
Your prejudice and bias makes your argument null and void. Open your mind to the sickening corruption of the first case. That alone casts extreme doubt Avery would get a fair trial anywhere in WI.
——LOCAL talk show hosts - so you must be from Wisconsin? Manitowoc area perhaps?
Not a small town or Manitowoc resident. I reside in a major metropolitan area in Southeastern Wisconsin. The trial was covered daily in our news.
——Your prejudice and bias makes your argument null and void. Open your mind to the sickening corruption of the first case.
Sorry, you are not comprehending this. It is not —prejudice—. I am INFORMED by an extremely credible CONSERVATIVE observer who saw ALL the evidence and heard ALL the testimony. (This observer-reporter-LAWYER fills in for Mark Belling when Mark does the Rush Limbaugh show btw). He reviewed IN DETAIL the specific evidence that he found convincing as opposed to the Netflix product. I have further read the critiques of the near-fictional Netflix presentation. If you are relying on a dramatic, cheerleading commercial (e.g. profit-motivated) product rather than all the information, it is you who are duped and prejudiced.
-—18 Years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit - exonerated by undeniable DNA evidence. I suppose that’s just a whacked out liberal conspiracy.
Avery was sadly one of hundreds nationwide exonerated by DNA evidence after serving time.
Nobody has ever claimed that our legal system is infallible. What do you think “â€Better 10 men go free than an innocent man convictedâ€â€ means? This old phrase is a clear statement of the risk in a human-based legal system. This tells me that not every miscarriage of justice is a corruption.
-—That alone casts extreme doubt Avery would get a fair trial anywhere in WI.
You do realize that the trial was moved to another county right? The Netflix show did include that fact, did it not?
Is it a good thing that Avery s defense team presented only 4 hours of testimony during the trial but now there are hours and hours of pleading in public? Perhaps we should dispense with trials and just hire liberal film makers to determine guilt and innocence.
Is this a new thing to make money from the legal system - to have a defense make a perfunctory court defense so a money making drama can be made to the court of public opinion?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.