|
TL posted:Onto episode 5 with Bobby Dassey's testimony-Ken Kratz is the biggest shitbag I've ever seen and the fact that the judge didn't declare a mistrial there is probably the biggest what the gently caress I've seen so far in the show. God drat. It gets worse.
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
I think Colburn found the car with the body in the back and used it as a way to nail Avery. I don't know who killed her but I think Colburn and Lenk set everything up from there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
Those text messages Krantz sent to the domestic abuse victim he was representing alone should get him disbarred for life. And if you know anything about Vicodin the concept of someone doing lawyer stuff while on it is terrifying. Opiates do so much more than make you feel good; just look at what Rush Limbaugh got up to while he was on Oxycontin all the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
kaworu posted:A lot of less scrupulous individuals have probably been inundating all sorts of people with crap though, I am sure. Oh god, yes. My friend works in Manitowoc and has a similar (but entirely distinct) job title to one of the story's "villains"--a job she's held less than two years--and is still getting absolutely flooded with emails cursing her out for her role in the case. A friend of hers who works at the city historical society says even they're getting hate mail over it? If people who had nothing to do with the case are getting that much harassment, I'm sure the actual baddies are getting 20x more. Pinky Artichoke posted:Juror selection is a toughie because I'm not sure there were untainted jurors available in the United States. I know I have a special interest in the area as an "ex-pat" but I was well aware of Avery's arrest and the allegations based on Brendan's testimony even here in California. Probably the best case scenario would have been to relocate the trial to Milwaukee and hope the real city folk just don't give a gently caress about hick news. Short of that, I'm not sure any change of venue would have helped because all of northeastern Wisconsin tends to be pretty interrelated. They would've been fine in Milwaukee, I think. People definitely followed the case down here in southern Wisconsin, but it wasn't balls-to-the-wall coverage like it was up closer to Manitowoc. You would have been able to find plenty of people who hadn't bothered to find out much.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
I think at the very least I would like to see this documentary spur some sort of push to pass legislation that prevents the state from prosecuting and convicting people for the same crime while presenting two completely different narratives of the crime. I am just dumbfounded that Steven and Brenden were convicted for the same crime that somehow occurred in two completely different ways. Also, I would be so hesitant to ever have a jury trial because people are so incredibly stupid, but the judge in Avery's case makes me realize a bench trial would be just as hopeless.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
sportsgenius86 posted:I think Colburn found the car with the body in the back and used it as a way to nail Avery. Yeah, that does seem more plausible, burning a body seems a step too far but I guess it could work. The only issue is that it doesn't answer who killed her, but no one really has a motive for doing that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
B B posted:It gets worse. You weren't kidding. This judge is ridiculous.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Yeah, that does seem more plausible, burning a body seems a step too far but I guess it could work. As shady as the cops are, I really don't see them killing someone to do this. It wouldn't fit with the license plate call either. But I think they're both extremely capable of framing Avery once they discovered everything else.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
Can anyone find a list if his convicted crimes before he was convicted of murder? The judge complains of him basically being a monster, but my google-fu is failing. They mention the cat thing and running a cousin off the road, but what did he do after he was released for being wrongfully accused?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
Wiggles Von Huggins posted:what did he do after he was released for being wrongfully accused? Literally nothing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The only issue is that it doesn't answer who killed her, but no one really has a motive for doing that. The one person who could have potentially had a motive other than random bloodlust/sexual deviancy is the ex-boyfriend. He would have had all the info he'd need to commit the crime and police usually look at those type of relationships first for a reason. Those deleted voicemails may have pointed in his direction, possibly him making threats or at the very least showing that he was angry at her about something at the time. The other people who had a clear motive are cops, but the ex-boyfriend is a much likelier scenario. At the very least its clear to me that he and the brother participated in the evidence tampering, that shifty interview in Episode 1 combined with the timeline of events makes that much fairly obvious I'd say. To be honest though if I had to put my life on the line with a single guess, it'd still be Avery himself. He shouldn't have been convicted of course, but the documentary didn't convince me that he's completely incapable of something like that, and the basic indisputable facts still make him the likeliest suspect. Very similar to the OJ Simpson case because even though its been established that some evidence was planted, I still firmly believe that OJ did it, as do most people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Wiggles Von Huggins posted:Can anyone find a list if his convicted crimes before he was convicted of murder? The judge complains of him basically being a monster, but my google-fu is failing. They mention the cat thing and running a cousin off the road, but what did he do after he was released for being wrongfully accused? In 2004, he was charged with disorderly conduct after the police were called to his house after an altercation between him and his girlfriend. This list includes stuff other than his arrests, but it's the most comprehensive one regarding his run-ins with the law (it even includes speeding tickets!) that I could find.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
