Yeah, I read up on this before watching it and honestly I can see where people might think he was being framed, but to be honest why would one police group focus on just one single man just to ensure he was gotten for murder just because he walked after a wrongful conviction on that rape charge? I mean it doesn't make sense why they would focus all that time and effort just to frame him. Idk, I know innocent people are railroaded all the time but most of those don't have dna evidence, why would they carry around his dna just to frame him? It really doesn't make full sense to me why they would do that.

I've not watched the whole series yet, but if he was about to sue the county/police force of a small county for $36 in damages, not to mention the loss of respect/reputation for several prominent individuals, the county court and police force as a whole. I can certainly imagine them wanting to discredit him and his family.

Believe me, I have thought of that too, but they have insurance in place that pays this, not them, so it's not like it would truly impact them, other then maybe raising their rates. EVERY county in this country has wrongfully accused someone at some point and that person has been released, sued for time in prison, won and moved on, never to be bothered by the police again so again I really don't get why this one police force would put that much time and effort, however as i said, I do see where they can and do think that they did in fact frame him for this, so if this is true, I do hope they are brought to light and those responsible are charged for it, I just don't truly think this is the case but they did put together a compelling show that's for sure.

We just watched episode...7 I believe and the set up is perfect. The defense team points out how everyone thinks it would be impossible for a frame job, that too many people would be in on it etc. etc. however the truth actually leans quite a bit in the defense's favor

1) There have been numerous instances of widespread corruption in law enforcements, and really throughout any organization. Basically if the people at the top are "in on it", especially if they did the same thing while they were rising through the ranks then the influence and pressure is from the top down. "Bad" cops are rewarded while "good" cops are pressured or drummed out of the system. If you read about corruption in law enforcement agencies there are usually several attempts at whisetleblowing by "good" officers where the rest of the department just comes down and crushes them.

2) The defense makes an excellent case that it doesn't require the whole department, just one or maybe two individuals. For every single major piece of evidence, Lenk was heavily involved. He handled Avery's blood in the first place, he found the key, he was at the site of the RAV4 for either 8+ hours or 4+ hours (depending on which testimony you believe) AND he was on site when they found the bullet. Colburn (sp?) was there for the key, the bullet, and also the mysterious RAV4 license plate read that came in 2 days before the car was found. If Lenk was crooked he could easily have planted the majority of the evidence with very little effort given nobody was really watching him despite the obvious conflict of interest.

3) The Insurance Companies were not going to pay for the 36 million. It was mentioned in episode 1 or 2 that because of the nature of the misconduct the county was going to be on the hook for it.

4) Pretty much the entire sheriff's department thought Avery was guilty of the first crime even after he was released because of DNA. In Episode 1 and 2 they hit that especially how when during depositions they ask them "Is Avery innocent?" and the deputies are all "That is one opinion..."

It is easy to see their motivations if they think that a guilty rapist is about to walk away with a 36 million payday at the expense of "good honest officers". This time they want to make sure his crimes 'stick' and he doesn't get out on a technicality.

5) The point of the series isn't really whether Avery is guilty or not, but to show how fragile the concept of "reasonable doubt" really is. Sure he could have done it but the prosecution put forward just a god awful case that was full of holes and unprofessional conduct. Innocent until proven guilty, guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and there is a LOT of doubt cast in that case, especially considering the police investigate NO OTHER suspects. There are at least 4 members of the Avery clan with a strong history of sexual assault, there is the fact that the ex-boyfriend deleted voicemails from her phone...none of them were investigated or even asked for a statement beyond a witness statement.

6) Forget Avery, look at Brendan Dassey and what the system did to an obviously mentally deficient youth. THAT is the real crime they expose...

The main problem is how do they explain away the evidence of the bullet found in the woman's body matching Avery's gun. I really doubt that police stole his gun to kill a woman just to frame him for murder....

Now Dassey, yes I agree he should go free, he's obviously got issues and I don't get why he would say he helped when he clearly didn't, but still. Ballistics were matched to Avery's gun.

watched all of them over the last few days with my son, way too cool of a show, if you haven't finished it, I won't spoiler anything, but I know..... i was...... well, never mind, watch it to fruition.

