|
mobby_6kl posted:Episode 5. And remember that the boyfriend/roommate straight up admit that they hacked into her voicemail, and IIRC one of them says something like "I don't remember if I deleted any voicemails" (emphasis mine). But no, that's not suspicious at all. Nope.
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
And they just kind of... figured out her password.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
Alastor_the_Stylish posted:And they just kind of... figured out her password. I could easily get into any of my parents accounts, their passwords are always one of their three dogs, sometimes followed by two specific numbers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Alastor_the_Stylish posted:And they just kind of... figured out her password. They actually even said what it was, a birthday I believe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Xae posted:They were already at civil risk and possibly criminal risk from the last time they framed him. My point being that they would be increasing the risk with their actions. If they had just shut up and kept out of the case, things wouldn't have gotten worse for them. precision posted:They actually even said what it was, a birthday I believe. Two birthdays back to back
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
Schurik posted:My point being that they would be increasing the risk with their actions. If they had just shut up and kept out of the case, things wouldn't have gotten worse for them. Maybe not worse if they stay out, but possibly a lot better if they risk it. With Avery completely discredited they were off the hook for all of the poo poo they were potentially in for before the murder. If Avery's just a person of interest in a case that never goes anywhere they gain nothing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Schurik posted:Best part of the whole thing are the lawyers and cops who jumped right out of (an episode of) Fargo. Had to check that I wasn't duped into watching fiction a couple times. Yah der hey.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
Oh man, while thinking of ways to smash Kratz' face in from overseas, I remembered the DNA testing lady, someone so simultaneously stupid, deceitful and arrogant that it made me physically ill looking at her loving smirk, and how she tries not to laugh every time her face makes any sort of transition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Schurik posted:Two birthdays back to back No matter how often it happens, I'm always amazed that anyone under 50 uses birthdays or anniversary dates as passwords. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
Actually, the DNA lady was totally right about the fact that the test indicated a positive for Teresa's DNA on the bullet and that the presence of self-contamination in the null sample shouldn't disqualify the result. The "contamination re-do" rule the defense was arguing about was overly strict, and the DNA lady was trying to choose her words carefully so she could explain that without overstepping. Teresa's DNA clearly ended up in the test tube the bullet was washed in, and not in the null tube. The argument then becomes "how'd Teresa's DNA get on the bullet" and the most likely explanation is that teresa's blood seeped into the bullet's crater on the garage floor and the bleaching didn't fully sterilize the cratered bullet. You can also argue that the police planted it. I don't think you can make a reasonable argument that Teresa's DNA in the lab test tube came from contamination. As for the lack of EDTA on the Rav4 samples, EDTA is a stable substance and doesn't degrade in the environment. Since there was no EDTA in the RAV4 Avery blood smears, then the blood in Teresa's car came from Avery directly and not from the tube. There's no other reasonable explanation for Avery's blood in Teresa's car besides "Avery bled on her car while loving around in it." Why no Avery fingerprints in the car? He wore gloves according to Brendan, but the process of putting gloves on in the dark with a bloody finger would almost definitely result in Avery's blood on the outside of the gloves. Which would transfer from the outside of the gloves to the interior of the car. Why didn't Avery crush the car? Because he realized that would implicate a family member if the car was later found, and he told Brendan that burning the body was a better solution. "boehner" posted:The process of gathering the evidence and extremely hosed up police handling of the situation create enough reasonable doubt about either of their involvement that neither Avery nor Brendan should be behind bars, especially since this same county already wrongfully sent this man to prison for 18 years. I was all in favor of the guy getting $34 million from the state, and his heir/family should receive that. But committing a murder after his release shouldn't be ignored just because he got falsely imprisoned once. quote:Well, that's all OK, then. Have a nice day Vic Mackey. quote:If you believe the key was planted then everything else mentioned in the defence is a real possibility. Particularly on top of the fact that there's no reasonable timeline that has Teresa being murdered off the Avery property. quote:And you're pointing to this as likely to be a real confession? Yeah, it's a textbook on how mistakes can be made in an interview, but that doesn't mean you throw the entire thing out. Read both interviews in totality and tell me Brendan didn't see some horrible poo poo go down and then lie and cover it up for months before leaking a mishmash of truth and cover story out in his interviews. Honestly, the worst thing about Brendan's case is attorney Len's behavior, which was unethical and criminal. But that all happened long after the March 1st Brendan interview. Steven Avery admits to standing with Brendan at a bonfire, in a pit behind his house where Teresa's corpse was found, on the night of the murder. He stoked it with tires and a car seat to get it to burn hotter. It's mindblowing that anyone can look at that and reasonably think he wasn't torching a body.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