aslan posted:In 2004, he was charged with disorderly conduct after the police were called to his house after an altercation between him and his girlfriend. God loving dammit. Nothing here of even remote substance. I finally finished all of the episodes, and at a bare minimum Brendan Dassey needs to be immediately released from prison.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:13
|
|
|
aslan posted:Oh god, yes. My friend works in Manitowoc and has a similar (but entirely distinct) job title to one of the story's "villains"--a job she's held less than two years--and is still getting absolutely flooded with emails cursing her out for her role in the case. A friend of hers who works at the city historical society says even they're getting hate mail over it? If people who had nothing to do with the case are getting that much harassment, I'm sure the actual baddies are getting 20x more. I feel bad for your friend and everyone else who is absorbing this poo poo. I wish people would channel their outrage into something more productive than dumping on the town. Literally the only thing that made this case noteworthy was Avery's stubborn refusal to plead out on the 1985 charge; there are plenty of similarly vulnerable people rotting in prisons around the country. Our public defender system is a joke in many areas, even getting a Len Kachinsky-level chump would be a godsend to some defendants. Threatening little old lady museum volunteers in Manitowoc will do nothing to improve the situation. PrincessKate posted:Also, I would be so hesitant to ever have a jury trial because people are so incredibly stupid, but the judge in Avery's case makes me realize a bench trial would be just as hopeless. I've sat on two different juries now (because apparently I look reasonable and I'm not a big enough rear end in a top hat to pull the jury nullification card), both for quick, penny ante stuff. The judge's instructions make a ton of difference to the jury's process and outcome. The first judge basically let us come to our own conclusions with no real instructions as to what we could or could not consider and did not make a point of instructing us on the law. The second judge was much more conscientious about instructing us on the letter of the law and what material we could or could not consider; the quality of our deliberations was much higher. In this case, I think it would've taken an extraordinary judge to wring a fair verdict out of a jury -- which by the way may still have been guilty based on the specific material that jury is allowed to consider.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
This might be a good time to bring up the fictional show Rectify, first two seasons are on Netflix. It deals with exactly this kind of thing, to the point where I believe the show was directly inspired by this specific case (tight-knit redneck town full of corruption, DNA evidence releasing a man after nearly 2 decades, etc.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
sportsgenius86 posted:As shady as the cops are, I really don't see them killing someone to do this. It wouldn't fit with the license plate call either. It fits if she was alive when he called it in. Like, he saw her in her car at a stoplight or wherever, called it in to see if it was her, followed her to a remote area and pulled her over. Not saying I believe that's what actually happened, but it possible. When the defense played that call in court, he looked crestfallen. We also don't know if she died immediately after seeing Avery, or even the same day. She could have gone on a bender, met her secret lover, worked the night shift at a strip club two towns over and so on. Remember that there seems to have been some activity with her cell phone after she was (according to the Kratz timeline) dead and her phone burned.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Kampfbereit posted:It fits if she was alive when he called it in. Like, he saw her in her car at a stoplight or wherever, called it in to see if it was her, followed her to a remote area and pulled her over. Not saying I believe that's what actually happened, but it possible. When the defense played that call in court, he looked crestfallen. Yea I don't think anyone is saying that Colburn or Lenk murdering her is the likeliest scenario, but it really shows how rotten that department is that you can walk away from this documentary and still have that little nagging doubt in your mind that its possible. If Theresa were still alive for a day or more after she met with Avery then I think she would have been seen by somebody, but I suppose if the one person she saw was the person who ended up killing her(ex-boyfriend), its possible. After all, her roommate didn't really seriously start to worry for like 2+ days, so maybe dropping of the map for 24-48 hours was normal for her. Her roommate is a figure in all this that hardly gets brought up in the documentary, but she could certainly have played a part in sparking a motive if she and the ex-boyfriend had been getting together and Theresa was vocal about not liking it. Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Dec 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:The one person who could have potentially had a motive other than random bloodlust/sexual deviancy is the ex-boyfriend. He would have had all the info he'd need to commit the crime and police usually look at those type of relationships first for a reason. Those deleted voicemails may have pointed in his direction, possibly him making threats or at the very least showing that he was angry at her about something at the time. You know what really sticks out in my mind? That piece of testimony that Teresa had been getting repeated unwanted calls like, two weeks before the murder. If you recall, the defense called a co-worker (I believe) of hers or something, and he was talking about how she didn't answer several calls during a period of time she was with her, and would dump the call once she saw who it was. And he inquired about it, because it seemed troubling, but she said it wasn't a big deal - or something to that effect. I find it very difficult to believe there isn't a relationship between whomever was calling/harassing her and the subsequent murder. Seems like there's something to that. And I *highly* doubt that it was Steven Avery who was calling/harassing her (despite that sack of poo poo Kratz trying to argue that this was true to some extent) because there's no way in hell she would have been embarrassed about talking about that with anyone. If some weird-rear end client you barely know is calling you repeatedly over and over again you aren't exactly going to be reticent when asked about it by a co-worker. I don't know if this points to her ex, or the brother, or someone else, but I feel pretty solid in my belief that Teresa was murdered by someone she knew. One of the biggest things for me is motive; Steven Avery not only had 0 motive to kill Halbach, he had extremely good reasons NOT to. And this means a lot to a man who isn't too bright. It's like this: On top of having no motive, I don't think Steven Avery was anywhere near smart enough to pull off a murder like this and have the means and ability to properly clean up the way he did in the amount of time he had. On the flip-side, I also think that even if he somehow *was* capable of murder, there is no way he would have jeopardized his current situation where he was about to make millions in a civil suit. A dim guy like him frankly has a very dogged but one-track mind, as we learned in the film, and it simply does not pass the straight face test. I think you need to be both intelligent, confident, and ballsy as hell to murder someone when you are in a situation like the one he was in, or you have to be insane. And he was neither. Does that make sense? Just based on what I learned about the man over those 10 hours and the research I've done, that's how it feels to me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:To be honest though if I had to put my life on the line with a single guess, it'd still be Avery himself. He shouldn't have been convicted of course, but the documentary didn't convince me that he's completely incapable of something like that, and the basic indisputable facts still make him the likeliest suspect. Very similar to the OJ Simpson case because even though its been established that some evidence was planted, I still firmly believe that OJ did it, as do most people. At this point, I'd say I largely agree with this. I'm not particularly certain one way or the other about Steven Avery's guilt, but I wouldn't be all that surprised to find out he actually did it. (Note: I still think that there was enough reasonable doubt to acquit both.) With that said, his and especially Brendan Dassey's trial were incredibly unfair and rife with some really sketchy and shady poo poo on the part of the police, prosecution, and that Len Kachinsky guy. What happened to Brendan is the most upsetting part of the whole ordeal for me, because it's clear that he was just a developmentally disabled kid who had a false confession forced out of him. The fact that his own lawyer used a private investigator to get a statement out of him that was then used against him in his trial is just beyond comprehension. Ken Kratz presenting two different stories of how the crime occurred in two different trials to two different juries should not be legal. It's also clear that both versions of the murder that the prosecution presented are impossible due to the lack of physical evidence to support them. The whole thing is just a mess. Whether or not Steven actually committed the murder, our criminal justice should not allow law enforcement to behave in the way that they did in this case. B B fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Dec 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
kaworu posted:It's like this: On top of having no motive, I don't think Steven Avery was anywhere near smart enough to pull off a murder like this and have the means and ability to properly clean up the way he did in the amount of time he had. On the flip-side, I also think that even if he somehow *was* capable of murder, there is no way he would have jeopardized his current situation where he was about to make millions in a civil suit. A dim guy like him frankly has a very dogged but one-track mind, as we learned in the film, and it simply does not pass the straight face test. I think you need to be both intelligent, confident, and ballsy as hell to murder someone when you are in a situation like the one he was in, or you have to be insane. And he was neither. Does that make sense? Just based on what I learned about the man over those 10 hours and the research I've done, that's how it feels to me. If Avery did it, the thing that really confuses the issue and makes it hard to establish what actually went down is Brendan's confession. Could a man of Avery's mental abilities done what Brendan describes and cleaned up the scene so well? Probably not, but what if Avery is guilty, and Brendan's confession is also bullshit? If we're going with the premise that Avery is too dumb to get away with this, then that doesn't preclude him from having done it because he got caught, he didn't get away with it. It just means he was too dumb to completely sanitize that garage, which is of no importance if he never tried to because the garage was never a crime scene to begin with. In the end I don't think we're ever given a complete enough picture of Steve Avery as a person to really know for sure what he is and isn't capable of, and I think that was probably by design. If he had developed deviant sexual appetites either in childhood or in prison, and they were too strong for him to resist, I'm not sure he's smart enough to say to himself "better not kill this person, it'll be easily traced back to me!". But he may be, I just can't say for sure. Sometimes he comes across as smarter than you'd expect for a guy with a 70 IQ, other times not.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
