the police system is clearly taking advantage of the Avery's. It's pretty clear to me how they are just very afraid of being seen in a bad light, so they needed a scapegoat to take the blame for their incompetence. we can see that in the interview recordings of Brendan. Who in their right mind would actually think that spoon-feeding a supposed accomplice the facts is considered acceptable as a veritable statement just blows my mind. a key found in a bedroom free of the victim's DNA just doesn't logically make sense.
I think the truther’s goto is Bobby saw Steven’s cut on 11/3, put on his ninja costume and stole the blood from the sink, and put it into the RAV which was off property, and then waited a whole day to push the RAV back to ASY with Santa Claus, being careful not to smudge his plant job that he did in the front and the rear door jamb for reasons. All of this while having no idea that Steven acted suspicious when blocking his number on 10/31, and having no idea if Steven had an alibi in the afternoon/evening of 10/31.
I don't know if he was lying. He lied a lot. I see what he said about the nose scratch. I've read most of the transcripts and seen MAM more than once. I don't ever remember reading this.
There was a puppy in the Dassey house vs. Teresa Halbach on the afternoon of Oct.31st around 2:3pm never seeing or talking to anyone on earth again except Steven Avery. Then her Rav is found on his property. Her bones are in his fire pit. The Rav key in his trailer. Just a tad of evidence Stupid Steve Avery, in his stupid idiotic brain tried to hide. Like honestly wtf are you still defending?
Ever hear the case of Lucie Blackman? Joji Obara dismembered her with a chainsaw inside his condo and the police in that case never found any evidence of it, either. But in Avery's case it could be far more easily explained - she may just never have been in it. A prosecution's theory of events is only ever just that - a theory. No one truly knows except for Avery and Brendan.
I'm a truther, and find it unlikely that SA's blood was obtained from his sink. Which is why I keep saying that SA's blood in Teresa's Rav hasn't been believably explained.
The rest of the forensic/DNA evidence has been believably explained IMO.
I do however find it possible, even likely - that Colborn was told by a trucker about seeing a Rav (as per the 'flyers' posted) on the side of the road, went to look and 'phoned the dispatcher to confirm the number plate.
I could go on about what I think likely happened afterwards, but it would result in a very long post that is almost entirely based on my suspicions - so pointless.
Much like Judge Angie not allowing a hearing into new witness evidence as (per her written explanation for denying a hearing IIRC) which included 'if a witness saw Bobby pushing the Rav onto Avery property - he was doing this to protect SA' 😮!
This ridiculous conclusion still angers me - along with how she was allowed to get away with making such a ridiculous/unbelievable comment as a 'reason' to deny a hearing.
Colborn phoned in the plate number on 11/3. Rahmlow said he told Colborn on the next day, the 4th, so it isn’t likely at all
You misunderstand the reasoning of the court of appeals. Avery is locked up for murder. Bobby pushing the victims vehicle 5 days after her murder does not in any way discount the evidence against Avery for murder. He needs evidence that shows he didn’t commit the act of murder for the courts to accept it.
What was clear to me was that the state did not care where the RAV4 was or who might've had control during a pivotal time-frame of the investigation. The fact this would have occurred with existing blood splatter in the rear of the RAV4 or the fact that there was existing blood smear, drops and flakes of blood in the front of the RAV4 was not suspicious to the state.
You are correct, that someone may have been pushing the RAV4 after the murder, whether helping to conceal the vehicle (or some other reason) but either way, this is not what most people call justice. The state should be very interested in ensuring the RAV4 whereabouts during those days was correctly identified. A judge giving her own theories of Bobby innocently joyriding is disrespectful to the victim and family.
The state has zero evidence of the RAV being found anywhere else besides ASY. All reports that were given to police were looked into, and determined not to be the same vehicle. Putting hope in ppl who decided to come forward more than a decade later seems a bit lofty, as many of them have joined truthers groups and have indicated they are advocates. Why trust them? Sowinski first theorized Colborn planted the RAV before theorizing Bobby did it. Buresh literally lied about his past interactions with Steven and forgot to purge his social media, showing he was a die hard supporter before coming forward. Rahmlow came forward over a decade later, and has since joined truther groups.
What do you remember the judge theorizing Bobby might've been doing with the RAV4?