Sort of amazing how all the anti-Avery people are usually from Wisconsin or close by and experienced all the media coverage, and thus already had their minds made up about the case.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 04:16
|
|
|
I forget, was there ever any explanation for the test tube tampering from the State?MrBuddyLee posted:An incredible amount of Horseshit Lmao
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
kaworu posted:Sort of amazing how all the anti-Avery people are usually from Wisconsin or close by and experienced all the media coverage, and thus already had their minds made up about the case. I don't think that's accurate. A lot of the people in Wisconsin who I've heard/seen comment on this were very open minded about the case, and on the other hand I think it's entirely possible to watch the documentary with relatively little previous exposure and conclude that Avery is probably guilty. MrBuddyLee posted:As for the lack of EDTA on the Rav4 samples, EDTA is a stable substance and doesn't degrade in the environment. Since there was no EDTA in the RAV4 Avery blood smears, then the blood in Teresa's car came from Avery directly and not from the tube. There's no other reasonable explanation for Avery's blood in Teresa's car besides "Avery bled on her car while loving around in it." There are just too many problems with the EDTA evidence to find it compelling, in my opinion, first among them that the guy didn't test all the samples. quote:I was all in favor of the guy getting $34 million from the state, and his heir/family should receive that. But committing a murder after his release shouldn't be ignored just because he got falsely imprisoned once. I'm not, I'd hate to see what that would do to people who need services in the area. Realistically, though, even if he hadn't been forced to settle to pay for his lawyers the eventual payout would've been much lower than $34m. Even if the award was fairly high, say $20m, I doubt he'd end up collecting on all of it. quote:You have a reasonable explanation for how Avery's blood is all over the inside of Teresa's car? If not, that's enough evidence to convict right there. If I recall correctly, *Teresa's* blood was all over the inside of the car, his was just in that one spot near the ignition. That's part of what makes me skeptical of the EDTA testing: if he tested samples from elsewhere in the car but not that one in particular, of course there would be no EDTA. Since we don't see his full testimony, we can't know for sure. Much more damning to me is the sweat evidence under the hood. The main thing I would've had to hear as a juror, though, is that it was conclusively Steven and not just a familial match. quote:The level of detail of much of Brendan's two interviews, in totality, is way too in sync with dozens of pieces of physical evidence to be completely bullshit. Just because some details don't match up or some of the techniques were leading doesn't mean you disregard the entirety of both interviews. Brendan brought up rape first. I believe he brought up stabbing first. I believe he brought up bleaching the garage with Avery first and getting bleach on his pants, and the details about where the RAV4 was moved, and where the body was moved various times. The kid was too accurate, and wasn't led into EVERY fact. I just can't trust anything that Brendan said because he is *such* an unreliable witness. Even if he was describing actual events in one or two quotes, they're embedded in so much bullshit. I also don't trust that a kid who has to go back and live with these people (he thinks) would necessarily implicate the correct person if fingering Steven rather than Earl/Chuckie/Bobby/Scott (pick one or more) seemed like the best way to feel safe at home. quote:Steven Avery admits to standing with Brendan at a bonfire, in a pit behind his house where Teresa's corpse was found, on the night of the murder. He stoked it with tires and a car seat to get it to burn hotter. It's mindblowing that anyone can look at that and reasonably think he wasn't torching a body. I don't know, man, having a bonfire on freaking Halloween night is not really suspicious behavior. And I have a hard time getting over the bones in the quarry.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
With all the media attention and petitions surpassing 100k signers, I hope the cops connected to this case are crapping themselves. I wonder if any journalists are banging on Lenk's door right about now.precision posted:And remember that the boyfriend/roommate straight up admit that they hacked into her voicemail, and IIRC one of them says something like "I don't remember if I deleted any voicemails" (emphasis mine). The most convincing explanation I've heard for this bull poo poo is that it's very likely the ex-boyfriend was actually stalking her. The brother knew and didn't like him. But then she turns up missing and/or dead, and even though the brother dislikes the ex-boyfriend, they collude to delete voice mails where the ex-boyfriend threatens her. From the brother's point of view, even though the ex-boyfriend is a rear end in a top hat (possibly even stalker), he didn't kill her. I'm pretty sure both of those guys have solid alibis. There's a reason why the defense team did not mention the brother as a potential suspect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
Has anyone seen this? http://patch.com/district-columbia/georgetown/dc-pay-16-million-man-framed-cops-murder-gu-student-report-0
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
I got to dig it out again but there's a pretty good video showing that you could take a sweaty gross sock or something similar and basically rub it on an item to get the same touch dna results, they even state in the case the forensics professional hosed up a test just by talking too close to it. His dna on or near the car doesn't really prove anything since he was known to be near it. As for the blood samples the agent said that he only tested 3 out of 7 samples and was without a doubt 100% sure there was 0 edta on this sketchy as gently caress test to begin with even on ones he didn't test and had this weird combative attitude the whole time. I think Avery is creepy as gently caress specially with the fact he is obviously preying on woman from within jail as evidenced by the two crazies he was dating within the doc but his trial was an embarrassing sham and I honestly don't know what to think other than he and dassy deserved better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:I don't think that's accurate. A lot of the people in Wisconsin who I've heard/seen comment on this were very open minded about the case, and on the other hand I think it's entirely possible to watch the documentary with relatively little previous exposure and conclude that Avery is probably guilty. By the very design of the documentary, it's hard to conclude that a fair trial was conducted. At least, assuming you're not one of those "ends justify the means" people.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:35