There wasn't a bullet in the body (such as it was), but a fragment of one was found in his garage under something with her blood on it (many months later).  At one point, the defense talked about there being plenty of spent bullets around the area from shooting at rats, etc., in the scrap yard, so that's a possible theory.  The gun was also in police custody for six months before the bullet was found and, while unlikely, it's possible that someone might have gotten access to it, etc.  The forensics lab had to fire it at least once to do the ballistics.

The thing is, he could be guilty and be framed at the same time.  During the defense's closing statements, he said a lot about how the cops didn't think they were framing an innocent man.  They at least thought they were making it easier to convict the guilty person.

My personal opinion is that he didn't get a fair trial... and that's as far as I'm willing to go.  He might well be guilty.  He might well be innocent.  The documentary is too biased to really use it to judge.

In reply to swordchucks (msg # 11):

I agree with your assessment, the trial was neither fair nor impartial. the DA put the story out on tv months before the jury was selected, he loaded the deck so to speak with a judgment of guilt before ever heading to trial.

It happens all the time. It's essentially no different then hypnosis if you have the right subject. Poor Brendan was interrogated 4 times for probably 4-6 hours each session. He had no reason to think the police were working against his best interests, he had no legal advice or parental oversight and most importantly, he had no idea what would happen when he said those things.

After he "confessed" to rape, torture, and killing he then asked if he could go back to school because he had an exam. Later on a call from prison he was asking if he could get out by that weekend because Wrestlemania was out.

He had no idea what he was saying and between lack of intelligence, trust in authority, and sheer exhaustion with everyone constantly saying "TELL THE TRUTH! THAT'S NOT THE TRUTH!" he just got into this mindset of saying whatever he thought they wanted him to hear. Constant repetition is a staple of a form of hypnosis.

What sickened me is that the cops had to know what they were doing to the poor boy but they were far more concerned in getting dirt on Steve then to actually care that Brendan was an MR teenager...

Lotta MR's on death row.

Some other facts to keep in mind:

Of death row inmates cleared through DNA, 1 in 4 either had a confession or statement used against them during their conviction. Of those many were told to confess as per a plea deal or it is believed the police "extracted" a confession from them. 25% of innocent prisoners. What happened to Brendan was so far from "unique" that it scares me.

Thank god Wisconsin didn't have death penalty or Avery and Dassey might not even have the option of a retrial anymore!

Okay...did you not see where I said I agreed that Dassey needed to be released? Because I definitely did say Dassey did as he'd been taken advantage of. But it's not just based on his nephews word that he was convicted, the bullet, the blood, the dna, all of it combined helped too and to me, while I can see while they think it was possible, I don't see why they would target him just over a wrongful imprison lawsuit. How many have been wrongfully imprisoned, released and sued for being imprisoned? Too many to count, but how many of those were after their suit was almost to the finishing stages framed for something by said police officers? Seems like only Steve Avery, so why again I ask would they put such effort into this when every other police force out there has dealt with it and moved on? I just don't see them being this vindictive over one man, why would they all put their jobs in jeopardy if caught just to ruin one mans life? Think about it.

You should be glad that you don't, because that means you've not had to deal with the kinds of petty, vindictive folks that would do that.  In the area where I live, the Sheriff's office (why does it always seem to be Sheriffs?) just back-door fired three supervisors who dared to blow the whistle on the illegal dealings of their supervisor (and, considering the whistleblower protection laws, they're probably going to be sued for it).  So, yeah, that kind of thing really does happen.

Also, has been pointed out, because of the nature of the actions involved, the insurance company wasn't going to cover the lawsuit.  When this charge hit, Avery had to settle the wrongful imprisonment lawsuit for pennies on the dollar in order to afford a defense attorney.      There actually is a motive there.

---

EDIT: Also, it probably goes without saying, but in the US, it is NEVER a good idea to talk to the police from a legal standpoint.  Everything you say can only hurt you, never help you.
This message was last edited by the user at 20:03, Tue 12 Jan 2016.

Edit: SPOILERS but if you're reading this far down the thread you deserve it :P

tl;dr: The simple answer is they did it the first time. They had several opportunities to catch the real rapist (Allen) but ignored the City police and in 1994 or 1995 they ignored the detective because they were so gung ho on Steve Avery. Hell they even changed the witness' own testimony to better match steve (her original testimony briefly seen didn't match steve's eye color, mentioned underwear that steve didn't even own etc.)