It took me a couple of episodes to get into it, but this is crazy good. I just hit the end of episode 4 and the blood vial made my jaw hit the floor. This is some insane poo poo. Also Len's poo poo eating yet oblivious grin is one of the most irritating things I've ever seen. It feels like he's being played by a really talented actor who's spent years perfecting the 'punch me in the face, I dare you' look.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
I have a hard time believing Avery did this. I get it, he's no saint. But he's also not some drug dealer who considers prison time the cost of doing business. He also has no history of murder or anything close to it. He spent EIGHTEEN years behind bars as an innocent man and had a pending mult-million dollar case open. I know he's not the sharpest tool in the shed but you gotta think the last thing he is going to do is risk getting put behind bars again and lose out on the case. He had to have known the finger would be pointed his way immediately if this woman disappeared.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
Kal Torak posted:I have a hard time believing Avery did this. I get it, he's no saint. But he's also not some drug dealer who considers prison time the cost of doing business. He also has no history of murder or anything close to it. He spent EIGHTEEN years behind bars as an innocent man and had a pending mult-million dollar case open. I know he's not the sharpest tool in the shed but you gotta think the last thing he is going to do is risk getting put behind bars again and lose out on the case. He had to have known the finger would be pointed his way immediately if this woman disappeared.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Steve2911 posted:The only way I can see him having done it is if he was arrogant and stupid enough to think the 'I was wrongfully accused before' defence would make him indefinitely immune to all crime. Which isn't totally out of the realm of possibility. Anything could have happened when the two of them were alone on his part of the property. He may have touched her inappropriately and she fought back, she may have insulted him in some way that led to him committing the crime in anger(we know he has anger issues), who loving knows. It didn't have to be some cold-blooded, calculated plan to murder her from the beginning. Remember, its very possible he did it but under a different set of circumstances than what Brendan confessed to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
I just have a hard time thinking he did it when there's not a shred of evidence to prove he did that wasn't very obviously planted.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:In the end I don't think we're ever given a complete enough picture of Steve Avery as a person to really know for sure what he is and isn't capable of, and I think that was probably by design. If he had developed deviant sexual appetites either in childhood or in prison, and they were too strong for him to resist, I'm not sure he's smart enough to say to himself "better not kill this person, it'll be easily traced back to me!". But he may be, I just can't say for sure. Sometimes he comes across as smarter than you'd expect for a guy with a 70 IQ, other times not. Brendan and Steve both have similar IQs, but they are still so different from each other that I don't think it's a useful metric at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Anything could have happened when the two of them were alone on his part of the property. He may have touched her inappropriately and she fought back, she may have insulted him in some way that led to him committing the crime in anger(we know he has anger issues), who loving knows. It didn't have to be some cold-blooded, calculated plan to murder her from the beginning. Remember, its very possible he did it but under a different set of circumstances than what Brendan confessed to. That's a good point. I suppose it could have been something unplanned that escalated quickly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
sportsgenius86 posted:I just have a hard time thinking he did it when there's not a shred of evidence to prove he did that wasn't very obviously planted. Well there is plenty of circumstantial evidence, which is used to convict people all the time. Certainly not enough to convict in this case, I think we all agree on that, but it doesn't mean Avery is actually innocent. She was known to have met with Avery very very close to the time of her disappearance. Her bones were found on his property, outside of his trailer. Her car, which her blood and hair were found in, is found on his property. Its pretty likely the bones and the car were moved by police but there's really no evidence to prove that the same way there is with the blood vial, the bullet, and the key.