|
|
|
MrBuddyLee posted:Actually, the DNA lady was totally right about the fact that the test indicated a positive for Teresa's DNA on the bullet and that the presence of self-contamination in the null sample shouldn't disqualify the result. The "contamination re-do" rule the defense was arguing about was overly strict, and the DNA lady was trying to choose her words carefully so she could explain that without overstepping. Brendan brought a lot of poo poo up first because he pretty much exhausted every horrific act possible as they attempted to get him to say "shot her in the head" ad nauseum. And I don't see what him saying rape first has to do with anything considering literally no one has any idea whatsoever if she was raped and the entirety of rape being involved here is based off of the plot of a loving movie that a borderline retarded kid recited from memory because he just wanted to go back to school. Truther Vandross fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 06:40
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Maybe not worse if they stay out, but possibly a lot better if they risk it. With Avery completely discredited they were off the hook for all of the poo poo they were potentially in for before the murder. If Avery's just a person of interest in a case that never goes anywhere they gain nothing. Reading both our posts again, we are arguing the same thing, I just worded it badly in my first one. My point was that they very likely planted some or all of the evidence, but with reason and intent, not, like some other sources on the internet seem to believe, for shits and giggles. Like you say, they stood to gain a LOT and if Avery had been stuck with a public defender as planned, the risk would've been minimal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:10
|
|
|
computer parts posted:By the very design of the documentary, it's hard to conclude that a fair trial was conducted. There's a difference between thinking he did the crime and thinking the trial was fair. joshtothemaxx posted:I'm pretty sure both of those guys have solid alibis. There's a reason why the defense team did not mention the brother as a potential suspect. The defense didn't successfully bring up the ex-boyfriend (or anyone else) as a potential suspect because Wisconsin has a specific test for determining if an alternative suspect is admissible and no one met the criteria. http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/ev...a-to-amend.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:28
|
|
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:There's a difference between thinking he did the crime and thinking the trial was fair. Not apparently to the above poster: who appears to categorically deny any sort of police tampering with the investigation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:42
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Not apparently to the above poster: Right? He's basically saying they needed eight loving days to find blood in the car, bullet shells in the garage, and an SUV key on the bedroom floor. Also, they needed to ransack the place to find this. Come on.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 07:54
|
|
cpaf posted:They didn't go after Allen because they wanted to frame Avery, who the entire sheriff's department hated and particularly the deputy's wife + her best friend. If they put Allen in they can't put it on Avery. The police department who were monitoring Allen were keen to go after Allen but the sheriff's department (who framed Avery) told them to gently caress off It's important to keep in mind just how much of a motive the sheriff has to hate Avery. Dude pointed a gun at his wife. Think about what you might do if you heard some hillbilly rear end in a top hat your wife already hates pulled this poo poo. Now imagine you had the kind of resources at your disposal that a sheriff does.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 08:04
|
|
|
Brodeurs Nanny posted:Has anyone seen this? See that dude was smart enough to get the gently caress out of town before he sued.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 09:42
|
|
|
MrBuddyLee posted:the most likely explanation is that teresa's blood seeped into the bullet's crater on the garage floor and the bleaching didn't fully sterilize the cratered bullet. MrBuddyLee posted:Since there was no EDTA in the RAV4 Avery blood smears MrBuddyLee posted:Why no Avery fingerprints in the car? He wore gloves according to Brendan, but the process of putting gloves on in the dark with a bloody finger would almost definitely result in Avery's blood on the outside of the gloves. Which would transfer from the outside of the gloves to the interior of the car. MrBuddyLee posted:Why didn't Avery crush the car? Because he realized that would implicate a family member if the car was later found, and he told Brendan that burning the body was a better solution. MrBuddyLee posted:You have a reasonable explanation for how Avery's blood is all over the inside of Teresa's car? If not, that's enough evidence to convict right there. MrBuddyLee posted:Just because some details don't match up or some of the techniques were leading doesn't mean you disregard the entirety of both interviews. MrBuddyLee posted:Brendan brought up rape first. MrBuddyLee posted:I believe he brought up stabbing first. MrBuddyLee posted:The kid was too accurate, and wasn't led into EVERY fact.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