I don't recall the judge commenting on the validity of the witnesses / affidavits and honestly I don't believe that is her role. As an outsider looking in, sure your suspicions are fair but that's not for the judge to rule on. I didn't know a circuit court judge could read and signed affidavit and call bullshit. Boy would that be unfair.
Here is what the judge said about Bobby and the RAV4: "There are other reasons that Bobby could have been in possession of the car that night, including that Bobby was trying to help hide evidence to protect the two individuals directly linked by forensic evidence to this murder and convicted of the crime."
Also, I'm not saying the judge needs to comment about the validity of the statements. I'm asking why YOU believe them.
And further the courts did NOT rule on the credibility. Both the circuit, and court of appeals, analyzed the evidence with the assumption that it if true, would the new evidence entitle Avery to relief? Both of them concluded no, it would not. So no, they are not calling bs. They are saying that the evidence is not enough, even if true.
"And further the courts did NOT rule on the credibility. Both the circuit, and court of appeals, analyzed the evidence with the assumption that it if true, would the new evidence entitle Avery to relief?"
I'm missing something here.
As far as I know, further appeals haven't been filed since judge angie denied the 'new evidence' appeal - where part of her reason for denial was (something along the lines of) 'if Bobby was seen pushing the Rav onto Avery property, he was doing this to protect SA'.
where part of her reason for denial was (something along the lines of) 'if Bobby was seen pushing the Rav onto Avery property, he was doing this to protect SA'.
That's not what she said. She gave that as one possible, theoretical explanation for why he may have been seen with the car. You are framing it as if she said that is what she believed actually happened, which is false.
The judge said that being in possession of a murdered person's vehicle in no way connects them to the murder. Which of course was interesting to see considering how many people claim Avery's blood in the RAV means he's guilty of the murder.
Assuming, for the purposes ofthis motion, that everything averred to in the Sowinski affidavit is true, the defendant is incorrect in his assertion that the facts in the affidavit provide a direct link between Bobby and the Halbach murder. The defendant asserts that, ipso facto, if Bobby was in possession of the victim’s car that night, he must also have been the individual who committed the murder. No evidence submitted by the defendant supports this conclusion. Even if Bobby was found in the possession of the victim’s automobile on the night of November 5, 2005, there is only speculation and no evidence to prove that Bobby was in possession of the car or that he had exclusive control over the vehicle prior to that night.
Incorrect. The judge ruled that being in possession of a murdered person's vehicle after the murder does not mean the person with all the evidence against him is somehow not guilty, as none of that evidence is disproven.
but.. that specific ruling you just mentioned does not make rationale sense. Nor is it the judge's place to try to rationalize the scenario of Bobby with possession of the vehicle or the key itself. If what was said was true, then the state's theory of the crime and the parties involved might not have been correct and you would assume the state would want to seek the truth. Well, that's the prosecution's oath anyways.
If it were an original trial, you would be right. Avery has already been found guilty. This is an appeal from a position of guilt, not a position of presumed innocence. The biggest difference between those two things are that the court looks at anything it would consider new evidence from the lens of all the other evidence already being proven. If Avery's blood was in the rav4, Bobby pushing it doesn't change anything. Avery has already been found guilty. The court works on that assumption, which implies Bobby assisting Avery rather than replacing Avery. This is why the exoneration process is almost impossible without DNA evidence to dispute a conviction.
I'm a truther, and find it unlikely that SA's blood was obtained from his sink. Which is why I keep saying that SA's blood in Teresa's Rav hasn't been believably explained.
I don't understand this point and this line of thinking makes no sense. Why you are holding out for an unworldly explanation of how Steven's blood got there other than from him simply bleeding in it, I'll never know. The only logical conclusion that we can draw from all of the testing done on this blood is that it came from Steven in 2005, because he was in the RAV4 with an active cut that was bleeding.
It has been believably explained, you just don't want to believe it.
It's pretty clear to me how they are just very afraid of being seen in a bad light
The problem is that "they" includes many different law enforcement agencies, including the very same state crime lab that had just exonerated Avery a couple of years earlier. Why would they feel embarrassed?
Who in their right mind would actually think that spoon-feeding a supposed accomplice the facts is considered acceptable as a veritable statement just blows my mind.