They had a hard on for the Averys in general (degenerate white trash) and specifically for Steve because he threatened the wife of a deputy. The cousin's best friendw as the deputy that first said "That sounds like Steve!" because she interviewed the victim and from that point onward they had tunnel vision.

Anyway as I said earlier

1) In Episode 1 or 2 they stated that the insurance company backing the county denied coverage due to mishandling of the case. If Steve won 36 million it was coming directly out of the county and directly out of the people found guilty.

2) As I said earlier, even after DNA evidence showed Avery was innocent of first rape case, from the top to the bottom the sheriff's department did not believe he was innocent.


So put yourself in Lenk's shoes. You are possibly on the hook for part of a 36 million dollar lawsuit that would bankrupt you, your job, and your home county and that money could go into the pocket of a rapist who got off on a technicality.

now another woman goes missing and after days of searching even though you *know* he is guilty, it looks like he might get away with it AGAIN.

You also know you've got a vial of his blood on hand, DNA evidence that could be used AGAINST him.

So you move a key from one place to another, plant a little blood here and there. It's not wrong because you know he's guilty and he deserves it, you're just giving justice a little helping hand.

Now add to the fact that is is incredibly rare for police to get caught and charged for planting evidence. All your cop buddies and unions will pull together and fight for you and that's even assuming that everyone else isn't going along with it with a wink and a nudge.

So you have very little risk (it is so rare for police to be investigated that on public forums they brag about how they plant evidence)

http://thefreethoughtproject.c...nce-lying-part-game/


Then you have this guilty man but the evidence isn't enough to put him away
Then this same guilty filthy rapist is also potentially getting 36 million from you, your job, and your county because insurance won't cover it.

Little to no risk, A LOT of gain and potentially a history of getting away with it all adds up to very strong motive and opportunity for planting evidence.

---

I believe he is innocent, I think it was most likely one of the known sexual offenders that lived on either side of him, you know the guys that only alibid each other while going hunting or what not. I think she was definitely murdered somewhere else, burned somewhere else, and her body was dumped in Steve's pit after the bonfire because the guys knew the cops were out to get Steve.

(Remember that Brendan Dassey's ORIGINAL testimony basically blows apart Steve's ability to murder and burn her).

I think the RAV4 was found someplace else (Nov 3. by Colburn) I think it was moved to Avery's property, blood, key and bullet were all quite obviously planted.

Bottom line is that the prosecution had no narrative, no time line, and all their key evidence suffered from "fruit of poisoned tree" because it was all found by people with clear conflict of interest that the public was told weren't going to be present. Plenty of reasonable doubt because of how cops mishandled the case from start to finish (and also don't understand what 'conflict of interest' means).

What makes me furious is that there is a very good chance that they could have solved this crime, that they could have found the real murder site, found the real culprit (or definitive proof that Steve was guilty) but they pissed away all their time focusing on Steve and completely ignored every other lead (i.e. all the other potential guilty parties, mysteriously deleted voicemails etc.).

Just wanted to bring this up, watched a lecture by a law professor and in fact it CANNOT help you.

If the defense tried to bring up anything said by the defendant in testimony the prosecutor would say "hearsay" and judge would sustain.

A witness statement is something but if you're going down to the station for an affadavit or whatever it's called, the signed statement it can ONLY be used against you.

Even if you're telling the 100% complete perfect truth, if they have a witness to contradict you even if that witness is wrong, that can be enough to convict you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

Well....it wasn't a technicality that got him off free, it was DNA from the actual rapist that got him off. As for not having dealings with the police, you are correct, I grew up in Utah where they actually aren't that corrupt, plus Utah shields it's people from a lot of the stuff that happens outside of it's boarders. So for me, I grew up with cops being honest and mostly law abiding. While yes there have been instances of cops being corrupt even in Utah, it was hugely less then anywhere else. However, that being said, as I said, I can see where people think he was framed. I am intelligent enough to pay attention to it but this documentary ONLY favors the defense, I have been looking up things on the prosecution side and a lot of it just doesn't add up to the guy being framed. I'm sorry, I know corruption exists out there and while I don't like it, I really just don't see this guy being framed.

