Making a Murderer Documentary on Netflix

neil999 · March 9, 2016

Efcjake said:
I don't know what to make of this. It has come from her twitter account, which if any of you have taken a look at is absolutely full of nonsense that I can make head nor tail out of. This is the clearest statement she's probably posted in over a month of being on the case.

If they can prove that Teresa left the Avery property by way of her cellphone being located/pinged by a cell network tower elsewhere in the state then it raises a lot of doubts about how the prosecution argued the supposed murder happened. If Zellner can prove that she pinged a tower somewhere else in the state, in another county, while Steven was on his landline making a call to Jodi or someone else then she will have produced enough questioning of the state's evidence to hopefully cause a retrial.

Reddit has found out that there was a mad rush on to declare Teresa dead on Nov 5th, 2005, even before the bones were properly identified as human remains. The theory is that the paperwork was rushed to allow them to get a search warrant and to arrest Avery before the old Sherriff and Defense Attorney from his 1985 case were scheduled to give their depositions on Nov 10th, 2005 for Avery's civil suit against Mantiwoc county.

imagine he is inncoent, the pay-out he will get lol

Efcjake · March 9, 2016

neil999 said:
imagine he is inncoent, the pay-out he will get lol

I'd hope he bankrupts the state.

Not only did they do a frame-up on him once, they did it a second time to prevent him from pursuing his justified legal recourse against them.

As Strang says, "Part of me hopes he is guilty because the alternative is much scarier in my eyes"

evertoniandy · March 9, 2016

neil999 said:
imagine he is inncoent, the pay-out he will get lol

They'd have him killed and make it look like suicide, the bad teds.

Jags..class · March 9, 2016

Efcjake said:
Some of it is great.

There is a lot that I don't like about it though. Some people are convinced of his innocence and attack people who don't share their view of it. There is some good investigative work by the amateur sleuths but it is surrounded by baseless speculation from others claiming they have "proof" of something or another. There is also a lot of personal attacks on people involved, not just against the cops or Kratz but against the Halbach family and the ex-boyfriend to the point of some serious libel.

Everybody in here is on a much more even keel (unless we're talking about Martinez).

Yes there alot of good stuff on it

The Cowboy · March 9, 2016

I can't imagine they'll release him unless they either a) find the real killer or b) the new evidence provides him a cast-iron-coated-in-diamond-dust alibi that means it 100% couldn't be him. Cos unless they can fulfill either of those, there's still the very real chance that he did do it and they're releasing a murderer.

Efcjake · March 9, 2016

The Cowboy said:
I can't imagine they'll release him unless they either a) find the real killer or b) the new evidence provides him a cast-iron-coated-in-diamond-dust alibi that means it 100% couldn't be him. Cos unless they can fulfill either of those, there's still the very real chance that he did do it and they're releasing a murderer.

It has to be entirely new evidence.

It won't be anything like when he got off from 1985 case.

He won't get let out unless they can without a doubt prove that somebody else did it, just like how they had DNA evidence proving Gregory Allen did it the first time.

If they find new evidence that calls evidence that was used to secure his conviction, like this cell tower business, that could secure him a re-trial. If he gets a re-trial then the prosecution has to come up with a way to address the new evidence brought to the court and choose whether or not, with the new evidence considered, to continue to attempt to prosecute him again.

RomanReigns · March 9, 2016

if the glove dont fit you must acquit

Efcjake · March 9, 2016

https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/49p9j2/how_bz_could_prove_falsified_evidence_and/

This one has just come up.

Basically there is some confusion over the chain of custody of Teresa's bones that were used to identify them as being Teresa's bones.

There were questions raised over this piece of evidence elsewhere recently. Specifically because the bone tissue sample did not return a complete match to Teresa's DNA, they had enough genetic markers that they could determine that the owner of the sample had genetic markers shared by Teresa's family on the mother's side and determined that was good enough to assert that the bones were Teresa's body. If they didn't get that DNA match then there was no proof those bones were Teresa.

What the reddit post there is looking at are two pieces of testimony about the bones used for DNA analysis.

There appears to be a disagreement concerning the chain of custody of those bones. On one hand, we have the coroner who received the bones on November 10th for analysis and documentation saying that she sent them off directly to the FBI when she was finished with them where they were received by the FBI on November 16th.

Then you have Sherry Culhane, the State crime analyst, saying she was in possession of the bones on November 11th when she cut a sample that was tested and determined to be that partial-DNA match I mentioned earlier. She produces her DNA report on November 12th when, according, to the coroner the bones were being stored at the morgue until they were "directly transferred" to the FBI.

So someone is incorrect in their timeline here and it brings the bones into question as to their validity as evidence.

RomanReigns · March 9, 2016

Efcjake said:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MakingaMurderer/comments/49p9j2/how_bz_could_prove_falsified_evidence_and/

This one has just come up.

Basically there is some confusion over the chain of custody of Teresa's bones that were used to identify them as being Teresa's bones.

There were questions raised over this piece of evidence elsewhere recently. Specifically because the bone tissue sample did not return a complete match to Teresa's DNA, they had enough genetic markers that they could determine that the owner of the sample had genetic markers shared by Teresa's family on the mother's side and determined that was good enough to assert that the bones were Teresa's body. If they didn't get that DNA match then there was no proof those bones were Teresa.

What the reddit post there is looking at are two pieces of testimony about the bones used for DNA analysis.

There appears to be a disagreement concerning the chain of custody of those bones. On one hand, we have the coroner who received the bones on November 10th for analysis and documentation saying that she sent them off directly to the FBI when she was finished with them where they were received by the FBI on November 16th.

Then you have Sherry Culhane, the State crime analyst, saying she was in possession of the bones on November 11th when she cut a sample that was tested and determined to be that partial-DNA match I mentioned earlier. She produces her DNA report on November 12th when, according, to the coroner the bones were being stored at the morgue until they were "directly transferred" to the FBI.

So someone is incorrect in their timeline here and it brings the bones into question as to their validity as evidence.

your honor, motion to strike out the prosecution's evidence in relation to the bones found on Avery's property, the validity of the evidence is questionable.

motion granted.