Schurik posted:I forget, was there ever any explanation for the test tube tampering from the State? quote:Yes, the CLEARLY tampered with blood vial. You seem to gloss over this. The evidence seal was broken and the top was punctured. Who did this and why? The hole in the top was supposedly from the initial blood draw of Avery. See 1:25 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q02UukDhVxg quote:Most likely? That would require the garage floor to be covered with her blood, and not a trace of it was found there. And also that during the meticulous cleaning of the floor, the culprits didn't remove the bullet quote:No, there was no EDTA detected in the RAV4 Avery blood smears. In the tests performed by the FBI, who have confessed to faking tests to bolster prosecution cases. quote:Except that this would result in smears on every area he touched, not drops on the door frame. quote:if he was Mirandaized at all quote:"The United States Supreme Court has approved such questioning of a minor in the absence of his or her parents. The police still have to give Miranda warnings if the minor is in custody. quote:It ends with Riegert exasperatedly throwing his hands in the air and shouting "THE HEAD, HE SHOT HER IN THE HEAD!" Clearly, twelve jurors who saw the totality of Brendan's interviews and cross-referenced them with the physical evidence believed Brendan was there and did plenty of what he originally said he did. Zero jurors agree with you, or with anyone who thinks his interviews were 100% horseshit. quote:Not only is there zero evidence of stabbing, the lack of blood anywhere in Avery's trailer completely contradicts the stabbing story. One stab in the gut, which Brendan said leaked a little on the sheets and blankets. One slash of the throat, which missed any significant arteries and thus caused no spatter. Teresa was fully alive and struggling after the stab and slash, according to Brendan, had to be tied by legs and arms to her sides, and she was still able to beg for her life while being carried out of the trailer by both of them. Brendan said they later burned her clothes and the sheets and blankets to get rid of the blood evidence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 13:20
|
|
|
It's a sign of how dishonest the documentary makers were willing to be that they showed the defense attorney making a big stink about the puncture hole in the top of the blood vial without providing context for why that hole was there. People who work with blood every day don't want open vials, they want blood traveling from sealed tube to sealed tube to sealed tube, and they don't want to be popping open vials so the blood can spatter--they want to add or remove chemicals (like EDTA to keep it from coagulating) via a syringe through the top of the vial. Also, here's more Brendan, talking with his mom and admitting he and Steven did bad stuff together that night: https://www.dropbox.com/s/lr7iif6ca3xp5sa/Transcript%20-%20May%2013%2C%202006%20%28Dassey%20to%20Mother%29.pdf?dl=0 Mom: "What all happened, what are you talking about?" Brendan: "What me and Steven did that day." Mom: "Then Steven did do it." Brendan: "Ya." Mom, crying: "Why didn't you tell me about this?" ... Mom: "Did he make you do this?" B: "Ya." Mom: "Then why didn't you tell them that? That Steven made you do it..." B: "Ya, I told them that..." MrBuddyLee fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 13:40
|
|
|
Do you even understand the concepts of sensitivity and specificity in regards to a scientific test mate Or the concept that one of the reasons Controls exist is so that if something goes wrong with the control it's indicative of a flawed experimental approach that invalidates all other results in that experimental set
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
Daius posted:Do you even understand the concepts of sensitivity and specificity in regards to a scientific test mate If there was enough sample to run a second test, they should have. There wasn't. It's shoddy lab work, but you can potentially still make an argument from it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
MrBuddyLee posted:Yeah, my degrees are in Chemistry, Biology and Immunology. I did years of research. What I'm trying to say is that even though the control was screwed up, you can still use your judgment to determine that Teresa's DNA was present in the primary sample. Then you can argue to a jury about what the possible sources of contamination were, and try to make the case that there was no reasonable source of Teresa DNA in the lab to cause contamination, and let the jury decide. I'm a vaccinologist and I can say that if you're running experiments with hosed controls and saying "Well that doesn't reflect on the rest of my data, we can still use this" instead of scrapping it and redoing it until you get a reliable data set then congratulations, you're poo poo at your job If it's not passable in the presentation of data in a lab setting then there is no fathomable reason why we should treat it as admissable in a court of law
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
MrBuddyLee posted:The hole in the top was supposedly from the initial blood draw of Avery. See 1:25 Some jurors where I live recently accepted a Saudi Millionaire's rape defence that he tripped and fell into her. That someone is able to convince 12 idiots of something isn't compelling. Reminder there was a huge scandal with dubious FBI lab results just recently, it's not conspiracy theory stuff to be suspicious of their results, it's just common sense. Also the lawyers established that the lab people don't fill their blood vials by injecting a syringe into the top. And the seal was broken!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
Pinky Artichoke posted:Yah der hey. I'm from Wisconsin, but some of the accents in this series drive me bonkers. Especially the phone conversations. Hello? Yah. Yah... (begin talking)
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
Retail Slave posted:I'm from Wisconsin, but some of the accents in this series drive me bonkers. Especially the phone conversations. Don't be strange. I'm not bein strange!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
MrBuddyLee posted:Yeah, my degrees are in Chemistry, Biology and Immunology. Well I'm literally Steven Avery and I'm positive I didn't kill that girl!