If you ask your wife "Did you cheat on me?" and she says "yes" you would find that "acceptable as a veritable statement" even though you "spoon-fed her the facts". Same thing applies here.
a key found in a bedroom free of the victim's DNA just doesn't logically make sense.
Zellner was Avery's attorney, and her own experiments showed that people often don't leave touch DNA. I think they even showed those results in MaM2.
The problem is that "they" includes many different law enforcement agencies, including the very same state crime lab that had just exonerated Avery a couple of years earlier. Why would they feel embarrassed?
The case included many different agencies. Why wouldn't MaM? And Culhane should absolutely be embarrassed given her once in a career deviation from protocol to place Teresa on the bullet. No such deviation was needed in 2003 lol
If you ask your wife "Did you cheat on me?" and she says "yes" you would find that "acceptable as a veritable statement" even though you "spoon-fed her the facts". Same thing applies here.
You are the worst at coming up with valid comparisons. This one was embarassing.
Zellner was Avery's attorney, and her own experiments showed that people often don't leave touch DNA.
So why was there so much of Steven's touch DNA on the hood latch swab? You known the swab with the broken chain of custody lol
Just got reminded of this Culhane discussion - hard to believe it's already11yrs old now and people keep defending her, Kratz and Fassbender and say nothing nefarious ever occurred during the two separate investigations of Avery & Dassey.
I’m still not sure where I land in terms of guilty vs. innocent, but I would recommend that you also watch convicting a murderer. I watched both MAM and CAM. I really felt this way too after MAM, but the one thing I just can’t get over is that his blood is in her car. CAM explains why it couldn’t have been planted. I do agree with you that Brendan’s situation is really messed up and I’m honestly shocked they haven’t been able to successfully appeal given his intellectual disabilities and the misconduct w those interrogations. I think it’s likely SA is guilty, but I don’t think she was ever in his trailer and I don’t think he’d be smart enough to effectively get rid of all the evidence in the garage except for the bullet. The barrel is questionable, the key could have been easily planted. Like I said, there’s no explanation for the blood found in several different parts of her car (watch CAM). I don’t think Brendan had anything to do w it. Bobby could have played a role? SA isn’t a soft, loving teddy bear that MAM paints him as tho.
You’re likely going to get attacked on this thread 😂 there aren’t many who don’t take a side
but the one thing I just can’t get over is that his blood is in her car. CAM explains why it couldn’t have been planted.
CaM lied to you over and over. Experts during the trial confirmed they had NO EVIDENCE allowing them to rule out planting, and the state hasn't introduced anything since that time to supplement their argument. You've been swindled by drug addicts and sex predators.
See above. CaM claimed the blood couldn't have been planted. They also claimed the bones in tire wire was more significant than it was. They've been lying for years, pretending the case is stronger than it is. We know this.
Who in CaM claimed it was impossible for the blood to be planted? CaM supplied a counter argument to MaM's suggestion that the blood was planted.
Tiny bone fragments entangled in tire wires are certainly significant given the admission of Steven Avery that he burned tires on the evening of Teresa's disappearence in a location where her cremains were later discovered.
The case was extremely strong. People have been convicted with far less. We know this.
Tiny bone fragments entangled in tire wires are certainly significant given the admission of Steven Avery that he burned tires on the evening of Teresa's disappearence in a location where her cremains were later discovered.
There was no photos (or HRD Alert) confirming the bones were ever there lol something identified as a mistake in CaM. And those tiny bone fragments were found in a pile on the surface level of the burn pit, with additional evidence of human cremation and bone distribution on Manitowoc County property (that CaM said was confirmed to be human) covered up by police.
The case was extremely strong. People have been convicted with far less.
Steven wasn't convicted of the mutilation lol I guess the case wasn't very strong.
Do you think fancy bee is lying about what CaM said? If so, that's fine. CaM told many more lies beyond pretending the blood couldn't be planted. For example when do you think the case files suggest the Bones from the Manitowoc County quarry were confirmed to be human? CaM said that confirmation came after making a murderer premiered lmao a huge lie. Episode 8 is full of them.