But that's the beauty of all of us having opinions, we are all entitled to them and whether you agree with me or not, I probably won't see this as proof of the cops framing him until I get definitive proof, right now this is all speculation. I have seen the show so pointing out the evidence AGAIN is not going to change my mind. I have seen the evidence that favors the defense, I have also read the evidence that favors the prosecution and to me, the evidence against him is more damming then the evidence the defense brought forth on the frame.

That's exactly the lecture I was thinking about when I said that.  If nothing else, look at all of the stuff the detective interjected into the Dassey thing with his analysis of the interview.  All of that stuff about how he was being evasive and attributing motives to it.  That kind of stuff can sink you in a trial.  It's best not to even try.

Yes, this kind of attitude can make it really hard for criminals to get caught, but law enforcement has brought it upon themselves.  All of the tactics used to get that confession out of Dassey are perfectly legal and widely used.  I actually didn't watch the last couple of episodes because I didn't really want to see what they did to that poor slow kid.


I agree that there's a lot of bias in the documentary, but I also feel like it's clear he didn't get a very fair trial.  Really, that's all I ask.

I too have read about the "missing" evidence but none of it is a game changer to me, especially if you dig deeper.

For awhile the biggest piece was that some additional DNA was found under the hood latch but it later came out that the investigator searching the hood didn't change gloves after handling evidence from the inside so it's entirely plausible that this was an accidental transfer.

The sloppy police work is what kills me. Again, whether he is guilty or innocent the police 100% bungled this investigation. No care was taken to retrieve the bones, areas should have been searched and then cleared, not searched over and over and over again when it was difficult for police to control a "crime scene" that large. Shoddy documentation, shoddy evidence handling, shoddy lab work (I LOVE the FBI guy who tests 3 of 6 swabs and then "extrapolates" a conclusion across all of them :D)

If I was law enforcement I'd be pissed at these guys for looking like a bunch of Andy Griffith's instead of professionals.

To be fair, the FBI guy was testing for a chemical that, if the blood was from that one vial, should have been present in all of the samples.  If his test worked, then there was no real need to test all six.  The issue with that was that, according to the defense at least, the test didn't have properly established detection limits and wasn't a commonly performed one.  In other words, testing six swabs didn't much matter since it's the test itself that's questionable.

I'm a bigger fan of the local crime lab lady that managed to ruin all sorts of evidence while testing it.

Most of the pro-prosecution "left out" info we've all seen probably comes from the same sources.  There's a rebuttal out there now with a list of pro-defense "left out" info, much of which rebutes the other list.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Makin...was_left_out_of_mam/

Well, hopefully this will shake up the status quo a bit and make future jurors a bit more analytical in their decisions.

I think the series also shows how much of an impact wrongful incarcerations can have. For Steve's first wrongful imprisonment he literally lost his life over 18 years. He lost his wife, he lost his 5 kids...I cannot imagine missing 18 years of my son's life.

Sure as hell I'd want 36 million in compensation so I would be free to try and make up for lost time, literally bribe my way into my kid's hearts because I just didn't have the time to do it the old fashioned way...


18 years and nobody on the department seems the least big remorseful...hell half of them still thought he was guilty despite DNA (and confessions) proving otherwise...

I remember a case near here back in the 80s.  At the time I was in a club with one of the cops on the outskirts (IIRC) of the case.  He said of the one who was later convicted, 'We all know he's guilty.'  But later DNA evidence showed he wasn't the one, and they have never found the real culprit.

I remember being a little uneasy at the time, at the 'we know' part, but I can see that there doesn't even need to be misconduct on the part of the investigators; people will see what they expect to see.  There are too many possibilities to thoroughly investigate them all, and the deep down distaste for someone they believed raped and killed a child would colour their every thought.  I haven't been watching this show, but I can imagine that it's possible things just started because they thought they had the right person, errors compounded that belief, and someone or several stepped over the line between honest, however misguided, investigation, and slanting the evidence to support what you believe is so.

As Dean Strang put it so eloquently, there is a tragic lack of humility in the justice department.

The emphasis is always on arrests and convictions, not the truth...

In reply to praguepride (msg # 25):

And I think in too many places the cops are, by choice or not, trying to build a case for trial, rather than investigating without bias.  So once they find a viable suspect, they concentrate on that one, even if unconsciously.

After having watched the show and read a few things outside of it, I have a few conclusions that I haven't seen anyone else come up with yet.  I'm going to start with a few things that are common and then end with a few different ones, so bear with me.