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Her roommate is a figure in all this that hardly gets brought up in the documentary, but she could certainly have played a part in sparking a motive if she and the ex-boyfriend had been getting together and Theresa was vocal about not liking it. Wasn't the roommate a guy? I remember because it was a little odd, even for 2003. Though thinking back I may be getting that mixed up with the 1985 case. Kal Torak posted:Interesting. I hadn't considered that. Yeah, we can agree about the burn site. And for me, despite how awful Lenk and Colburn and some of these Manitowoc officials are, it's hard to see them being the ones burning her body. Not because they're such upstanding gents, but it just doesn't fit how I view them. I don't think they're good people, but I think they think they're good people, and burning the body of a "nice young lady" in cold blood would break that illusion so violently... it doesn't seem like the exact kind of hosed up thing they'd do. Not unless they thought Teresa was a slut or witch or something. I can imagine them moving her cremains though; at that point you can block it out and not think about it as a person. Personally, I think Teresa was probably killed & burned by someone she knew, then Steven was intentionally framed by a very small group of people, not much more than one or two, with Brendan caught in the crossfire. But I wouldn't that surprised if it turned out Steven or another Avery killed her, despite how bad a decision that'd be. (People do stupid poo poo, a hunting accident on the Avery property would have been extremely possible) I would be a bit surprised if it turned out the cops killed her, or even were the ones who burned her body. That's a whole 'nother level of  Kal Torak posted:If it was someone close to her, we are to assume that whoever did it, knew about Avery, knew about his history, knew he would be the perfect target, and knew that she would be going to take pictures for him? That seems like a serious stretch for her brother or ex-boyfriend. It's a bit of a stretch, I agree. But this is a troublesome case. There aren't really any clean solutions where everything adds up.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Anything could have happened when the two of them were alone on his part of the property. He may have touched her inappropriately and she fought back, she may have insulted him in some way that led to him committing the crime in anger(we know he has anger issues), who loving knows. It didn't have to be some cold-blooded, calculated plan to murder her from the beginning. Remember, its very possible he did it but under a different set of circumstances than what Brendan confessed to. This (and your other points) are very true. He did have anger issues, and there could have been escalating circumstances that led to her death. But like another poster said, if this were the case I sincerely feel like there would have been actual compelling evidence, rather than what the prosecution offered. Even Kratz' additional points that were 'left out of the documentary' aren't particularly compelling. There was no smoking gun here, there was no motive, there was so little actual investigatory work done that the sad thing is we'll never know. But again, the thing is, if it was something that got out of hand... Part of me thinks Steve would have owned up to it and plead guilty. Or that if he decided to cover it up, he'd have been smart enough to, you know, use that massive car crusher he owns instead of driving past it and parking Teresa's RAV4 in an obvious place and covering it with twigs and branches so it stands out. While being intelligent enough to perfectly clean his apartment and garage of all blood and DNA belonging to Halbach, but leaving several smears of both his and Halbach's blood that were incredibly visually obvious right in the car (which could have been cleaned up with a papertowel and some 409) even though he had the foresight to hide the car. It just doesn't pass the straight face test! But yes, I mean... It could have been him! In truth we don't know. The possibility does not seem, well, likely. kaworu fucked around with this message at 21:42 on Dec 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
Kal Torak posted:Interesting. I hadn't considered that. Didn't a whole bunch of people close to her have access to her voice messages? And wasn't someone making harassing calls to her phone? It could easily have been one of them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:43
|
|
|
Measly Twerp posted:Brendan and Steve both have similar IQs, but they are still so different from each other that I don't think it's a useful metric at all. The problem with IQs is the number which would be reported here is what'd be known as the "full spectrum" IQ, which is actually an average of a bunch of different numbers. Most commonly, your scatter of numbers don't differ that far from each other, probably not much more than a standard deviation of 15 points. If that's the case, the full spectrum IQ gives you a pretty accurate summation of someone's mental faculties. But some people do have really broad scatters - especially gifted people, people with either learning disabilities, or both (LD-gifted people, like a dyslexic guy that's great at poetry), and in that case the full spectrum doesn't give a very clear picture. Steven could have just one or two scores that are way lower than everything else that drags the whole thing average down into mentally retarded land. He could have just scored in the bottom fifth percentile for the visual spacial skills section and otherwise be a normal guy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