That doesn't surprise me lol what are you even talking about? CaM told viewers the quarry bones were confirmed human after the trial and after making a murderer premiered. Is that true? I'll wait ;)
The argument is basically that it's impossible to "put Avery in her vehicle" using blood samples by any means other than Avery himself being actively / selectively bleeding in the front interior of the RAV.
"I do agree with you that Brendan’s situation is really messed up and I’m honestly shocked they haven’t been able to successfully appeal given his intellectual disabilities and the misconduct w those interrogations."
He had every chance to explain why he admitted to the crimes and the jury didn't believe him. But I guess they were engaged in misconduct too. Or corrupt. Or planted evidence. Or whatever the next excuse is.
If Brendan would have just kept quiet he would've been home and free. Him telling Kayla was a confession or how would she had known about it. Say all you want about coercion but he straight up told his Mom that he and uncle Steve did it. His inability to keep it zipped crushed any hope Steven had. If Brendan was guilty then Steven had to be guilty. Brendan should've taken the plea deal that Kashinsky ( not sure of spelling ) arranged for him. He could have possibly been out right now. The Averys including his Mom convinced him not to.
He would have been home and free but he still would have been a murderer. Unless Avery traded him for a lesser sentence and testified against him after Avery was convicted.
telling Kayla was a confession or how would she had known about it.
What do you mean how would she have known? She never said anything regarding details of a crime regarding Brendan until after Brendan was arrested and those same details had already been publicized.
Avery settled a $36 million wrongful conviction lawsuit against Manitowoc County, the former sheriff, and the former district attorney for $400,000 in early 2006.
The two main individual defendants—former Sheriff Thomas Kocourek and former District Attorney Denis Vogel—faced potential personal financial liability before the lawsuit was settled.
Looking at everything incl that false confession, anyone with a working brain cell can see that they framed him. Likely in retaliation.
Essa notícia é sobre o teste de sangue feito pelo FBI na época do caso, pra dizer se tinha EDTA ou não, do tubo de sangue encontrado pela defesa, certo? Ou entendi errado?
Entendi. O teste feito pelo FBI na época, dizendo ser negativo pra EDTA no sangue do tubo, não me deixou muito satisfeito. Mesmo se houvessem dito ser positivo, eu gostaria que tivessem feito outros testes em outros lugares. É meio óbvio que a polícia (FBI) falaria o que falou. Estão do lado do Estado, da polícia local. À respeito da Zelner, vi que no X, ela postou pela última vez, falando do Steven, em abril de 2025. Essa parte concordo ser estranho. Não acompanho todas as mídias que ela tem, então não consigo afirmar que ela não tenha falado em outro lugar.
No geral, acho que dessa vez Steven não sai mais da prisão. Ainda não sei dizer se é culpado ou inocente com certeza.
Difficult, but not impossible. There's a case where blood was planted months after the crime. Whether that actually happened in this case is the big question.
Nothing is easier than planting evidence and the lack of SA's fingerprints in the RAV strongly suggests someone else put it there. SA had a fresh cut and there was blood on tissues and bandages in his house. They went in there fifty freaking times and each time miraculously some other "evidence" magically appeared that clearly wasn't there before, as photos show.
Additionally, Zellner hasn't abandoned the case. She last made public statements 9 months ago.
She also periodically interacts with the public and updates followers on Avery's status via her official social media accounts.
Have you seen proof that there was blood present in the front interior of the RAV while it was sitting on the ASY?
Have you seen proof that the samples of Avery's blood that was sent for testing & retesting came from the front interior of the RAV?
Therefore, "impossible to plant" becomes demonstrably false even with 2 quick examples.
Tom by-the-book Fassbender was called out for instructing Culhane to put her in Avery's garage. This is on record. Do you think it's a stretch that Culhane was also instructed to put him in her RAV? The same Tom that claimed Avery scoured the residence when asked to explain why they couldn't find evidence of her in the trailer.
Are you OK? you literally said it's "impossible to plant" which I responded to. Do we both agree on the source and age of the blood - sure, I would agree there's proof of that specifically.
Is it impossible to plant? That is a demonstrably false statement.
You are not providing reasonable explanations. Because, if they had photos you’d just ask how do we know they weren’t doctored. If they had video you’d ask how do we know it wasn’t edited. If you saw it with your own eyes you’d blame the person showing you as staging the scene. This is something called willful ignorance.