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 15:06
|
|
|
kaworu posted:Sort of amazing how all the anti-Avery people are usually from Wisconsin or close by and experienced all the media coverage, and thus already had their minds made up about the case. You're hitting the nail right on the head. My dad is from Milwaukee and is sick of hearing about this story after it was covered for years and years in the Wisconsin media. I don't think he feels either way about Avery, but he also dropped some bullshit about how the documentary is "dramatized" and isn't the full truth. Which is almost certainly authoritarian appeal based on the nonsense Kratz is circulating to discredit it, since my dad hasn't watched Making a Murderer yet. So yeah, it's basically impossible for Wisconsin people who followed this case previously to walk in with an open mind. Besides, even if people are contending that the filmmakers aren't objective (no poo poo, and neither are Super Size Me, Murder on a Sunday Morning, Citizenfour, Inside Job, etc), it's blatantly obvious that evidence was planted, the investigation was continuously tampered with, and that the prosecution had a hilariously motivated grudge against the Avery family. The underlying purpose of the documentary isn't to prove Avery's innocence anyways. Honestly, it's largely irrelevant and completely missing the forest for the trees to debate whether or not he killed Halbach. It almost doesn't matter. The creators wanted to depict how the Manitowoc County criminal justice institution (and the broken justice system itself) "made a murderer" through their disgusting actions, and advancing how this increasingly happens to socioeconomically disadvantaged defendants all across the United States. Cough Drop The Beat fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
it doesn't make sense to flawlessly clean the garage for DNA but leave a pile of bones 30 feet from the house. It's ridiculous. Clearly Avery should have been found not guilty due to reasonable doubt although I do believe he was likely innocent. His phone call to Jodi the night of the murder just does not sound like someone who just killed someone. Seeing that all the evidence was obviously planted there's not much else to go on. If someone was stalking her they may have timed the killing with her meeting avery.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
MrBuddyLee posted:The level of detail of much of Brendan's two interviews, in totality, is way too in sync with dozens of pieces of physical evidence to be completely bullshit. Just because some details don't match up or some of the techniques were leading doesn't mean you disregard the entirety of both interviews. Brendan brought up rape first. I believe he brought up stabbing first. I believe he brought up bleaching the garage with Avery first and getting bleach on his pants, and the details about where the RAV4 was moved, and where the body was moved various times. The kid was too accurate, and wasn't led into EVERY fact. The really annoying thing is someone could easily think Steven Avery killed Teresa without being ... like you. It's totally believable that he did it. But the stuff you're saying is trash.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
Is there magic blood bleach that will allow you to scrub up an obscene amount of blood flawlessly while also leaving all other blemishes in tact? I love the "Well Dassey's confession fits the rest of the case" theorists considering the confession was piece-by-piece solicited by the detectives specifically for that purpose. Truther Vandross fucked around with this message at 17:06 on Jan 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
Retail Slave posted:I'm from Wisconsin, but some of the accents in this series drive me bonkers. Especially the phone conversations. THA TITTY THRILLER posted:Don't be strange. You two will either love, or hate, this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRguRPcGMQA
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
CarlosTheDwarf posted:it doesn't make sense to flawlessly clean the garage for DNA but leave a pile of bones 30 feet from the house. It's ridiculous. The only time I remember the doc hinting that she had a stalker was her coworker telling the story of her receiving a call and ignoring it, but seeming upset by it. I forget when they showed this, but the implication was that there was an unknown other that had a motive to kill her. The filmmakers then conveniently leaving out the evidence of Avery calling her repeatedly before Oct 31 is one of the worst instances of their bias, in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2016 17:17
|
|