kaworu posted:But again, the thing is, if it was something that got out of hand... Part of me thinks Steve would have owned up to it and plead guilty. Or that if he decided to cover it up, he'd have been smart enough to, you know, use that massive car crusher he owns instead of driving past it and parking Teresa's RAV4 in an obvious place and covering it with twigs and branches so it stands out. While being intelligent enough to perfectly clean his apartment and garage of all blood and DNA belonging to Halbach, but leaving several smears of both his and Halbach's blood that were incredibly visually obvious right in the car (which could have been cleaned up with a papertowel and some 409) even though he had the foresight to hide the car. It just doesn't pass the straight face test! As far as what we think Avery "would have" done in these scenarios, I don't think anyone's opinion is really an educated one because the documentary doesn't give us a complete enough picture of who he is. Ok, so a few times when he was younger he owned up to some bad stuff he did. If he's smart enough to know how big a deal murder is, he may not be as willing to own up to that as you'd like to believe. And as I said before, because of the police gently caress-ups and corruption, we simply don't know what evidence may have been cleaned or "covered up", or just never existed in the first place. There may have never been any blood in his apartment or garage if the crime didn't take place there, the reason the state believes it did is a dubious confession. There are so many different ways this could have gone down that would explain why Avery didn't do a better job covering his tracks, but we'll never be able to straighten it out because the police made that impossible. Edit: Just as one example, Avery's low intelligence may have led him to believe that his scrapyard was a bottomless pit that nobody would be able to find anything in. He literally may not have beleived the police were persistent or capable enough to go through each and every car in order to find Theresa's. The boards and sticks could have just been a half-assed afterthought. My overall point is we really don't have the first clue what's going on inside Avery's head, but we do have a person who was known to have met with him before disappearing and who's burned remains were found on his property. Those are the facts. Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Dec 28, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
People keep bringing up the $36m civil rights case, but the documentary said that the Avery Bill that was passed right when Teresa went missing gave Avery $400k. I'm almost positive that was going to be the extent of his restitution, I don't see the state adding another lump of money on to what he was probably going to win anyways. I can't find if his case ever closed or what, but the way he was buddy buddy with lawmakers in the state I can see them offering the $400k and him dropping the civil rights lawsuit in exchange.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
Grem posted:People keep bringing up the $36m civil rights case, but the documentary said that the Avery Bill that was passed right when Teresa went missing gave Avery $400k. I'm almost positive that was going to be the extent of his restitution, I don't see the state adding another lump of money on to what he was probably going to win anyways. I can't find if his case ever closed or what, but the way he was buddy buddy with lawmakers in the state I can see them offering the $400k and him dropping the civil rights lawsuit in exchange. Didn't he say in the documentary that he only took a $400k settlement because he needed money to defend himself in the murder case?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
Grem posted:People keep bringing up the $36m civil rights case, but the documentary said that the Avery Bill that was passed right when Teresa went missing gave Avery $400k. I'm almost positive that was going to be the extent of his restitution, I don't see the state adding another lump of money on to what he was probably going to win anyways. I can't find if his case ever closed or what, but the way he was buddy buddy with lawmakers in the state I can see them offering the $400k and him dropping the civil rights lawsuit in exchange. He didn't get that either. The money he did get was for settling the lawsuit for $250k if I recall.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:29
|
|
|
Measly Twerp posted:He didn't get that either. The money he did get was for settling the lawsuit for $250k if I recall. He got $400k for settling and I believe that other amount that was supposed to compensate him for loss of earnings or whatever was $450k
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
Grem posted:People keep bringing up the $36m civil rights case, but the documentary said that the Avery Bill that was passed right when Teresa went missing gave Avery $400k. I'm almost positive that was going to be the extent of his restitution, I don't see the state adding another lump of money on to what he was probably going to win anyways. I can't find if his case ever closed or what, but the way he was buddy buddy with lawmakers in the state I can see them offering the $400k and him dropping the civil rights lawsuit in exchange. That is a separate thing. The lawmakers wanted to increase the restitution from the state to exonerated former inmates from $5k/year to $25k/year (it's not clear to me whether that provision remained in the bill after Avery was arrested for the Halbach murder, but the bill also included provisions about recording interrogations and handling of evidence). The civil suit was specifically against Manitowoc County and associated individuals in reference to their malpractice in the 1985 case.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Buting: This clearly proves that the victim's phone was used after the day she went missing by someone who knew her password, and that something was deleted. Judge: ...I'm having trouble seeing the relevance of this.  Is this guy even awake? Even Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney wouldn't have been able to convince him something was wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
Coppers eh? What a bunch of bastards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2015 23:11
|
|