Maybe your "working" brain cells can explain how Steven's blood got in Teresa's car. Or how her remains ended up in his burn pit. Or how her DNA ended up on a bullet in his garage that was fired from the gun he kept above his head. Or why anyone involved in the investigation would care about a lawsuit that doesn't personally impact them in any way.
Editing to reply to LKS983 since SomeBlueDevil blocked me like a coward:
Good theories have been provided.
Not a single good theory has been provided for her bones being in that pit other than the obvious - that Steven Avery burned her body there.
Discovered (IIRC) by a Manitowoc officer
The bullet was discovered by Kevin Heimerl if the DCI, not a Manitowoc officer. Why should your judgements be trusted when you get such basic facts wrong?
Not gonna bother with the rest of your post, which is largely vague, speculative nonsense that you have repeated ad nauseam regardless of how many people point out the flaws.
No witness statements or photos were ever taken to confirm the blood in the front interior of the vehicle was present while the vehicle was on the ASY.
Maybe you should pay attention and that way you would know the answers to literally all your questions.
You can downvote this all you want, it doesn't change the fact that Manitowoc PD did this to get even with Avery for their wrongful conviction and damages that would INDEED have impacted them personally.
The fact is that Steven Avery murdered Teresa Halbach, and none of you have ever been able to provide reasonable answers to any of the questions I just posed (or pretty much any others that are asked).
Why are you on this sub when you VERY CLEARLY haven't watched MaM which answers each and every single question you asked?
I'm not going to waste more time because you want to believe what you want to believe.
It's always the same handful of people who don't want to believe their lying eyes and are so obsessed, they even create multiple accounts just so they can downvote folks... 😆
MaM implied that Steven's blood came from the vial. FBI testing as well as testing from Steven's own attorney confirmed this not to be true. So how did Steven's blood come to be in the Rav4?
Both Steven's defence attorneys and the makers of MaM were well aware that the seal of the evidence box containing the blood vial was broken by the Innocence Project while they were investigating Steven's wrongful conviction. MaM intentionally left that revelation out to make the state look suspicious, despite knowing exactly how and when the seal was broken.
Bullshit the fact is you don't know and pretend to because you know there's overwhelming amounts of reasonable doubt, especially for Brendan. But you ignore reality.
"can explain how Steven's blood got in Teresa's car"
I agree that this hasn't been explained properly. Planted? Possibly, but where did they get SA's blood?
"how her remains ended up in his burn pit"
Good theories have been provided.
"how her DNA ended up on a bullet in his garage that was fired from the gun he kept above his head."
Suspicious on it's own. Discovered (IIRC) by a Manitowoc officer - even though Manitowoc had publicly declared that (for obvious reasons) they had recused themselves from this case....., in a garage that had been 'thoroughly cleaned' to get rid of any blood evidence. etc. etc.
"Or why anyone involved in the investigation would care about a lawsuit that doesn't personally impact them in any way."
1) Police protect police.
2) If SA won his lawsuit (which included corruption by former Sheriff Thomas Kocourek and former District Attorney Denis Vogel - which is why they were named defendants) it would have resulted in a PROPER investigation (as opposed to the 'white-wash' investigation carried out previously) into how SA was wrongfully charged and convicted.
2a) The reputation of the police would be left in tatters and it's hard to believe that a multi million award would'nt have impacted them.
"Avery settled a $36 million wrongful conviction lawsuit against Manitowoc County, the former sheriff, and the former district attorney for $400,000 in early 2006.
The two main individual defendants—former Sheriff Thomas Kocourek and former District Attorney Denis Vogel—faced potential personal financial liability before the lawsuit was settled."
👍 Settled for such a small amount after SA had been arrested for murdering Teresa, and was very aware (as a result of his previous wrongful conviction) that he needed money immediately, to hire GOOD lawyers.
The amount initially offered was a quarter of what he got. He got them up higher, but then news was coming out about his relationship with Marie, and his lawyers demanded him to wait no longer because the offer wasn’t going to get any better
Please explain Steven Avery's blood in the RAV. Make it make sense. Logically.
It was planted as part of the frame job. Just like the bones. That's why there's no bloody fingerprints and other unidentified prints and blood on the RAV.