1.  Steven Avery is innocent of both crimes.
2.  During several episodes, it's mentioned how someone familiar with Steven could make use of law enforcement's bias to get away with the second crime.  I believe this is exactly what happened.
3.  I believe that the guilty parties are in fact Scott Tadych, Brendan's brother, and Brendan Dassey.  I do not know if Brendan participated, but I believe that he was party to the body disposal or at least knew about the crime at some point during its execution.
4.  I believe that the body was partially burned in one location and the burning was finished or the remains moved to Avery's burn pit later.  I think Brendan was party to this as he was the one to whom Steven invited for the bonfire, so I think that inspired his accomplices to burn the body or at least place it in Steven's burn pit.
5.  Brendan's story is inconsistent because he's being pushed to fight for his innocence with what is to be his story to implicate Steven, conjured by the guilty trio, and the alternate story which removes him from the situation completely, conjured by his mother.  Pressure from his mother, his low IQ, and pressure during interrogations do him no favors and he ends up scrambling his story so badly that it's useless to everyone but the prosecution.
6.  I believe that the car was not moved onto the Avery property by law enforcement.  I think Colburn found it early, but law enforcement needed someone else to find else the evidence be deemed inadmissible or extremely tainted.
7.  I do believe that the blood in the car was planted, though not at the time specified in the documentary.  I think it was done soon after Colburn found the car before the victim's family was directed to find it.

And that's about the end of what I see differently.

Before you all make up your mind. I think you should watch the Steven Avery show ID is doing this weekend. It's going to present ALL the evidence, not just the parts that favor the DA or the PA.

So the prosecution keeps railing on about "missing evidence" but if you take the time to read through the evidence that was omitted you'll realize that it doesn't actually change anything.

Going point by point through this article:
http://www.nydailynews.com/ent...er-article-1.2485213

9. He lit a cat on fire. It's an awful thing to do but the key point the narrators made was that Avery straight up admitted to doing it. He said he threw the cat over the fire and it burst into flames in the documentary, adding the missing "gasoline" actually makes that story make sense...

8. History of violence against women. The key word is "alleged". People come out of the woodwork on big publicity cases like this. If there was any ACTUAL proof they would not hesitate to move forward with another conviction. People accusing a "celebrity" of something, news at 11...

7. Avery answered the door in a towel. Supposedly this was communicated by Halbach's coworker but she could not provide any real details so it wasn't brought into trial. Again, hearsay and speculation. Also the actual words spoken was that Halbach didn't want to go back to the Avery PROPERTY, had nothing to do with Avery specifically. Again it wasn't brought up at trial because it was hearsay and more importantly the co-worker couldn't remember the actual details...

6. Avery requested Halbach specifically. This wasn't actually unusual for him as he had requested her several times because as it turns out, a junkyard has a lot of cars to sell.

6a. Avery used his sister's name for the appointment. This was because he was selling his sister's car.

5. Avery called Halbach several times. It turned out Halbach was late for the appointment and Avery was just trying to get hold of her to figure out what was going on.

5a. Avery used *67 to mask caller id. Actually a phone technician came out and said that isn't how that works, instead the *67 was just how the call was routed on the back end of things.

4. Avery had ordered leg irons and handcuffs. Turns out these "leg irons" were fuzzy pink handcuffs you find at a sex shop. They found a whole bunch of DNA on the handcuffs, but none of it matched Halbachs. It did match Avery and one other person though, but again, NOT halbach.

3. Avery's "sweat" DNA was found on latch hood. 1st there is no such thing as sweat DNA. Second the hood latch was a result of cross contamination because an investigator did not switch out gloves after handling some of Steven's DNA.

2. Avery allegedly molested Dassey. Again the key phrase is "alleged" and that most importantly this was AFTER the police had been interrogating him for hours and hours. Most likely this was yet another implanted suggestion the police pushed into Dassey's mind.

1. The bullet matched Avery's gun. FALSE! The deformed bullet fragment could only be identified as coming from a .22 rifle however there were a lot of 22's on the Avery property. Yes Avery had one but Scott T, his neighbor, tried to sell a .22 rifle the day after Halbach went missing...


I don't have the proof on me but reddit covers that pretty nicely in this thread. All the specifics and sources are here

https://www.reddit.com/r/Makin...to_missing_evidence/