'Making A Murderer' If You Have Not Watched Spoiler Alert

[festeringZit]

[h=3]Ballistics said the bullet with Halbach's DNA was fired by Avery's rifle.[/h]

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/making-a-murder-steven-avery-evidence-guilty-2016-1# 8 / 8 http://www.businessinsider.com.au/making-a-murder-steven-avery-evidence-guilty-2016-1#​

<small style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 13px; display: block; line-height: 18px; font-weight: 700; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; text-align: center;">Netflix</small>
In Avery's garage, police found a bullet that had Halbach's DNA on it. Kratz said in the email the ballistics proved the bullet was shot from Avery's rifle that police had confiscated back when they first searched the property.
'Ballistics said the bullet found in the garage was fired by Avery's rifle, which was in a police evidence locker since (November) 6 (2005),' he wrote. 'If the cops planted the bullet, how did they get one fired from his gun?'
Avery's former defence attorney Strang did not deny the ballistics report, but told The Timesthat bullet fragments were found all over the Avery Salvage Yard property where the family often shot guns.
​

 

[Illini]

Anyone with any logic skills at all can see that there is no chance things went down the way the prosecution says they did. You can't commit a gruesome rape and murder and get rid of 100% of the DNA evidence. Two retards performed the immaculate cleaning and then piled all the shit up in the garage again so it looked like an episode from Hoarders. They got every fucking fingerprint off the car, but they forgot the visible blood drops.

Laughable. But he's guilty, says Nancy Grace. She just knows it!

 

[festeringZit]

The film-makers make it look like the hole in the blood vial is some massive huge smoking gun, and gullible people lap it up.

But, nurses testified that hole is how the damned blood got into the tube in the first place.

Well, Kratz and the prosecution had an answer to this: that the hole was how the blood was inserted into the vial, and that such holes were the norm. In fact, court documents from the time show that a nurse nearly testified in the trial to establish that the puncture hole was not, in fact, unique or remarkable.

​

 

[Illini]

You seem irrational with these posts. There is a TON of evidence that points to Avery. Here is just one example (conveniently left out of the film):

'Teresa's phone, camera, and PDA were found 20 feet from Avery's door, burned in his barrel,'Kratz said in his email. 'Why did the documentary not tell the viewers the contents of her purse were in his burn barrel, north of his front door.'
Kratz doubled down on this assertion in an interview with Maxim: '
Teresa's phone, camera and (other contents of her purse) were found 20 feet from Avery's door, burned in his barrel...Two people saw him putting that stuff in there. This isn't contested. It was all presented as evidence at the jury trial, and the documentary people don't tell you that.'
Though Tech Insider doesn't currently have access to Avery's court documents to check the veracity of this statement, Manitowoc County's current sheriff Robert Hermann remembers this evidence as well.
'In the burning barrel, the cell phone and several other things of Teresa Halbach were found in the barrel, burnt,' Hermann told The Hollywood Reporter. 'A camera, I believe, and a cell phone.'

Just like body parts being found on the property. Means jack shit. Nada.

 

[festeringZit]

Anyone with any logic skills at all can see that there is no chance things went down the way the prosecution says they did. You can't commit a gruesome rape and murder and get rid of 100% of the DNA evidence. Two retards performed the immaculate cleaning and then piled all the shit up in the garage again so it looked like an episode from Hoarders. They got every fucking fingerprint off the car, but they forgot the visible blood drops.

Laughable. But he's guilty, says Nancy Grace. She just knows it!

The point is, he can be 100% guilty, and the prosecution narrative be wrong at certain points. Look at the damned OJ trial.

 

[festeringZit]

Just like body parts being found on the property. Means jack shit. Nada.

Um, 2 people testified in the trial under oath that they saw him putting that stuff in the barrel. Don't be so obtuse.

 

[Illini]

Ballistics said the bullet with Halbach's DNA was fired by Avery's rifle.

8 / 8​

<small style="box-sizing: border-box; font-size: 13px; display: block; line-height: 18px; font-weight: 700; font-family: 'Open Sans', 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; text-align: center;">Netflix</small>
In Avery's garage, police found a bullet that had Halbach's DNA on it. Kratz said in the email the ballistics proved the bullet was shot from Avery's rifle that police had confiscated back when they first searched the property.
'Ballistics said the bullet found in the garage was fired by Avery's rifle, which was in a police evidence locker since (November) 6 (2005),' he wrote. 'If the cops planted the bullet, how did they get one fired from his gun?'
Avery's former defence attorney Strang did not deny the ballistics report, but told The Timesthat bullet fragments were found all over the Avery Salvage Yard property where the family often shot guns.
​

Pretty fucking convenient they find a bullet fragment 6 months later. But zero DNA in the garage or the house. Could they have put DNA on a bullet and planted it? Naw, they are cops. Cops good, Avery bad.

 

[festeringZit]

Just like body parts being found on the property. Means jack shit. Nada.

I suppose you have a reason why Avery called Halbach twice with *67 to hide his number (before the murder) and then called her with no *67 after the
murder, to try and establish an alibi?

 

[Illini]

Um, 2 people testified in the trial under oath that they saw him putting that stuff in the barrel. Don't be so obtuse.

Eyewitness testimony is not reliable much of the time. Anyone knows this. Did the articles they claim they saw have Halbach's nametag on them?

 

[Illini]

I suppose you have a reason why Avery called Halbach twice with *67 to hide his number (before the murder) and then called her with no *67 after the
murder, to try and establish an alibi?

Calling someone means you murdered them? Nobody knows when she was murdered, except the killer or killers.

 

[DesertDevil]

I'm not 100% convinced of his guilt

Wait. I could have sworn you said in this thread that you were 100% convinced he is guilty.

 

[DesertDevil]

The more I read about this case, and see the evidence that wasn't included in the series, I think Avery is 100% guilty.

Yup. You did.

 

[festeringZit]

Wait. I could have sworn you said in this thread that you were 100% convinced he is guilty.

Never said that. I said I thought he was guilty, and still do... But wouldn't say it beyond a shadow of a doubt, or say "I'm 100% convinced."
If that makes sense?

 

[festeringZit]

Yup. You did.

Well, that's poorly worded... and I can see how it could have been misconstrued.

 

[DesertDevil]

Never said that.

Huh? You said "I think Avery is 100% guilty".

100% is an absolute. It leaves no wiggle room.

 

[DesertDevil]

Well, that's poorly worded... and I can see how it could have been misconstrued.

Fair enough.

Its just a pet peeve of mine when people talk in absolutes, when its not appropriate.

 

[festeringZit]

Huh? You said "I think Avery is 100% guilty".

100% is an absolute. It leaves no wiggle room.

Saying I think he's 100% guilty is a different statement than I'm 100% convinced he's guilty. I should have been
more clear, and worded it differently - as I can see how someone would misinterpret my position.

 

[DesertDevil]

Throughout the last year on various forums, I have seen a few people post, "Trump has absolutely ZERO chance of winning the Republican nomination."

And no matter how many times I tried to convince them that they were wrong, they just continued to argue the ZERO % was fact.

Trump could end up not getting it. And I don't think he will. But that ZERO % was silly then. And its silly now. If he ends up not winning, that does not prove that their math was correct.

 

[DesertDevil]

Saying I think he's 100% guilty is a different statement than I'm 100% convinced he's guilty. I should have been
more clear, and worded it differently - as I can see how someone would misinterpret my position.

Splitting hairs. No big deal.

And I don't think its a crime to change your mind on anything. I think its healthy to have an open mind.

 

[Illini]

Avery lost 36 mil
Cops won 36 mil

72 million dollar poker pot.