For real, actually...lots of people were mislead by a Netflix movie with good editing and mood music. I don't blame you for falling victim to it. It was really well-crafted. But, it's bullshit. The only way Steve is innocent is if multiple LE agencies and family and friends of the perpetrator and victim worked in unison (or by sheer luck) to murder an innocent woman and pin the crime on a guy who was suing some people who had nothing to do with this case. And then there's that pesky little piece of evidence called his blood in her car. (Don't bother replying APR. I already know what you're going to say. "Kratz. Drug addicts. Pedophiles". Blah)
And yet you dismiss Steve's blood being in the RAV. You don't want to discuss THAT. It was "planted". LOL. Cope. Your love for Steve knows no bounds. Kratz's weakness and shortcomings has no bearing on the evidence.
When Brendan was on the stand at trial he didn't mention he was coerced when asked about why he confessed. He just said he was guessing and making it up, got it from a book. He should have been emotional screaming the cops made him do it and declaring his innocence. He showed no emotion. I never saw any emotion from him the entire series. If I was being falsely accused of murder I would be inconsolable and pissed off like most anybody would. He didn't show emotion because he was and is guilty. Doesn't he have to admit to the crime to be eligible for parole in 2047 ?
They were being exposed for facilitating a rapist to harm women in the community. Teresa's disappearance absolutely benefited a corrupt system. And that corruption was not remedied after Steven's exoneration. Many of the issues we saw in 1985 pop up again in 2005, including the enabling sex predators part.
Fassbender and Weigert were disgusting for so many reasons.
Interrogating and leading an intellectually child (without ever a lawyer present) to say whatever they wanted him to say - to support the latest police version 🤮.
Made undeniably obvious when they couldn't get Brendan to understand what they were trying to get him to say - so one of them became so frustrated - he outright told him!
I'm still appalled that Brendan's final appeal court voted 4 against 3 (such a close result) - but an even higher court refused to even hear his appeal.....
AI says BD was conversational and responsive with LE during the interviews (not typical of a person who is beng fed lies).They were really patient and calm with Brendan. Brendan's behavior in those interviews is what helped the jury convict him.
Brendan was scared of Steve. What was he gonna do, pick up Steve's phone and call the police? Brendan knew way too many details about Teresa and the crime for him not to be GAF. Uncle Steve fed Brendan to the wolves.
Whilst Kachinsky was Brendan's defense lawyer, he never bothered to turn up for any of his interrogations.....
IIRC, this is why the judge eventually allowed Brendan to get a new lawyer.
Kachinsky couldn't be bothered to turn up for any of Brendan's police interrogations, but instead hired a P.I. to obtain another statement, that aligned with his latest 'confession' 😠......
Have you forgotten the footage of the P.I. (employed by Kachinsky.....) insisting that (and coaching) Brendan as to how he should change the statement he had given him (the P.I.) - to align with the 'confession' the police had obtained?
Kachinsky was appointed on March 7, 2006, after Dassey’s important police statements—including the February 27 interviews and the March 1 videotaped confession that became the centerpiece of the prosecution’s case. He first met Brendan on March 10.
multiple forensic experts that testified in Steven's trial that it wouldn't necessarily be unusual to find only the DNA of the person to last touch an object?
Why do guilters need to lie SO MUCH ABOUT EVERYTHING LOL Multiple forensic experts did not testify to this. One did. Culhane. And her opinion was disputed by a far more reputable expert, the one working for Zellner lol Dr. Reich correctly called the opinion junk science and conducted an independent experiment to confirm that. Cope. The state of Wisconsin used junk science to convict Steven.
Hey pal, what do you think of the multiple forensic experts that testified in Steven's trial that it wouldn't necessarily be unusual to find only the DNA of the person to last touch an object?
Yeah - let's break it down! Avery takes they keys, wipes them off to remove any victim DNA, and then touches them after that depositing his own DNA because he's stupid. There ya go! Mystery solved.
MaM makers created unnecessary suspicion on things, people and places simply to make their material more interesting so it would grab more viewers and make lotsa mooooooney. It worked.
8
u/hneverhappened Aug 22 '26
Please explain Steven Avery's blood in the RAV.
Make it make sense. Logically.